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

posted by ping4santosh  – India, 2020-03-11 16:15 2401:4900:3317:febf:759:f353:c282:dbfc – Posting: # 21254
Views: 1,865

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
20,456 posts in 4,296 threads, 1,413 registered users;
online 12 (0 registered, 12 guests [including 10 identified bots]).
Forum time (Europe/Vienna): 21:23 CEST

No one wants to learn from mistakes, but we cannot learn enough
from successes to go beyond the state of the art.    Henry Petroski

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