Bizarre paper [Regulatives / Guidelines]

posted by ElMaestro  – Denmark, 2020-06-08 15:33 (754 d 00:50 ago) – Posting: # 21511
Views: 8,947

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
22,181 posts in 4,647 threads, 1,572 registered users;
online 10 (0 registered, 10 guests [including 4 identified bots]).
Forum time: Saturday 16:24 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

Reach for the stars,
even if you have to stand on a cactus.    Susan Longacre

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