[Opinion] Should the 90% CI for GMR be required to encompass 1 [RSABE / ABEL]

posted by bebac_fan – US, 2018-03-29 16:57 (1602 d 01:24 ago) – Posting: # 18617
Views: 8,838

Dear John

» So basically he's questioning the validity of FDA's 20% window on BE then...

Actually, I am questioning the validity of FDA's Swr scaled 10% window on BE for NTID.

If a GMR of 1.1 is clinically relevant (i.e. a test should be sensitive for this), and the NTID with a Swr of .22 will pass by ABE, this is a failure IMO.

Thanks,
BF

Complete thread:

UA Flag
Activity
 Admin contact
22,305 posts in 4,668 threads, 1,587 registered users;
online 11 (2 registered, 9 guests [including 4 identified bots]).
Forum time: Wednesday 18:22 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

There is no point in being precise when you don’t know
what you’re talking about.    attributed to John Tukey

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