## WHO: Chapeau! [RSABE / ABEL]

Hi ElMaestro,

» » Obviously people at the WHO are more clever than the EMA’s

Update 22 November 2018:

As of November 2018, PQTm will accept the use of scaling of the AUC acceptance criteria for data from a full 4-period replicate design study for products containing albendazole or mebendazole. It is not necessary to provide a scientific justification a priori as described below for albendazole or mebendazole.

Only those two? No other HVD(P)s in the list of essential drugs? Or no studies submitted in the pilot phase since June 2017?

» They specifically seem to want to compare variability for Ref and Test.

Still no information how that should be done.
• Like in the days of PBE/IBE
• ‘Similar’ variability was concluded if $0.667\leq s_{wT}/s_{wR}\leq1.500$.
• Like in the FDA’s warfarin guidance
• Variabilities are considered ‘compar­able’ if the upper confidence limit of $\sigma_{wT}/\sigma_{wR}\leq2.5$.

Cheers,
Helmut Schütz

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

Bioequivalence and Bioavailability Forum |  Admin contact
19,692 posts in 4,180 threads, 1,355 registered users;
online 10 (0 registered, 10 guests [including 8 identified bots]).
Forum time (Europe/Vienna): 20:21 UTC

Operational hectic replaces
intellectual calms.    Alexander Huiskes

The BIOEQUIVALENCE / BIOAVAILABILITY FORUM is hosted by
Ing. Helmut Schütz