FDA RSABE is ISC [🇷 for BE/BA]

posted by Helmut Homepage – Vienna, Austria, 2020-07-16 13:11 (1780 d 12:18 ago) – Posting: # 21709
Views: 25,362

Hi Detlew,

❝ Why not use the ISC estimate of T-R in the ABE decision in case of swR < 0.029356 (CVwR < 30%)?

❝ Politics? Nostalgia (Since years recommended the Proc MIXED code)?


The guidance “Statistical Approaches to Establishing Bioequivalence” of January 2001 (where the same SAS code is given in APPENDIX E) is still in force. Hence, it is only consistent to give it in the progesterone guidance.

❝ I would opt for the full ISC approach because it may be unambiguously implemented in SAS, R, Phoenix and so on for every replicate design, full or partial :cool:.


Cannot agree more. All problems would vanish.
—
Dif-tor heh smusma 🖖🏼 Довге життя Україна! [image]
Helmut Schütz
[image]

The quality of responses received is directly proportional to the quality of the question asked. 🚮
Science Quotes

Complete thread:

UA Flag
Activity
 Admin contact
23,424 posts in 4,927 threads, 1,676 registered users;
45 visitors (0 registered, 45 guests [including 31 identified bots]).
Forum time: 01:29 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

Nerds don’t just happen to dress informally.
They do it too consistently.
Consciously or not, they dress informally
as a prophylactic measure against stupidity.    Paul Graham

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