Bioequivalence and Bioavailability Forum • SAS vs. PHX

SAS vs. PHX [RSABE / ABEL]

posted by Shuanghe – Spain, 2013-04-23 13:45 (4403 d 02:52 ago) – Posting: # 10471
Views: 25,204

Hi Helmut,

❝ My PHX6.3 code gives for RSABE …

❝ boundy S²wr Swr PE 95% upper

❝ -0.221998 0.41138 0.64139 89.8990 -0.18424336

Just out of curiosity I tried my SAS macro and it only gives Swr, PE, 95% upper. They are the same as yours, which is slightly different from John's.

❝ ❝ I ran Unscaled Avg BE (Progesterone guidance SAS code)

❝ ❝ T/R Ratio 90% CI

❝ ❝ 101.021 80.7739 - 126.343

❝

❝ … and for ABE

❝ PE 90% CI

❝ 104.782 69.7855 – 157.328

Now, my average BE gives:
PE: 1.01021, same as John's :yes:

90% CI: 80.7733 - 126.3450, different from both of yours. :no:

Weird.

❝ But: PHX’ LME kicked my ass with “Warning 11094: Negative final variance component. Consider omitting this VC structure.” Nice. Old story with partial replicates – overspecified model since T is not repeated. We have seen in the past that SAS and PHX give different results in such a case. BTW, did you get “Convergence criteria met but final hessian is not positive definite.” or somefink sⁱm_il^a_r in Sas?

SAS did give me warning of " Convergence criteria met but final hessian is not positive definite".

❝ That’s funny! Same if I exclude subjects #14 and #31 (no results for T). What the heck?

after delete subject 14 and 31, same result for SABE but for ABE:
PE: 98.04322%
90% CI: 78.61817 - 122.26784.
Man, I never doubted the macro before. should I worry about it now? :confused:

Shall we compare the result from EMA's data set?

Edit:
Just tried EMA's 3-period data set, using "logdata" directly from the dataset.
SABE gives:

Swr=0.11397

PE=1.02264

95% upper= -0.00397289

ABE gives the same result as in the EMA's Q&A. 102.264 (97.05-107.76)

delete subject 5 and 8 (don't ask why those subjects)

SABE gives:

Swr=0.11803

PE=1.01341

95% upper= -0.00510258

ABE gives:

PE=101.218

90% CI= 95.7687 - 106.978

Can anyone check it?

—
All the best,
Shuanghe

Complete thread:

FDA's HVD SAS Code from Progesterone Guidance jag009 2013-04-22 16:39
- Proc MIXED vs. Proc GLM Helmut 2013-04-22 17:47
  - Proc MIXED vs. Proc GLM jag009 2013-04-22 20:33
    - SAS vs. PHX Helmut 2013-04-22 22:10
      - SAS vs. PHXShuanghe 2013-04-23 11:45
        
        SAS vs. SAS d_labes 2013-04-23 16:50
        
        SAS vs. SAS vs. Phoenix Helmut 2019-11-12 13:01
      - SAS vs. PHX jag009 2013-04-23 15:56
        
        SAS Warning (Note) on Proc Mixed jag009 2013-04-23 17:07
        
        Nut Job.. jag009 2013-04-30 21:09
        
        Second opinion (PHX 6.3) Helmut 2013-05-01 16:21
        
        Second opinion (PHX 6.3) jag009 2013-05-01 17:16
        
        Second opinion (PHX 6.3) ElMaestro 2013-05-01 18:48
        In praise of a full replicate Helmut 2013-05-01 19:16
        Third opinion d_labes 2013-05-02 12:00
        
        Compound Symmetry Helmut 2013-05-02 14:41
        
        Compound Symmetry - SASian (1) d_labes 2013-05-02 16:26
        
        Variance=0 Helmut 2013-05-03 16:07