Bizarre paper [Regulatives / Guidelines]

posted by ElMaestro  – Denmark, 2020-06-08 15:33 (371 d 14:40 ago) – Posting: # 21511
Views: 6,557

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
21,518 posts in 4,498 threads, 1,524 registered users;
online 18 (0 registered, 18 guests [including 7 identified bots]).
Forum time: Tuesday 06:14 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

I suppose it is tempting, if the only tool you have is a hammer,
to treat everything as if it were a nail.    Abraham Maslow

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