Reasons? [Study As­sess­ment]

posted by dshah  – India/United Kingdom, 2021-08-24 14:06 (910 d 14:31 ago) – Posting: # 22538
Views: 1,798

Hi Helmut

I have following thoughts w.r.t. to my points.

1. Change in subject will cause change in concentration. Even MVR of many regulatory and ISR also permits ~15% variation at Cmax point. The Cmax is generally variable than AUC. So if the ratio difference is +/- 15%, the discussion shall be of no point. But still may point out that there is difference.

2. BA method and same instrument needs to be mentioned. It could have impact.

❝ ❝ 3. Same Internal standard batch? Change in internal standard changes height and thus ultimately concentration.

❝ Given, the IS response might be different. However, even if calibrators and QC samples are prepared with, say, an IS of just 50% of the declared content in one of the studies, the back-calculated concentrations should be similar and therefore, the T/R-ratios.

Although, it sounds odd, Even for NTI- with same CRO- Method-Instrument; I have witnessed change in concentration with just change in IS batch. It may have similar T/R but even there was difference in T/R.

I hope this may help.

Complete thread:

UA Flag
 Admin contact
22,899 posts in 4,806 threads, 1,651 registered users;
28 visitors (0 registered, 28 guests [including 5 identified bots]).
Forum time: 03:37 CET (Europe/Vienna)

Statistics is, or should be, about scientific investigation
and how to do it better, but many statisticians believe
it is a branch of mathematics.    George E.P. Box

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