AUCextrap more than 20% [Study As­sess­ment]

posted by sam – India, 2013-08-01 13:21 (4714 d 07:10 ago) – Posting: # 11140
Views: 31,017

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
23,655 posts in 4,993 threads, 1,571 registered users;
349 visitors (0 registered, 349 guests [including 18 identified bots]).
Forum time: 20:31 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

The real struggle is not between the right and the left
but between the party of the thoughtful
and the party of the jerks.    Jimmy Wales

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