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

posted by ping4santosh  – India, 2020-03-11 17:15 (1499 d 22:02 ago) – Posting: # 21254
Views: 4,499

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
22,987 posts in 4,824 threads, 1,665 registered users;
79 visitors (0 registered, 79 guests [including 3 identified bots]).
Forum time: 16:17 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

The only way to comprehend what mathematicians mean by Infinity
is to contemplate the extent of human stupidity.    Voltaire

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