2 Groups model FDA [Two-Stage / GS Designs]

posted by d_labes  – Berlin, Germany, 2013-04-17 13:10 (2669 d 04:07 ago) – Posting: # 10427
Views: 35,972

Gents!

» » But honestly, group x treatment?? I'd rather not go down that road. I hope you do not make precedence.
»
» Not my invention. See this post for the reference.

I have another 'better' one (from a Letter of FDA, Barbara M. Davit)! :cool:

" ... the following statistical model should be used when analyzing data from a multiple group bioequivalence study:

Group
Sequence
Treatment
Subject(nested within Group*Sequence)
Period(nested within Group)
Group-by-Sequence Interaction (sic!)
Group-by-Treatment Interaction


Subject(nested within Group*Sequence) is a random effect and all other factors are fixed effects. ..."

Enormous effect(s) :-D.

BTW: Helmut, how had you planned the evaluation of the second stage, if it would be necessary?

BTW2: In context of a 2-Stage design, also a 2-group design with groups here called stage, the mighty oracle prohibit us the Group-by-Treatment Interaction! From the EMA Q&A Rev.7 :
"Conclusion ... A term for a formulation*stage interaction should not be fitted."

BTW3: NOL = no objection letter ?

Regards,

Detlew

Complete thread:

Activity
 Admin contact
20,977 posts in 4,374 threads, 1,460 registered users;
online 27 (0 registered, 27 guests [including 15 identified bots]).
Forum time: Friday 17:17 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

When someone says his conclusions are objective,
he means that they are based on prejudices
which many other people share.    Celia Green

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