[Opinion] Should the 90% CI for GMR be required to encompass 1 [RSABE / ABEL]

posted by bebac_fan – US, 2018-03-29 18:57 (2602 d 03:42 ago) – Posting: # 18617
Views: 11,536

Dear John

❝ So basically he's questioning the validity of FDA's 20% window on BE then...


Actually, I am questioning the validity of FDA's Swr scaled 10% window on BE for NTID.

If a GMR of 1.1 is clinically relevant (i.e. a test should be sensitive for this), and the NTID with a Swr of .22 will pass by ABE, this is a failure IMO.

Thanks,
BF

Complete thread:

UA Flag
Activity
 Admin contact
23,424 posts in 4,927 threads, 1,669 registered users;
122 visitors (0 registered, 122 guests [including 7 identified bots]).
Forum time: 22:39 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

No matter what side of the argument you are on,
you always find people on your side
that you wish were on the other.    Thomas Berger

The Bioequivalence and Bioavailability Forum is hosted by
BEBAC Ing. Helmut Schütz
HTML5