ABEL ≠ RSABE [Outliers]
Hello!
I have seen this or similar explanation several times:
... but I still can't get my head around this.
Lets say I plan study with theta0=0.95, CV=0.20, design="2x2", targetpower=0.8 (all except CV are default settings in PowerTOST), so with sampleN.TOST I get N=20 and power=0.834680
If all of my assumptions in a study are exactly realized, doesnt it mean that I would 100% always get bioequivalent formulations (and the study would never fail)?
If all of my assumptions in a study are exactly realized (pe=0.95, CV=0.20, design="2x2", n=20) then I would get the following confidence interval:
So because a confidence interval is completely within limits 80-125%, my formulations would always be bioequivalent because I would always get this confidence interval with same numbers (CV,n,pe)?
What am I not understanding here?
Thank you and best regards
BEQool
I have seen this or similar explanation several times:
❝ If you design studies for 80% power and all of your assumptions are exactly realized (T/R-ratio, CV, dropout-rate), one out of five will fail be pure chance. That’s life.
... but I still can't get my head around this.
Lets say I plan study with theta0=0.95, CV=0.20, design="2x2", targetpower=0.8 (all except CV are default settings in PowerTOST), so with sampleN.TOST I get N=20 and power=0.834680
> sampleN.TOST(theta0=0.95, CV=0.20, design="2x2", targetpower=0.8, print=FALSE)
Design alpha CV theta0 theta1 theta2 Sample size Achieved power Target power
2x2 0.05 0.2 0.95 0.8 1.25 20 0.8346802 0.8
If all of my assumptions in a study are exactly realized, doesnt it mean that I would 100% always get bioequivalent formulations (and the study would never fail)?
If all of my assumptions in a study are exactly realized (pe=0.95, CV=0.20, design="2x2", n=20) then I would get the following confidence interval:
> CI.BE(pe=0.95,CV=0.20,n=20)
lower upper
0.8522362 1.0589787
So because a confidence interval is completely within limits 80-125%, my formulations would always be bioequivalent because I would always get this confidence interval with same numbers (CV,n,pe)?
What am I not understanding here?
Thank you and best regards
BEQool
Complete thread:
- Outlier in fully replicate BE study Loky do 2021-06-16 00:49 [Outliers]
- Outlier in fully replicate BE study drgunasakaran1 2021-06-16 08:59
- Widening for clopidogrel BE study Loky do 2021-06-16 15:38
- Widening for clopidogrel BE study mittyri 2021-06-16 16:04
- Widening for clopidogrel BE study Loky do 2021-06-16 17:08
- Widening for clopidogrel BE study - cherry-picking? mittyri 2021-06-16 17:27
- Widening for clopidogrel BE study drgunasakaran1 2021-06-17 12:01
- Hypotheses Helmut 2021-06-19 12:32
- Hypotheses Loky do 2021-07-06 11:51
- ABEL ≠ RSABE Helmut 2021-07-06 16:17
- ABEL ≠ RSABEBEQool 2023-10-09 14:47
- power.TOST.sim and uncertainty mittyri 2023-10-11 12:42
- power.TOST.sim and uncertainty BEQool 2023-10-15 11:29
- power.TOST.sim and uncertainty mittyri 2023-10-20 21:47
- Distribution of PEs Helmut 2023-10-23 10:48
- Distribution of PEs BEQool 2023-10-23 19:55
- power.TOST.sim code mittyri 2023-10-31 15:40
- power.TOST.sim code BEQool 2023-11-02 11:22
- power.TOST.sim code mittyri 2023-10-31 15:40
- Distribution of PEs BEQool 2023-10-23 19:55
- Distribution of PEs Helmut 2023-10-23 10:48
- power.TOST.sim and uncertainty mittyri 2023-10-20 21:47
- power.TOST.sim and uncertainty BEQool 2023-10-15 11:29
- power.TOST.sim and uncertainty mittyri 2023-10-11 12:42
- ABEL ≠ RSABEBEQool 2023-10-09 14:47
- ABEL ≠ RSABE Helmut 2021-07-06 16:17
- Hypotheses Loky do 2021-07-06 11:51
- Widening for clopidogrel BE study Loky do 2021-06-16 17:08
- Widening for clopidogrel BE study mittyri 2021-06-16 16:04
- Widening for clopidogrel BE study Loky do 2021-06-16 15:38
- Outlier in fully replicate BE study drgunasakaran1 2021-06-16 08:59