Bizarre paper [Regulatives / Guidelines]

posted by ElMaestro  – Denmark, 2020-06-08 15:33 (419 d 06:55 ago) – Posting: # 21511
Views: 6,919

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:

Activity
 Admin contact
21,596 posts in 4,516 threads, 1,532 registered users;
online 5 (0 registered, 5 guests [including 3 identified bots]).
Forum time: Sunday 22:29 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

Sit down before fact as a little child,
be prepared to give up every conceived notion,
follow humbly wherever and whatever abysses nature leads,
or you will learn nothing.    Thomas Henry Huxley

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