Bioequivalence and Bioavailability Forum

Dear ElMaestro,

you are totally right in pointing at the shortcomings of PowerTOST with regard to higher order designs with more than two treatments. And here especially with more then one TOST to obtain BE.

IMHO there is no easy way to obtain power/sample size with two or more combined TOST's.
Some spare results are obtainable via using power.2TOST() / sampleN.2TOST(). But restricted to two TOST. But immediately the question arises how the correlation of the data of both TOST should be quantified. And so on.
As discussed here numerous times.

During implementing PowerTOST it was the question: "Leave higher order designs (more than two treatments) out" or not. I decided to not leave them out, with knowing the shortcomings of such an implementation. Not covering all the whistles and bells with more than one TOST. Serial or not.
In the sense "Something is better than nothing".

And in the sense that we don't adapt the power/sample size estimation with regard to having more than one PK metric to fulfill BE judgement.

So far so good for my excuse .
If you have any idea to escape from the shortcomings: Let me know.

❝ ❝ PS: Since my wife is now also retired and at home, be patient. ...

❝

❝ Yes, I hear people tend to get really busy when they retire. My uncle went into retirement and bought a hammond organ which he had in his sleeping room. ... The organ kept him occupied 24/7... Tinnitus specialists in the area where he lived saw a prominent rise in their income during those years.

Thus at least the Tinnitus specialists are happy with your uncle, growing old. Fortunately.
As I said years ago: "Getting old is not for Sissies."
Not for the person getting old and especially not for the persons around that of growing old.