Fast & fed in one study (alternative) [Design Issues]

posted by Shuanghe  – Spain, 2020-03-04 17:13 (2300 d 07:34 ago) – Posting: # 21203
Views: 6,455

Dear Helmut

❝ If T shows a substantially lower food effect than R that’s good for the patients. However, if you want to state that in the label/SmPC (“can be taken with or without food”) you have to switch from a generic to a hybrid application. The EMA welcomes that. Whether the additional clinical studies are worth the efforts is another story.


What happens if T is BE to R under fasting and fed but T has much more food effect than R? Will "nice-to-know" become "but-now-I-know-so-you-are-fucked"? What's your experience from regulation perspective?

All the best,
Shuanghe

Complete thread:

UA Flag
Activity
 Admin contact
23,655 posts in 4,993 threads, 1,571 registered users;
130 visitors (0 registered, 130 guests [including 17 identified bots]).
Forum time: 01:47 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

Science is simply common sense at its best that is,
rigidly accurate in observation, and
merciless to fallacy in logic.    Thomas Henry Huxley

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