Flawed evaluation accepted [RSABE / ABEL]

posted by Mikalai  – Belarus, 2020-01-31 12:40 (841 d 17:38 ago) – Posting: # 21117
Views: 17,312

Dear Helmut,

I would like to stress out again that this decision tree has been used in multiple accepted BE studies. The tree is used not only by Indian CROs but CROs from developed countries. Cannot say more because it is a bit confidential. And again no complaints from regulators at all; otherwise, it would not be used

Regards


Why is it flawed?
They passed bioequivalence with the first step and did not go to the second one. It may be risky according to your approach but they were lucky enough. There is no TIE inflation in their study as I understand.
What is wrong in relation to TIE inflation?

Best regards


Edit: Merged with a later (now deleted) post. You can edit your posts for 24 hours. [Helmut]

Complete thread:

UA Flag
Activity
 Admin contact
22,091 posts in 4,630 threads, 1,566 registered users;
online 20 (0 registered, 20 guests [including 7 identified bots]).
Forum time: Sunday 07:19 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

Competence, like truth, beauty and contact lenses,
is in the eye of the beholder.    Laurence J. Peter

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