Default rules [NCA / SHAM]

posted by mittyri – Russia, 2019-02-20 22:40 (1830 d 17:42 ago) – Posting: # 19950
Views: 10,361

Dear Astea,

❝ But there could be some phylosophical thoughts: may be 60 is a miss (error or samples were mixed) than what whould be better - to calculate the square under 30-60-2 triangle carefully or to calculate the square under the curve assuming log elimination?

BE guidelines are strict enough (recalling the cases with substituted samples shown by Helmut?) - you cannot exclude the concentration point during PK analysis (even if you have a strong suspicion regarding that). Thus, if you exclude that point from λz estimation and then use λz for interpolation, you are ignoring that point. I would not recommend it (at least for BE).

❝ Don't believe in it cause I observe a lot of changes and improvements while using PHX through years :-)

The only DEFAULT thing was changed (please correct me) is a way for therapeutic areas calculation. All additional features like another PK parameters, Concentrations and λz rules do not affect default ways of computation. I mean if you run NCA from Time vs. Conc data in WNL 6.3 and then rerun in WNL 8.1, the values will be the same.

Kind regards,
Mittyri

Complete thread:

UA Flag
Activity
 Admin contact
22,911 posts in 4,806 threads, 1,635 registered users;
29 visitors (0 registered, 29 guests [including 5 identified bots]).
Forum time: 16:22 CET (Europe/Vienna)

The history of statistics is like a telephone directory:
the plot is boring, full of numbers and the cast is endless.    Stephen Senn

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