Cross validation: same concentration range [Bioanalytics]

posted by Helmut Homepage – Vienna, Austria, 2018-07-25 12:39 (910 d 18:49 ago) – Posting: # 19098
Views: 1,693

Hi Lmsmqa,

» In a clinical trial study where multiple doses are done…

Do I get you right – a high accumulation ratio leading to low concentrations after a single dose and high ones in steady state? If not, can you elaborate on the design and its purpose?

Cross validation (e.g., Deming regression, Bland–Altman plot) compares two methods in the same concentration range.

If you really want to go that way, you would have to:Personally I agree with ElMaestro’s gut feeling that – as long as both methods are validated – cross validation might not be necessary.


PS: Personally I never came across such a case. In BE studies of widely spread doses (and hence, concentrations) we regularly used different calibration ranges. Was never a regulatory issue to accept the entire submission package.
On the other hand, in dose proportionality studies and SD/MD with high accumulation we always used a method covering the entire range. Was sometimes difficult (limited range of the MS, quenching in fluorescence detection: quadratic model, weighting 1/x², 1/y², or – better – 1/s²y). I would never use different methods and/or different labs in the same study.

Dif-tor heh smusma 🖖
Helmut Schütz
[image]

The quality of responses received is directly proportional to the quality of the question asked. 🚮
Science Quotes

Complete thread:

Activity
 Admin contact
21,308 posts in 4,444 threads, 1,489 registered users;
online 7 (0 registered, 7 guests [including 1 identified bots]).
Forum time: Thursday 06:29 CET (Europe/Vienna)

Politicians use statistics like drunkards use lampposts:
not for illumination, but for support.    attributed to Hans Kuhn

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