Metrics for multiple profiles [NCA / SHAM]

posted by d_labes  – Berlin, Germany, 2009-12-03 09:58 (5617 d 19:12 ago) – Posting: # 4409
Views: 11,768

Dear Helmut!

❝ Only if your drug shows no diurnal variability, the first 8 h profile

❝ on day 4 is sufficient. If your drug's PK is influenced by some

circadian rhythms, you have to measure a full 24 hours cycle

❝ (i.e., three profiles).


I have a question.

How would you describe these three profiles?
If we take the first or last option and it comes to the statistical evaluation we have the burden to show bioequivalence for at least 3x more parameters than usual.
Or can we restrict the bioequivalence decision to lets say profile 1?
And see the other profiles only as secondary?

I remember a study with Aescin (12 h dosing interval), we have done long ago, with a marked difference between the morning and evening profiles. Much lower concentrations in the second profile, but also much more variable in Cmax / Cmin there.
Using the metrics of each profile we were able to show equivalence for the first profile but not for the second with respect to Cmax.
PTF was beyond good and evil (CV very much higher than 30%).
Bioequivalent?

Regards,

Detlew

Complete thread:

UA Flag
Activity
 Admin contact
23,424 posts in 4,927 threads, 1,673 registered users;
29 visitors (0 registered, 29 guests [including 8 identified bots]).
Forum time: 06:11 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

The combination of some data and an aching desire
for an answer does not ensure that a reasonable answer
can be extracted from a given body of data.    John W. Tukey

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