## Clarification from Russian expert organization… [Regulatives / Guidelines]

Hi Beholder,

❝ An article which might serve as "guideline" for conducting telmisartan BE studies in Russia written by expert organization representative. Open access and abstract in English is available.

THX; interesting. In Table 3 three studies are give twice each. Could reproduce the pooled CV of Cmax (43.57%). The upper limit 44.84% is based on a 75% CI. I would use a 80% CL. Given.

library(PowerTOST) design <- "2x2x2" n      <- c(85, 36, 40, 59, 60, 50, 40) CV     <- c(43.27, 32.72, 33.67, 48.35, 49.45, 34.12, 55.34)/100 df     <- n - 2 study <- data.frame(design = "2x2x2", n = n,                     df = df, CV = CV, CV.CL = NA,                     stringsAsFactors = FALSE) for (j in seq_along(CV)) {   study$CV.CL[j] <- signif(CVCL(CV = study$CV[j], df = study\$df[j],                                 side = "upper", alpha = 0.25)[["upper CL"]], 4) } print(study); print(CVpooled(study, alpha = 0.25), verbose = TRUE) #   design  n df     CV  CV.CL # 1  2x2x2 85 83 0.4327 0.4677 # 2  2x2x2 36 34 0.3272 0.3701 # 3  2x2x2 40 38 0.3367 0.3781 # 4  2x2x2 59 57 0.4835 0.5331 # 5  2x2x2 60 58 0.4945 0.5449 # 6  2x2x2 50 48 0.3412 0.3778 # 7  2x2x2 40 38 0.5534 0.6280 # Pooled CV = 0.4357 with 356 degrees of freedom # Upper 75% confidence limit of CV = 0.4485

The recommended sample of 20 subjects is for a 2×2×4 design and ABEL based on a GMR of 0.95 and CV 0.45). I would not be that optimistic and suggest a GMR of not better than 0.90 (42 subjects).
Not sure whether it makes sense to work with the pooled CV at all (different sampling schedules and bioanalytical methods).

I like that the experts recommend 2-sequence 4- (TRTR|RTRT) and 3-period (TRT|RTR) full replicate designs and not the lousy partial replicate. Kudos!

Dif-tor heh smusma 🖖🏼 Довге життя Україна!
Helmut Schütz

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