first point Cmax: trouble waiting to happen? [Study As­sess­ment]

posted by Astea – Russia, 2019-03-03 21:42 (567 d 05:42 ago) – Posting: # 19991
Views: 3,819

Dear Helmut!

Thank you very much for your response!

That's understandable that the sampling schedule should be planned to avoid Cmax being the first point. But if it has just happened for some (or even for the majority) subjects? "It happens... sometimes" (Forrest)

» My personal summary: First-point Cmax “should be avoided”. Though not elaborated in the section about exclusion, I would state it in the protocol. See also what Ohlbe wrote above. I would gather that excluding >20% of subjects will lead to troubles (similar to high residual AUC).

Can assessors ban the whole study for this reason? So far I was lucky enough not to get any questions from russian assessors, but we are planning to deal with the regulators from other countries. Contrary to the Mann's situation the full data set is BE. I would like to know if there were any precedents of this kind.

"Being in minority, even a minority of one, did not make you mad"

Complete thread:

Activity
 Admin contact
21,068 posts in 4,392 threads, 1,465 registered users;
online 12 (0 registered, 12 guests [including 9 identified bots]).
Forum time: Monday 04:25 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

I have finally come to the konklusion
that a good reliable set ov bowels
iz worth more to a man
than enny quantity of brains.    Josh Billings

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