Bioequivalence decision affected by ISR? [Bioanalytics]

posted by Ohlbe – France, 2012-12-21 11:30 (4541 d 21:32 ago) – Posting: # 9740
Views: 8,425

(edited on 2012-12-21 15:13)

Dear Dan,

❝ Do you agree with these considerations?


No, sorry I don't...

If the reason for ISR failure is metabolite back-conversion, I have two concerns:Even if ISR fails for another reason than metabolite back-conversion, I always had problems with justifications like "my method is just as bad for the reference as for the test, so there should be no impact in the end". Sorry !

I also have problems to say that an increase in the analytical variability can only decrease chances to demonstrate bioequivalence. You can't exclude that it will result in a point estimate closer to 1, or in a slightly decreased intra-CV (difficult to predict the influence of a random effect, isn't it ?). It would be great to run some sims:To be honest I don't expect much changes for AUC, but Cmax could be more problematic.
I'm afraid I just don't know how to fire such sims. If any of our sims-specialists gets bored during the Christmas break ;-)

Regards
Ohlbe

Regards
Ohlbe

Complete thread:

UA Flag
Activity
 Admin contact
23,424 posts in 4,927 threads, 1,674 registered users;
50 visitors (0 registered, 50 guests [including 12 identified bots]).
Forum time: 10:02 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

It’s difficult to work in a group
when you are omnipotent.    John de Lancie (as Q)

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