Bioequivalence and Bioavailability Forum • WNL almost the same as SAS

WNL almost the same as SAS [Software]

posted by d_labes – Berlin, Germany, 2010-09-03 14:10 (5358 d 09:12 ago) – Posting: # 5881
Views: 5,767

Dear Helmut!

❝ OK, here my results (Phoenix/WinNonlin 6.1):

❝ ...

❝ They are almost (!) the same. ;-)

Very fine

❝ Chow/Liu reported carryover effects at p=0.32 and further results

❝ (3^rd ed. 2009, Tables 10.3.15/16, p322):

❝ Carryover R T S

❝ Yes 5.67 7.24 6.30

❝ No 6.01 7.06 6.45

❝ ...

From the values and a short look into the book it seems they have analyzed the AUC values un-transformed! Not a very good idea with respect to nearly all guidances around the world :no:

.

@Maura: I agree with Helmut. There is a coding error in your carry-over factor. In the first period there is no carry-over possible.
BTW: I would not take a model with carry-over if no very strong arguments are present that such an effect could have occured. An sufficient wash-out period should have avoided that.
If not the simple first order carry-over model is not an efficient tool to deal with.
See
Stephen Senn
"Cross-over Trials in Clinical Research"
Chapter 10
Second edition
Wiley, Chichester, 2002

—
Regards,

Detlew

Complete thread:

Cross-over 3x6 WNL x SAS Maura 2010-09-02 17:09 [Software]
- WNL partial F vs. SAS type III F d_labes 2010-09-03 08:58
  - WNL partial F vs. SAS type III F Helmut 2010-09-03 11:13
    - WNL almost the same as SASd_labes 2010-09-03 12:10
      - WNL almost the same as SAS Maura 2010-09-03 14:07