Still SF [Two-Stage / GS Designs]

posted by ElMaestro  – Belgium?, 2016-10-06 22:13 (1406 d 00:12 ago) – Posting: # 16702
Views: 10,955

Hello VStus,

» But back to reality: isn't it more practical in case of HVD to perform pilot on development with let's say 50% power (wondering: replicated pilot to keep reasonable small population?), better understand in-vitro in-vivo relationship, optimize formulation and than run replicate scaled trial? In 2-stage we also need to wait for results from the 1st stage...

Yes
Nitpicking: you perform a 2-stage trial or a pilot trial because you do not know the variability, right? Which means the "let's say 50% power" in actuality means guessworking. Optimizing the formulation on basis of a pilot trial with inherently low power (=high uncertainty on the PE) is in scientific terms as solid as tarot cards or crystal healing.
I read on LinkedIn the other day: "The flat earth society has members all over the globe" :-D:-D:-D

OK, surely I will get in trouble for this post.
:pirate:

I could be wrong, but...

Best regards,
ElMaestro

"Pass or fail" (D. Potvin et al., 2008)

Complete thread:

Activity
 Admin contact
21,008 posts in 4,379 threads, 1,460 registered users;
online 17 (1 registered, 16 guests [including 13 identified bots]).
Forum time: Wednesday 22:25 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

Statistics is the art of never having to say you’re wrong.
Variance is what any two statisticians are at.    C.J. Bradfield

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