It is, it is! [Power / Sample Size]

posted by Helmut Homepage – Vienna, Austria, 2020-05-04 14:07 (349 d 20:21 ago) – Posting: # 21397
Views: 5,815

» 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.”

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

Dif-tor heh smusma 🖖
Helmut Schütz

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

Complete thread:

 Admin contact
21,419 posts in 4,475 threads, 1,510 registered users;
online 12 (0 registered, 12 guests [including 4 identified bots]).
Forum time: Monday 10:28 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

There is one certainty in drug development
and statistics that one can depend on:
the data are always late.    Scott Patterson and Byron Jones

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