It is, it is! [Power / Sample Size]

posted by Helmut Homepage – Vienna, Austria, 2020-05-04 12:07 (214 d 17:14 ago) – Posting: # 21397
Views: 5,206

» I believe it must be this assessment report.:
» "the acceptance criteria for Cmax was widened to the acceptance range of 72.83-137.31%",

Almost my dear Dr Watson!
It’s the first study; results on page 7:
“… within-reference intra-subject CV of ln-transformed Cmax > 30% (42.6%), hence Cmax limits were widen[ed] to 73.31–136.42% using scaled-average-bioequivalence.”

library(PowerTOST)
identical(42.6 / 100, round(100 * CVwRfromU(136.42 / 100), 1))
[1] TRUE


Dif-tor heh smusma 🖖
Helmut Schütz
[image]

The quality of responses received is directly proportional to the quality of the question asked. 🚮
Science Quotes

Complete thread:

Activity
 Admin contact
21,240 posts in 4,431 threads, 1,482 registered users;
online 3 (0 registered, 3 guests [including 2 identified bots]).
Forum time: Saturday 05:21 UTC (Europe/Vienna)

I believe there is no philosophical high-road in science,
with epistemological signposts. No, we are in a jungle
and find our way by trial and error,
building our road behind us as we proceed.    Max Born

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