Calculation of AUC0-72 [NCA / SHAM]

posted by Helmut Homepage – Vienna, Austria, 2009-01-26 17:24 (5170 d 18:28 ago) – Posting: # 3123
Views: 24,212

Dear D. Labes,

sorry for the late response – I was driven by discussions about the drafted European BE-Guideline. :-D

❝ I would like to discuss this a bit further.

❝ How do you act in a truncated setting if the last sample is missing? Or if some subject has conc. <LOQ due to faster kinetics?

❝ Omit this subject from the analysis?

I have heard of CROs omitting subjects if AUC72 was stated as the primary parameter and the sample at 72 h (or earlier) was ≤LOQ. In the strict sense I would consider this correct.
But: with the current trend of moving from seening BE as a surrogate of clinical safety/efficacy to a measure of pharmaceutical performance in vivo I would go with Kamal Midha’s Mantra and accept AUCs where the absorption is completed (Clast ≥2–4 times tmax). See Example 2 in this thread. If we truncate AUCs of subjects with Clast<72 (for any treatment) at the last time point where C>LOQ (for all treatments), it should be possible to get an unbiased estimate of the T/R-ratio.* Unfortunately this method is not available in commercial software (at least not in the current versions of WinNonlin, Kinetica, EquivTest/PK).

I wouldn’t start trying to get an estimate of C72.

Edit (years later)

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

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

Complete thread:

UA Flag
 Admin contact
22,550 posts in 4,724 threads, 1,606 registered users;
18 visitors (1 registered, 17 guests [including 8 identified bots]).
Forum time: 11:53 CET (Europe/Vienna)

If there is an exception to any rule,
and if it can be proved by observation,
that rule is wrong.    Richard Feynman

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