Critical review of EU BE guideline (Rev.1) [Regulatives / Guidelines]

posted by banusunman – 2008-08-26 18:56 (6083 d 14:53 ago) – Posting: # 2256
Views: 23,810

Dear all,

Here is another one:

On page 5, line 150-151 — the criterion for "adequate wash-out period" is not defined. However, in the previous 2001 NfG, for steady-state designs, it was given as "at least 3-times the terminal half-life". In FDA's 2003 GfI, an adequate washout period was described as "e.g., more than 5 half lives of the moieties to be measured".

Do you think they forgot to define it.. or?

Regards,

Complete thread:

UA Flag
Activity
 Admin contact
23,424 posts in 4,927 threads, 1,671 registered users;
31 visitors (0 registered, 31 guests [including 4 identified bots]).
Forum time: 09:50 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

The difference between a surrogate and a true endpoint
is like the difference between a cheque and cash.
You can get the cheque earlier but then,
of course, it might bounce.    Stephen Senn

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