Counterintuitive? [Design Issues]

posted by bebac_fan – US, 2018-04-04 02:43 (2186 d 10:11 ago) – Posting: # 18637
Views: 5,728

Hi Nobody,

❝ Why should the ratio of REL influence the appropriate metric for BE? Switching T and R should not influence the test in my opinion...


The BE studies I have seen (I am quite junior), the drugs follow dose-linearity. One convenient result is that the shape of the PK curve generally stays the same under test conditions. That means the tests aren't required to be sensitive for changes in shape.

This drug doesn't follow that assumption for reasons previously discussed. The PK shape changes under small formulation changes (e.g. REL). There is definitely a need for non traditional parameters, as it is conceivable that AUCinf and Cmax may pass, but with wildly (and clinically relevant) differences in shape.

I agree that the test applied should be invariant to T/R or R/T. Perhaps run a test on Tmax - which based on the above image, appears to be sensitive to changes in REL. Or require passing all the tests together.

Cheers,
BF

Complete thread:

UA Flag
Activity
 Admin contact
22,957 posts in 4,819 threads, 1,636 registered users;
119 visitors (0 registered, 119 guests [including 9 identified bots]).
Forum time: 11:54 CET (Europe/Vienna)

With four parameters I can fit an elephant,
and with five I can make him wiggle his trunk.    John von Neumann

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