But what is the real problem? [Two-Stage / GS Designs]

posted by ElMaestro  – Belgium?, 2018-06-07 13:53 (903 d 12:00 ago) – Posting: # 18863
Views: 3,156

Hi Yura,

you do your study as best you can, making some assumoptions -good or bad- about GMR and CV.
At the end of the day you may show BE or not, and if you do, then it may be with a large or small margin. I guess forced BE just means the margin was large whatever that means quantitatively.
There is no real issue here. The discussions I have seen about BE consider forced BE as a hindsight phenomenon, like post-hoc power.

If you start fiddling with "forced BE" being convincingly planned before a trial then I would of course oppose it.

Remember: In principle, either the product is BE or it isn't. There just happens to be some uncertainty on the degree by which we can demonstrate it.

I could be wrong, but...

Best regards,
ElMaestro

No, of course you do not need to audit your CRO if it was inspected in 1968 by the agency of Crabongostan.

Complete thread:

Activity
 Admin contact
21,213 posts in 4,426 threads, 1,483 registered users;
online 11 (0 registered, 11 guests [including 8 identified bots]).
Forum time: Friday 00:53 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