Q&A ref [Two-Stage / GS Designs]

posted by Astea – Russia, 2019-09-16 18:28 (856 d 06:27 ago) – Posting: # 20599
Views: 6,576

Dear Helmut!

» I was wrong and we shouldn’t worry. See Detlew’s simulations.

That's good. Sorry, I didn't realized it at first.

» How likely is it that AUC (which passed already in the first stage) will fail in the second?

Thank you for the example! I've puzzled whether it will be reproduced for other cases. Let us consider the situation when CV of Cmax and AUC are very close to each other, like 21% and 20%, and for the first stage the number of subjects (n1=20) was sufficient for AUC, but not for Cmax.
Calculation shows that even then the power for AUC for the second stage would be always enough.

for(j in 5:100){nj1<-sampleN.TOST(CV=j/100,print=FALSE)[1,7]
n02<-sampleN2.TOST(CV=(j+1)/100,n1=nj1)[1,8]
nj2<-nj1+n02
print(suppressMessages(power.TOST(CV=j/100,n=nj2-1,alpha=0.0294)))}


» Take some Schützomycin?

Did you patent that? I gonna make a generic :-D

» According to the Q&A:

stage, sequence, sequence × stage, subject(sequence × stage), period(stage), treatment.


Are there any documents to refer which mention this model (excepting the answer on the EMA's web page?)

» Ask Detlew or inspect the sources of power.tsd() and power.tsd.2m(). :-D

Ok, need more tea to dive to the source...

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

Complete thread:

Activity
 Admin contact
21,831 posts in 4,567 threads, 1,553 registered users;
online 10 (0 registered, 10 guests [including 4 identified bots]).
Forum time: Wednesday 23:56 CET (Europe/Vienna)

Research under a paradigm must be a particularly effective way
of inducing paradigm change.    Thomas S. Kuhn

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