Log in
Register
SearchCτ for lin and lin-up/log-down [NCA / SHAM]
Dear Helmut!
I'm grateful for your quick reply!
» By the linear trapezoidal method (dammit!)… With lin-up/log-down I get 1298.
For some reason (may be for it's simplicity) russians like linear method and include it into the protocols.
I recalculated via lin-up/log-down and now I'm puzzled with a new question: why do Cτ's differ by the way of calculation AUC? For linear I've got 3,38... (by the way, what are (1) and (2) on your presentation, slide 18?)
» Let’s call the first two datapoints t0|C0...
Is it correct to use t0 and t1, if dosing time happened between this two points? I mean for the time before dose (t0), the curve should be decreasing exponentially, while for the t1 it should be rising similar to linear?
» » What is the best way to handle with BLQ in the end of the dosing period for steady-state?
» Lin-up/log-down as usual. Don’t you have any accumulation or is the method lousy?
I was lucky enough not to get it till now but shit happens, you know, and a danger foreseen is half avoided. Is it a bad idea to miss that BLQ for ss elimination part?
What is about regulatory's acceptance of any of the calculation modifications? I may use profound methods of numeric integration, but would it be accepted?
I'm grateful for your quick reply!
» By the linear trapezoidal method (dammit!)… With lin-up/log-down I get 1298.
For some reason (may be for it's simplicity) russians like linear method and include it into the protocols.
I recalculated via lin-up/log-down and now I'm puzzled with a new question: why do Cτ's differ by the way of calculation AUC? For linear I've got 3,38... (by the way, what are (1) and (2) on your presentation, slide 18?)
» Let’s call the first two datapoints t0|C0...
Is it correct to use t0 and t1, if dosing time happened between this two points? I mean for the time before dose (t0), the curve should be decreasing exponentially, while for the t1 it should be rising similar to linear?
» » What is the best way to handle with BLQ in the end of the dosing period for steady-state?
» Lin-up/log-down as usual. Don’t you have any accumulation or is the method lousy?
I was lucky enough not to get it till now but shit happens, you know, and a danger foreseen is half avoided. Is it a bad idea to miss that BLQ for ss elimination part?
What is about regulatory's acceptance of any of the calculation modifications? I may use profound methods of numeric integration, but would it be accepted?
Complete thread:
- AUC0-tau at steady state - BNR, 2016-03-31 22:46 [NCA / SHAM]
![[Mix]](https://static.bebac.at/img/mix.png "open in mix view")
- AUC0-tau at steady state - jag009, 2016-03-31 23:05
- AUC0-tau at steady state - BNR, 2016-03-31 23:43
- RTFM - Helmut, 2016-04-01 00:59
- RTFM - BNR, 2016-04-01 02:05
- AUC0-τ estimation with time deviations - Astea, 2019-02-10 16:38
- AUC0-τ estimation with time deviations - Helmut, 2019-02-10 19:32
- Cτ for lin and lin-up/log-down - Astea, 2019-02-10 20:50
- Cτ by lin-/lin, lin-up/log-down, and λz - Helmut, 2019-02-11 01:45
- inter- vs extra- - Astea, 2019-02-11 19:46
- inter- vs extra- - Helmut, 2019-02-12 02:20
- No rule fits all - mittyri, 2019-02-14 12:55
- one size fits all vs goal posts - Astea, 2019-02-16 08:33
- one size fits all vs goal posts - ElMaestro, 2019-02-16 13:33
- Bias etc. - Helmut, 2019-02-16 14:26
- software: NCA not validated - Helmut, 2019-02-16 13:59
- no way out for NCA validation? - mittyri, 2019-02-20 21:22
- Default rules - mittyri, 2019-02-20 21:40
- one size fits all vs goal posts - ElMaestro, 2019-02-16 13:33
- one size fits all vs goal posts - Astea, 2019-02-16 08:33
- inter- vs extra- - Astea, 2019-02-11 19:46
- Cτ by lin-/lin, lin-up/log-down, and λz - Helmut, 2019-02-11 01:45
- Cτ for lin and lin-up/log-down - Astea, 2019-02-10 20:50
- AUC0-τ estimation with time deviations - Helmut, 2019-02-10 19:32
- RTFM - Helmut, 2016-04-01 00:59
- AUC0-tau at steady state - BNR, 2016-03-31 23:43
- AUC0-tau at steady state - jag009, 2016-03-31 23:05
Admin contact
