Still many subjects… [Study Assessment]
Hi Xipei,
Ok, but only if CFDA accepts scaling! I would rather opt for a four period full replicate design (sample sizes for ABEL 30 and for RSABE 20), if
If CFDA does not accept scaling and 75–133% is applicable for Cmax (your other post) you would need (T/R 0.95, CV 0.68, 80% power):
❝ ❝ ... You would need a replicate design (preferably a full replicate: RTR|TRT or RTRT|TRTR). For the required sample sizes see sampleN.RSABE
(FDA) and sampleN.scABEL
(EMA).
❝
❝ I tried both with CV=0.68. 42 subjects are needed for EMA, while only 27 subjects are needed for FDA. We plan to redo the BE study with a RSABE or SCABEL design.
Ok, but only if CFDA accepts scaling! I would rather opt for a four period full replicate design (sample sizes for ABEL 30 and for RSABE 20), if
- your analytical method can handle small sample volumes (limited by total blood loss) and
- you don’t expect too many drop-outs (more likely in four periods).
PowerTOST
yet (though I expect similar sample size like in the partial replicate) and you have to adapt FDA’s and EMA’s code (easy).If CFDA does not accept scaling and 75–133% is applicable for Cmax (your other post) you would need (T/R 0.95, CV 0.68, 80% power):
design PowerTOST n treatments power
RT|TR 2×2 92 184 0.805498
RRT|RTR|TRR 2×3×3 69 207 0.807633
RTR|TRT 2×2×3 68 204 0.801400
RTRT|TRTR 2×2×4 46 184 0.807602
—
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:
- Add more subjects after a failed BE study of a HVD wxp 2013-05-27 10:34
- bad luck Dr_Dan 2013-05-27 12:28
- bad luck wxp 2013-05-27 14:19
- Beware of Add-on Studies! Helmut 2013-05-27 13:51
- Beware of Add-on Studies! Shuanghe 2013-05-27 15:59
- Oh wow! Helmut 2013-05-27 16:21
- The same criterion of Cmax in China now wxp 2013-05-28 06:10
- SFDA ⇒ CFDA Helmut 2013-05-28 13:02
- Helmut, updated Chinese BE guideline here Shuanghe 2013-06-14 11:05
- BE in Chinese Pharmacopoeia Helmut 2013-06-14 14:22
- BE in Chinese Pharmacopoeia Shuanghe 2013-06-14 14:56
- BE in Chinese Pharmacopoeia Helmut 2013-06-14 16:11
- BE in Chinese Pharmacopoeia Shuanghe 2013-06-14 14:56
- BE in Chinese Pharmacopoeia Helmut 2013-06-14 14:22
- Helmut, updated Chinese BE guideline here Shuanghe 2013-06-14 11:05
- SFDA ⇒ CFDA Helmut 2013-05-28 13:02
- The same criterion of Cmax in China now wxp 2013-05-28 06:10
- Oh wow! Helmut 2013-05-27 16:21
- Add more subjects after a failed BE study of a HVD wxp 2013-05-28 05:13
- Still many subjects…Helmut 2013-05-28 12:56
- Beware of Add-on Studies! Shuanghe 2013-05-27 15:59
- bad luck Dr_Dan 2013-05-27 12:28