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

posted by ping4santosh  – India, 2020-03-11 15:15 (225 d 06:23 ago) – Posting: # 21254
Views: 3,339

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
21,177 posts in 4,414 threads, 1,474 registered users;
online 8 (1 registered, 7 guests [including 6 identified bots]).
Forum time: Thursday 21:38 UTC (Europe/Vienna)

It is not so much that I have confidence in scientists being right,
but that I have so much in nonscientists being wrong.    Isaac Asimov

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