? business as usual [BE/BA News]

posted by Helmut Homepage – Vienna, Austria, 2019-12-04 16:42 (1160 d 23:40 ago) – Posting: # 20925
Views: 4,757

Hi ElMaestro,

❝ I tried to read that answer 10 times now and I am none the wiser. Do they mean "The guideline will deal with BCS-based biowaivers, but it is acknowledged that some countries might not accept those." ??

:-)


My interpretation as well. I expected that (since Japan had/has always a certain way of thinking).

We had that already in ICH E9 of 1998. The draft followed closely the European one of 1993. Japan insisted to have a “global assessment” in the GL. Quote:

In some cases, 'global assessment' variables […] are developed to measure the over­all safety, overall efficacy, and/or overall usefulness of a treatment. This type of variable integrates objective variables and the investigator’s overall impression [sic] about the state or change in the state of the subject […]
Global assessment variables generally have a subjective component. […]


Japanese investigator approaches the volunteer and asks “How do we feel today?”
Volunteer – unsuccessfully – tries to remove a nasal tube: “Hmpfl…”
Investigator turns away (mumbling “well, very very well…”) and ticks  good in the CRF.

[image]
© Disney and I.N.D.U.C.K.S.


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

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

Complete thread:

UA Flag
Activity
 Admin contact
22,485 posts in 4,710 threads, 1,603 registered users;
27 visitors (0 registered, 27 guests [including 7 identified bots]).
Forum time: 16:22 CET (Europe/Vienna)

The difference between a surrogate and a true endpoint
is like the difference between a cheque and cash.
You can get the cheque earlier but then,
of course, it might bounce.    Stephen Senn

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