α and 1–β [Power / Sample Size]

posted by Helmut Homepage – Vienna, Austria, 2017-12-27 14:31 (1065 d 13:09 ago) – Posting: # 18102
Views: 27,762

Hi Yura,

» » If the protocol was approved by the IEC and the competent regulatory agency
»
» yes, explanations are needed for estimating the sample size and design (that to reduce it)

Sure. But once explanations (better: assumptions) were accepted (i.e., the protocol approved) that’s the end of the story. That’s why I’m extremely wary of using the term “forced bioequivalence” in a regulatory context (see also this post and followings).
IMHO, post hoc power is crap. The chance to get one which is higher than planned is ~50%. Run my simulation code and at the end:

cat(nsims, "simulated studies with \u201Cpost hoc\u201D power of",
    "\n  \u2265 target    :", sprintf("%5.2f%%",
    100*length(res[, 3][res[, 3] >= target])/nsims),
    "\n  \u2265 achieved  :", sprintf("%5.2f%%",
    100*length(res[, 3][res[, 3] >= plan[["Achieved power"]]])/nsims),
    "\n  \u2265 0.90      :", sprintf("%5.2f%%",
    100*length(res[, 3][res[, 3] >= 0.9])/nsims),
    "\n  [0.95, 0.99]:", sprintf("%5.2f%%",
    100*length(res[, 3][res[, 3] >= 0.95 & res[, 3] <=0.99])/nsims),
    "\n  \u2265 0.95      :", sprintf("%5.2f%%",
    100*length(res[, 3][res[, 3] >= 0.95])/nsims), "\n")


With your example (CV 0.25, GMR 0.95, target power 80%, n 28, 105 simulations):

1e+05 simulated studies with “post hoc” power of
  ≥ target    : 49.92%
  ≥ achieved  : 48.02%
  ≥ 0.90      : 22.93%
  [0.95, 0.99]:  8.40%
  ≥ 0.95      :  9.70%

Although the study was performed with 28 subjects for ~81% power, the chance to get a post hoc power of ≥ 90% is ~23% and ≥ 95% is ~10%. That’s clearly not “forced BE” and none of these studies should be questioned by regulators.*
I suggest to reserve this term to the context of study planning.



Dif-tor heh smusma 🖖
Helmut Schütz
[image]

The quality of responses received is directly proportional to the quality of the question asked. 🚮
Science Quotes

Complete thread:

Activity
 Admin contact
21,213 posts in 4,426 threads, 1,483 registered users;
online 15 (1 registered, 14 guests [including 7 identified bots]).
Forum time: Friday 03:40 CET (Europe/Vienna)

Biostatistician. One who has neither the intellect for mathematics
nor the commitment for medicine but likes to dabble in both.    Stephen Senn

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