Excluding time points for lambdaZ [RSABE / ABEL]

posted by d_labes  – Berlin, Germany, 2012-10-09 11:33 (4597 d 01:20 ago) – Posting: # 9352
Views: 14,337

Dear Helmut, dear FI!

❝ ❝ What if one concentration looks to be an analytical mistake(?), that confounds t1/2 in such a way that the slope increases...?

❝ ...

❝ Other options (?):


In this post I had claimed "I never have seen deficiency questions concerning the fit of the terminal phase of concentration time courses in my ~30 years career. Even if the 'fit' was done with only 2 points".
Say never never. :no:
Quite recently I got:

… The applicant should justify the calculation of the terminal rate constant for patient #xxx, reference/r.1, patient #yyy, test/r.2 …

(It was a replicate BE study in patients).
The questioned cases had in common that the last measured concentration was increasing compared to the preceding ones and doesn't fit into the linear part for the log-linear regression. To not grossly overestimate the terminal half-life in such situations it is my standard operation to act according to Helmut's first option above.

Seems some regulators opinion do not match mine.

Regards,

Detlew

Complete thread:

UA Flag
Activity
 Admin contact
23,424 posts in 4,927 threads, 1,669 registered users;
114 visitors (0 registered, 114 guests [including 8 identified bots]).
Forum time: 12:53 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

Lack of clarity is always a sign of dishonesty.    Celia Green

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