EMA: ABEL [RSABE / ABEL]
Hi Clarc,
May I guess: Kinetica? If yes, AFAIK you cannot evaluate replicate designs at all.
You could, but it will not be accepted…
Yes – see Dr. Gunasakaran’s post above. Don’t forget two obstacles:
❝ Our statistical software doesn't permit scaling, only widening to 0.75-1.33. The design is a fully replicated TRTR/RTRT design.
May I guess: Kinetica? If yes, AFAIK you cannot evaluate replicate designs at all.
❝ Can I define in the protocol a widening to 0.75-1.33,
You could, but it will not be accepted…
❝ or I have to perform a reference scaled bioequivalence?
Yes – see Dr. Gunasakaran’s post above. Don’t forget two obstacles:
- A sound justification that a wider difference in Cmax is clinically irrelevant.
- A justification that the calculated intra-subject variability is a reliable estimate and that it is not the result of outliers.
—
Dif-tor heh smusma 🖖🏼 Довге життя Україна!![[image]](https://static.bebac.at/pics/Blue_and_yellow_ribbon_UA.png)
Helmut Schütz
![[image]](https://static.bebac.at/img/CC by.png)
The quality of responses received is directly proportional to the quality of the question asked. 🚮
Science Quotes
Dif-tor heh smusma 🖖🏼 Довге життя Україна!
![[image]](https://static.bebac.at/pics/Blue_and_yellow_ribbon_UA.png)
Helmut Schütz
![[image]](https://static.bebac.at/img/CC by.png)
The quality of responses received is directly proportional to the quality of the question asked. 🚮
Science Quotes
Complete thread:
- Widening Cmax in EU Clarc 2013-10-24 14:55
- Widening Cmax in EU drgunasakaran1 2013-10-24 15:43
- EMA: ABELHelmut 2013-10-25 14:56
- EMA: ABEL Clarc 2013-10-28 10:04