Bioequivalence and Bioavailability Forum

ke versus t1/2 [🇷 for BE/BA]

posted by d_labes  – Berlin, Germany, 2016-07-20 18:05 (3127 d 07:05 ago) – Posting: # 16501
Views: 10,322

Dear Helmut,

❝ BTW, asking for a comparison of both k and t_½ demonstrates a lack of understanding of statistics. They differ only by a factor of ln(2). Any comparison will give identical variance, CI, etc.

I think here you err.
t½ = ln(2)/k (some sort of 'inverse transformation').

Lets consider for simplicity the GMR's (I consider the metric names are the geometric means here):
t½T/t½R = (ln(2)/kT)/(ln(2)/kR) = kR/kT
That's not identical to the GMR for k IMHO .

BTW: @Mahmoud.
k or k_e will be better called lambda_Z - terminal rate constant.

❝ ❝ 1st order elimination rate constant

is only correct within an one-compartment model.

Complete thread:

• ANOVA for lambdaz, half life and tmax in bear 2.7.7 mahmoud-teaima 2016-07-20 11:03 [🇷 for BE/BA] 
  • Egypt: Strange requirements Helmut 2016-07-20 12:25
    • Egypt: Strange requirements mahmoud-teaima 2016-07-20 14:12
      • Output is not from Phoenix/Winnonlin mittyri 2016-07-20 17:00
    • ke versus t1/2d_labes 2016-07-20 16:05
      • ke versus t1/2 Helmut 2016-07-20 16:31
        • ke versus t1/2 d_labes 2016-07-21 14:42
          • “double“ testing Helmut 2016-07-21 14:54
  • tmax in bear 2.7.7 yjlee168 2016-07-20 21:10
    • tmax in bear 2.7.7 mahmoud-teaima 2016-07-20 22:40
      • tmax in bear 2.7.7 yjlee168 2016-07-21 11:11
        • tmax results in R 3.3.1 and spss 20 on macos 10.11.6 mahmoud-teaima 2016-07-27 12:13