Reasons? [Study As­sess­ment]

posted by dshah  – India/United Kingdom, 2021-08-24 14:06 (969 d 02:10 ago) – Posting: # 22538
Views: 2,022

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.
Regards,
Dshah

Complete thread:

UA Flag
Activity
 Admin contact
22,987 posts in 4,824 threads, 1,665 registered users;
82 visitors (0 registered, 82 guests [including 3 identified bots]).
Forum time: 16:17 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

The only way to comprehend what mathematicians mean by Infinity
is to contemplate the extent of human stupidity.    Voltaire

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