AUCextrap more than 20% [Study As­sess­ment]

posted by sam – India, 2013-08-01 13:21 (4716 d 01:03 ago) – Posting: # 11140
Views: 31,073

Hi John

❝ A little off topic, but given the recent discuss in another thread, this example is one where the concept of a repeat trial may become relevant. If your lower CI limit was 79.28% then chances are that the true T/R (geometric mean, observed) was likely to be reasonably close to 100% and that more subjects in the trial therefore would have saved it. Got some numbers for us?


First of all thanks for the prompt reply,

The ratio for AUCt and AUCinf are 83.82 and 84.91 and the corresponding CIs are (79.28% - 88.61%) and (80.68% - 89.35%) respectively. The subjects evaluated for this trial is 124.


Best Regards
sam

Complete thread:

UA Flag
Activity
 Admin contact
23,656 posts in 4,994 threads, 1,570 registered users;
256 visitors (0 registered, 256 guests [including 22 identified bots]).
Forum time: 14:25 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

It requires a very unusual mind
to undertake the analysis of the obvious.    Alfred North Whitehead

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