The missing 72h [NCA / SHAM]

posted by d_labes  – Berlin, Germany, 2009-01-27 11:48 (4950 d 05:31 ago) – Posting: # 3137
Views: 22,909

Dear Helmut,

» ... I have such a procedure since decades (oh, I’m getting old) in my protocols ...

Don't lose heart! Getting old is not for sissies (Bette Davis) :-D !

I have the vague suspicion that I have not explained my point precise enough.

So let me give an example (real data):
       time      Conc.
----------------------------------
 1     0.0        0.00
 2     0.5        0.00
 3     1.0        2.55
 4     2.0        9.79
 5     3.0       13.23
 6     4.0       14.43
 7     5.0       12.49
 8     6.0       12.78
 9     7.0       10.96
10     8.0       12.40
11    10.0       11.68
12    12.0       11.26        *
13    24.0        8.36        *
14    48.0        7.53        *
15    72.0        4.78 (missing)
----------------------------------


Half live for this curve with no missings is 53.6 h (using points 12-72 h).
AUC(0-72)=584.93 (linear trapezoidal rule for sake of simplicity).

If now the conc. value at 72h is missing unfortunately (vial broken or so), what to do?
AUC(0-48h) is 437.21, considerably lower than AUC(0-72), only 75%.
  1. Option: Exclude subject
  2. Option: Use AUC(0-48)
  3. Option: Extrapolate to 72h (C(calc.)=5.69 using log-lin regression with * points) and calculate then AUC (result=595.85).
Looking forward to your opinion.
Other users also a position?

Regards,

Detlew

Complete thread:

UA Flag
Activity
 Admin contact
22,305 posts in 4,668 threads, 1,587 registered users;
online 9 (1 registered, 8 guests [including 5 identified bots]).
Forum time: Wednesday 18:20 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

There is no point in being precise when you don’t know
what you’re talking about.    attributed to John Tukey

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