3 period full repli­cate [RSABE / ABEL]

posted by Dr_Dan  – Germany, 2015-06-24 15:55 (3457 d 22:34 ago) – Posting: # 14974
Views: 33,733

Dear all
From a leading European regulatory authority I just recieved the information that a 3-period full replicate design (two sequences: T-R-T and R-T-R) for a bioequivalence study will not be accepted. The reason is that

for a full replicate design R as well as T need to be replicated and this is only possible with the res­pec­tive sequences (so TTRR etc.). A 3-period full replicate design would result only in two parallel sepa­rate groups (one which – apart from the integrated 2-period crossover– only get Test and the other only Reference); an evaluation would probably only possible as a general 2-period crossover study.

Please excuse the confusing explanation but the text set in italic is the verbal translation from what I received.
My interest is just of academic nature: What should one reply to this attitude?
Looking forward to your replies and to a fruitful discussion.
Kind regards
Dr_Dan


Edit: Category changed from Design Issues. I think this category fits better – especially if one is inter­ested in reference-scaling. [Helmut]

Kind regards and have a nice day
Dr_Dan

Complete thread:

UA Flag
Activity
 Admin contact
23,336 posts in 4,902 threads, 1,665 registered users;
25 visitors (0 registered, 25 guests [including 9 identified bots]).
Forum time: 13:29 CET (Europe/Vienna)

I’m all in favor of the democratic principle
that one idiot is as good as one genius, but I draw the line
when someone takes the next step and concludes
that two idiots are better than one genius.    Leo Szilard

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