Bizarre paper [Regulatives / Guidelines]

posted by ElMaestro  – Denmark, 2020-06-08 17:33 (1449 d 04:13 ago) – Posting: # 21511
Views: 12,010

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
23,035 posts in 4,835 threads, 1,644 registered users;
62 visitors (0 registered, 62 guests [including 6 identified bots]).
Forum time: 21:46 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

That which is static and repetitive is boring.
That which is dynamic and random is confusing.
In between lies art.    John Locke

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