Redosing study… [Study As­sess­ment]

posted by Helmut Homepage – Vienna, Austria, 2011-06-16 14:52 (5483 d 02:30 ago) – Posting: # 7138
Views: 13,408

Dear Dan!

❝ A redosing study is acceptable for the FDA […]



Should read ‘A redosing study may be acceptable for the FDA – but still they hate it.’

❝ Based on data from the pivotal study, an acceptance range for the ratios - mean ±3 standard deviations - should be calculated for AUC and Cmax using the log transformed data.


I’ve heard about this ‘method’ – do you have a reference? Assuming a normal distribution (after transformation) mean ±3SD covers 99.73% of the data. In other words, the sample size should be 370 in order to be able to ‘catch’ a single outlier.

Canada’s approaches are more reasonable, IMHO (cave: e.g., nonparametrics!).

Dif-tor heh smusma 🖖🏼 Довге життя Україна! [image]
Helmut Schütz
[image]

The quality of responses received is directly proportional to the quality of the question asked. 🚮
Science Quotes

Complete thread:

UA Flag
Activity
 Admin contact
23,655 posts in 4,993 threads, 1,570 registered users;
138 visitors (0 registered, 138 guests [including 29 identified bots]).
Forum time: 17:23 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

I have finally come to the konklusion
that a good reliable set ov bowels
iz worth more to a man
than enny quantity of brains.    Josh Billings

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