Treatment effect justification [General Sta­tis­tics]

posted by ElMaestro  – Denmark, 2020-10-07 12:19 (1526 d 03:31 ago) – Posting: # 21974
Views: 3,608

Hi Siva Krishna,

something like this:

"The test producing a significant treatment effect is that log(y)T=log(y)R where y is the dependent variable (AUC or Cmax). This is not the hypothesis evaluated for the conclusion of bioequivalence. It is entirely expected that Test and Reference could be associated with different levels of (logarithmic) Cmax or AUC as they are truly two different formulations. What the evaluation for bioequivalence shows is that the difference in rate and extent and absorption does not differ by a clinically relevant margin, where clinical relevance is determined by the regulatory convention. Therefore the significant formulation effect does not translate, in this case, into inability to conclude bioequivalence."

Good luck.:-)

Pass or fail!
ElMaestro

Complete thread:

UA Flag
Activity
 Admin contact
23,336 posts in 4,902 threads, 1,666 registered users;
36 visitors (1 registered, 35 guests [including 8 identified bots]).
Forum time: 14:51 CET (Europe/Vienna)

I’m all in favor of the democratic principle
that one idiot is as good as one genius, but I draw the line
when someone takes the next step and concludes
that two idiots are better than one genius.    Leo Szilard

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