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

posted by Shuanghe  – Spain, 2020-03-05 16:02 (206 d 23:26 ago) – Posting: # 21208
Views: 1,742

Hi Helmut,

» By “much more” you mean that the 90% CI is entirely outside the 80-125% limits, right?

Not necessarily. Yesterday when I was asking the question I was thinking about 90% CI partially out, e.g., T fed/T fasting is 60%--85%, and R fed/R fasting is 115%--130%. So food increase the reference but decrease the test absorption. Or vice versa.

But what if 90% CIs are within 80%--125%? e.g., T fed/T fasting 80.1%--90% (which is statistically significant different but is BE) and R fed/R fast about 115%--124% (similarly, there's statistically significant difference but is BE), or vice versa. Clearly, food effect is huge and there's something wrong here...

Of course, this is just pure speculation. I'm not even sure if the scenario is remotely possible given that T fed/R fed and T fast/R fast are assumed within 80%--125% :confused:...

» Everything else (CI overlapping the limits) is indecisive and would not worry me.

If the scenario above is possible, I would worry about it... But again, maybe it's just my silliness. I cannot think straight right now.

» Nil – also for the “nice” case. Though the EMA stated in various conferences to welcome such a hybrid application, I haven’t seen one so far. Any experience from the members?

Yes, let's hear other opinion/experience.

All the best,
Shuanghe

Complete thread:

Activity
 Admin contact
21,082 posts in 4,397 threads, 1,468 registered users;
online 4 (2 registered, 2 guests [including 1 identified bots]).
Forum time: Monday 16:28 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

A central lesson of science is that to understand complex issues
(or even simple ones), we must try to free our minds of dogma and
to guarantee the freedom to publish, to contradict, and to experiment.
Arguments from authority are unacceptable.    Carl Sagan

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