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

posted by ping4santosh  – India, 2020-03-11 16:15 (402 d 21:19 ago) – Posting: # 21254
Views: 3,592

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:

Activity
 Admin contact
21,419 posts in 4,475 threads, 1,509 registered users;
online 20 (0 registered, 20 guests [including 4 identified bots]).
Forum time: Sunday 14:34 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

Nothing fails like success because you do not learn anything from it.
The only thing we ever learn from is failure.
Success only confirms our superstitions.    Kenneth E. Boulding

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