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

posted by bebac_fan – US, 2018-03-29 18:57 (2013 d 01:17 ago) – Posting: # 18617
Views: 9,206

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
22,764 posts in 4,776 threads, 1,628 registered users;
16 visitors (0 registered, 16 guests [including 7 identified bots]).
Forum time: 20:15 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

The object of statistics is information.
The objective of statistics is the understanding of information
contained in data.    Irwin and Marylees Miller

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