1×2 ≠ 2×1 [Design Issues]

posted by Helmut Homepage – Vienna, Austria, 2019-12-14 00:42 (1018 d 22:18 ago) – Posting: # 20974
Views: 2,889

Hi John,

» The design is obviously wrong (due to IR dosing regimen) …

Yep.

» … but would a regulatory body reject the study (assume the study pass the BE objective which is BE needed only for auc).

I hope so. Imagine you have capacity-limited elimination. You would partly saturate the enzymes with the 1×2 regimen and see a higher AUC than with 2×1. Hence, the T/R-ratio will be positively biased. In an extreme case the study passes with the wrong design but would have failed with the correct one.

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
22,391 posts in 4,685 threads, 1,595 registered users;
online 5 (0 registered, 5 guests [including 2 identified bots]).
Forum time: Wednesday 00:01 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

The real struggle is not between the right and the left
but between the party of the thoughtful
and the party of the jerks.    Jimmy Wales

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