Method A, B (or C?) [Regulatives / Guidelines]

posted by Helmut Homepage – Vienna, Austria, 2016-05-19 21:04 (3193 d 08:30 ago) – Posting: # 16337
Views: 11,356

Hi Lucas,

❝ Hi guys.


Don’t forget the girlzzz!

❝ Anvisa is now suggesting the use of EMA's ABEL based on the 2014 WHO guideline. […] The use of semi or partial replicated designs is also allowed, since blood volume might be a problem for 4-period studies.


Good to know. Would mean that we could drop the argument regulator="ANVISA" in some functions of PowerTOST. There are two functions which adjust α in order to preserve the consumer risk at 0.05: scABEL.ad() and sampleN.scABEL.ad(). I had to introduce a lot of special conditions for ANVISA since large adjustments were needed for CVwR close to 40%.

❝ I've always used FDA's suggestion (appendix E of 2001 guidance) without problems.


Yep. The early versions of ANVISA’s guidelines were practically single-handed developed by Salomon Stavchansky. Hence, a lot of US-background. If ANVISA is following the WHO’s document (which in this section is almost 1:1 to the EMA’s GL) could we assume that we should also use the crippled models given in the EMA’s Q&A-document (Method A and B)? These are not the mixed-effects model given by the FDA (termed in the Q&A document Method C).

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
23,380 posts in 4,914 threads, 1,665 registered users;
90 visitors (0 registered, 90 guests [including 7 identified bots]).
Forum time: 04:34 CET (Europe/Vienna)

When people learn no tools of judgment
and merely follow their hopes,
the seeds of political manipulation are sown.    Stephen Jay Gould

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