Reasons? [Study As­sess­ment]

posted by dshah  – India/United Kingdom, 2021-08-24 14:06 (533 d 22:07 ago) – Posting: # 22538
Views: 1,244

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
22,489 posts in 4,711 threads, 1,605 registered users;
21 visitors (0 registered, 21 guests [including 9 identified bots]).
Forum time: 11:14 CET (Europe/Vienna)

Many people tend to look at programming styles and languages like religions:
if you belong to one, you cannot belong to others.
But this analogy is another fallacy.    Niklaus Wirth

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