Typos… [Regulatives / Guidelines]

posted by Helmut Homepage – Vienna, Austria, 2022-03-20 17:32 (708 d 21:08 ago) – Posting: # 22848
Views: 1,299

Hi Shata,

❝ So, correction for potency is no longer described in Canadian guidelines?


Yep, gone with the wind. Somewhat surprising because even the EMA accepts a potency-correction if you provide evidence that it was not possible to obtain a reference which differs ≤ 5% from the test.

❝ Thank you for the provided references, but I need data to validate potency correction equations.


Well, the formula given in Health Canada’s old guidance(s) is correct. In the example instead of \(\small{0.0360}\) plug in \(\small{\log_{e}\tfrac{Potency_\textrm{ R}}{Potency_{\,\textrm{ T}}}}\).
Alternatively, multiply all dose-related PK metrics (Cmax, AUC) of \(\small{\textrm{T}}\) with \(\small{Potency_\textrm{ R}}\) and the ones of \(\small{\textrm{R}}\) with \(\small{Potency_\textrm{ T}}\). Perform the comparison with the corrected values and you should obtain the same result than with the correction formula.

Dif-tor heh smusma 🖖🏼 Довге життя Україна! [image]
Helmut Schütz
[image]

The quality of responses received is directly proportional to the quality of the question asked. 🚮
Science Quotes

Complete thread:

UA Flag
Activity
 Admin contact
22,912 posts in 4,806 threads, 1,636 registered users;
25 visitors (0 registered, 25 guests [including 4 identified bots]).
Forum time: 14:40 CET (Europe/Vienna)

It is the peculiar and perpetual error of the human understanding
to be more moved and excited by affirmatives than negatives.    Francis Bacon

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