Counterintuitive? [Design Issues]

posted by bebac_fan – US, 2018-04-04 02:43 (2384 d 04:25 ago) – Posting: # 18637
Views: 6,173

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
23,249 posts in 4,885 threads, 1,665 registered users;
66 visitors (0 registered, 66 guests [including 9 identified bots]).
Forum time: 07:09 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

I believe there is no philosophical high-road in science,
with epistemological signposts. No, we are in a jungle
and find our way by trial and error,
building our road behind us as we proceed.    Max Born

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