Life belt [Two-Stage / GS Designs]

posted by Helmut Homepage – Vienna, Austria, 2012-09-05 17:20 (4630 d 01:22 ago) – Posting: # 9153
Views: 21,011

Dear Detlew!

❝ IMHO we should be glad that we have the option to widen the BE limits at all according to the EMA guidance in case of HVD's. This reduces the burden considerably for such formulations.


Cough. Cmax only. ;-)
Pfizer’s world-record is 300+ subjects in a full replicate (no scaling)…

❝ Fetching also the advantages of a 2-stage design in this situation would be too much overkill.


That’s why I called GSD’s attempts in my first reply “courageous”.

❝ Moreover we have to be convinced that our API is HVD. That means that we must have a good reliable estimate of the intra-subject CV (of the reference) which has to be >30%. In that situation an additional life belt for missing or uncertain informations to plan the study aka "2-stage design" is superfluous.


Define “good reliable estimate of the intra-subject CV”. :-D
Especially PPIs show CVs varying across studies from 30–90%. Some studies passed with 24 subjects whilst others failed with 120. Occasionally higher CVs were seen in larger studies; it’s more likely then to face outliers inflating the CV. That’s an example where a 2-stage design would not help because the CV estimated from the first stage would be too small anyway.

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, 1,669 registered users;
125 visitors (0 registered, 125 guests [including 8 identified bots]).
Forum time: 18:42 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

We should not speak so that it is possible
for the audience to understand us,
but so that it is impossible
for them to misunderstand us.    Quintilian

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