Underrepresentation of female subjects in BE study to register Generic [Regulatives / Guidelines]

posted by ping4santosh  – India, 2020-03-11 17:15 (1946 d 10:16 ago) – Posting: # 21254
Views: 6,512

Hi ElMaestro,

It's not a random flutter. Females actually fall back on bioequivalncy. Cmax at 75% and range was lower too. Pioneer product behaved similar way. So it's not random. You are right. The females also has higher variance.

I didn't understand your last statement. Can you kindly clarify?

❝ Yes, you can likely conduct the study in males. But why would you if you think the conclusion in males can be extrapolated


Cheers,

SKM

Complete thread:

UA Flag
Activity
 Admin contact
23,428 posts in 4,929 threads, 1,687 registered users;
72 visitors (0 registered, 72 guests [including 16 identified bots]).
Forum time: 04:31 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

To know that we know what we know,
and to know that we do not know what we do not know,
that is true knowledge.    Nicolaus Copernicus

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