Common variance! [Design Issues]

posted by jag009  – NJ, 2012-06-12 21:56 (5117 d 00:16 ago) – Posting: # 8719
Views: 11,107

Hi Helmut,

❝ Thinking it over I would expect that the FDA will not like this approach. What if it’s the other way ’round? Three tests; T1 and T2 perform bad in terms of their PEs whilst T3 is fine. Now let’s assume that s²WT1=s²WT2=s²WR WT3. The pooled s²W will be ‘dampened’ by the (later dropped) formulations T1 and T2. In other words you would never be able to demonstrate BE of T1 in a 2-way XOver of the same size. Though theses variances are not accessible in a nonreplicate design I think that the FDA wouldn’t like the idea of approving a product with a potential ‘variance-brake’ in the pivotal study.


Totally agree. Could I hypothetically strip the two treatments (successful test formulation and the reference) and re-run stats in a two-way crossover fashion to re-evaulate the data? Would that stand a chance with regulatory? Just a thought...

Thanks

John

Complete thread:

UA Flag
Activity
 Admin contact
23,654 posts in 4,992 threads, 1,571 registered users;
136 visitors (0 registered, 136 guests [including 13 identified bots]).
Forum time: 22:12 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

Always listen to experts.
They’ll tell you what can’t be done and why.
Then do it.    Robert A. Heinlein

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