Consistency [Two-Stage / GS Designs]

posted by DavidManteigas – Portugal, 2016-10-11 11:25  – Posting: # 16721
Views: 10,759

Hi all,

I get shocked sometimes with the lack of consistency in assessments of member states which should all follow the same guidelines and made their reviews according to the current opinions of the scientific groups of the EMA. I think this happens due to lack of training in regulatory reviews and "regulatory science" in general (in Portugal, almost all of the reviewers I know are "academic") and also due to lack of resources in some agencies to have qualified reviewers for each 'specialty'.
In some countries, I believe that as long as you got a favourable opinion from an ethics committee and regulatory approval for the trial, they will consider your trial "valid" regardless of the appopriateness of the design, statistical methodology and compliance with guidelines/recommendations for design & analysis.

Complete thread:

Activity
 Admin contact
20,779 posts in 4,351 threads, 1,444 registered users;
online 33 (2 registered, 31 guests [including 19 identified bots]).
Forum time: 11:39 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

All we know about the world teaches us that the effects of A and B
are always different—in some decimal place—for any A and B.
Thus asking “are the effects different?” is foolish.    John W. Tukey

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