Evaluation of Reference variability [Design Issues]

posted by Helmut Homepage – Vienna, Austria, 2009-04-17 15:44 (5908 d 23:46 ago) – Posting: # 3555
Views: 4,287

Dear Nirali,

I agree with Ohlbe. Same opinions were expressed at the EUFEPS meeting last January (see this thread), where almost the entire PK group of EMEA was present. The group univocally expressed their point of view that a two period replicate design (reference only) is not acceptable. See also Jan Welink's presentation (slide 22).
On the other hand I know of European companies running such studies right now (despite clear reservations by regulators). Obviously these companies are sure that they will be able to convince authorities that the performance was not sloppy. I would not bet on their success!

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
23,424 posts in 4,927 threads, 1,672 registered users;
47 visitors (0 registered, 47 guests [including 10 identified bots]).
Forum time: 15:30 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

Medical researches can be divided into two sorts:
those who think that meta is better and those
who believe that pooling is fooling.    Stephen Senn

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