Bizarre paper [Regulatives / Guidelines]

posted by ElMaestro  – Denmark, 2020-06-08 17:33 (909 d 23:17 ago) – Posting: # 21511
Views: 9,586

Hi all,

possibly a little off topic but even with AUCall in all its ugliness and over-estimation, it will not necessarily imply a bias on the BE conclusion unless someone can prove that E(ln(AUCall,T - ln(AUCall,R)) does not equal E(ln(AUCT) - ln(AUCR)), regardless of whether the latter is expressed as AUCinf or AUCt.

This isn't about imagining scenarios where the equality does not hold (that would be easy enough) but a consideration of the general (expected) case. For the general case I think we're ok.

Pass or fail!
ElMaestro

Complete thread:

UA Flag
Activity
 Admin contact
22,428 posts in 4,694 threads, 1,598 registered users;
14 visitors (0 registered, 14 guests [including 8 identified bots]).
Forum time: 15:51 CET (Europe/Vienna)

Statistics is the art of never having to say you’re wrong.
Variance is what any two statisticians are at.    C.J. Bradfield

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