EMA oracle [RSABE / ABEL]

posted by Helmut Homepage – Vienna, Austria, 2015-01-27 17:27 (3760 d 01:48 ago) – Posting: # 14322
Views: 25,343

Dear all,

today (at the XII Congreso de la Sociedad Española de Farmacia Industrial y Galénica in Barcelona) I had a strange encounter with Alfredo García-Arieta.

I asked him whether the EMA is aware that by applying their ABEL-method for HVD(P)s the type I error might be substantially inflated.* The answer was no and that the two Lászlós showed inflation of up to 7% only for FDA’s method – which is not correct (already in their paper of 2009). Next I asked whether it would be acceptable to use a method different from the guideline (e.g., iteratively adjusted α). Answer: “No; you have to comply with what is stated in the guideline.” I couldn’t believe it and asked for confir­ma­tion whether one has to use a method which might inflate the patient’s risk to 20%. The answer was “Yes. If you want you can change the guideline.”
Was too strong stuff for my poor soul. A regulator who values a lousy piece of paper more than the health of patients. I had to leave the lecture hall.

Later on he confirmed that Potvin’s methods are not acceptable because the inter­mediate power esti­ma­tion is not stated in the guideline.
Lesson learned: Whatever might be published by well renowned authors in peer-reviewed journals counts (by far) less than the personal opinion of the almighty oracle speaking ex cathedra.



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
23,424 posts in 4,927 threads, 1,671 registered users;
115 visitors (0 registered, 115 guests [including 6 identified bots]).
Forum time: 20:16 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

Only dead fish go with the current.    Scuba divers' proverb

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