Bioequivalence and Bioavailability Forum

Wow! Yet another awesome answer (and a big round of applause for solving the UTF-8 mystery)!

Honestly, I feel like a caveman who has been gifted a powerful handphone (by you), equipped with GPS, google map, etc. to help me navigate the forest of pharmacokinetics, while I'm still looking at bushes (not even trees yet!) and using that handphone as a mirror

Thanks for all the great pointers, keywords, and properties to look for :)
Especially the idea behind IUT, because its my first time hearing that correlation had such a geometric interpretation!
(｡♥‿♥｡)

❝ We have three tests. The areas give their type I errors. Since we perform all at the same level, the areas are identical. The Euclidean distance between centers give the correlation of PK metrics (here they are identical as well). The FWER is given by the area of the intersection which in any case will be ≤ the nominal α.

❝

❝ In reality the correlation of AUC_0–∞ (green) with AUC_0–t (blue) is higher than the correlation of both with C_max (red). If we would test only the AUCs, the FWER would by given again by the intersection which is clearly lower than the individual type I errors. If we add C_max, the FWER decreases further.

Now I'm even MORE looking forward to studying IUT in detail, because it reminds me of when I first learned that I could use SVD to geometrically visualize the error ellipsoid of a covariance matrix. I found it beautiful :)



Thanks Helmut, for all your help
(*ˊᗜˋ*)/ᵗᑋᵃᐢᵏ ᵞᵒᵘ*

P.S. I'm spending time reading on IUT now, hence the short reply; but I thought I'd end with a nice little picture for memory :p