Acceptable difference (BE history) [Regulatives / Guidelines]

posted by Helmut Homepage – Vienna, Austria, 2015-07-03 16:49 (3509 d 10:19 ago) – Posting: # 15035
Views: 8,762

Dear Detlew,

❝ ❝ critical dose drugs 90.0–112.0%).


❝ Although this is a bit of generous rounding to one decimal :cool:


I told Eric Ormsby at the last BioInternational conference (London, October 2008) that on the long run the mean of generic NTIDs will be \(\sqrt{0.900 \times 1.120} = 1.003992 \ldots\). IIRC he replied “We can stand that. 112% is just easier to remember.”
When discussions were hot in the mid-1980s (switching from untransformed to log-trans­formed data) we had a width of the acceptance range of 0.40 (80–120%) based on an acceptable Δ of 0.20:We all know which party won – leading to limits “which are easy to remember”. Yes, this was at the end the unbeatable argument.:-D

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
23,376 posts in 4,912 threads, 1,662 registered users;
160 visitors (0 registered, 160 guests [including 15 identified bots]).
Forum time: 02:09 CET (Europe/Vienna)

Science is what you know.
Philosophy is what you don’t know.    Bertrand Russell

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