yuvrajkatkar
★    

Pune, Maharashtra (India),
2010-04-15 16:44
(5910 d 12:59 ago)

Posting: # 5149
Views: 6,393
 

 NTI drug issue [Power / Sample Size]

Dear all,

Please see the below results
Dependent       Ratio[%Ref]  CI_90_Lower  CI_90_Upper  ICV(%)
Ln(AUCINF_obs)  95.80        92.57        99.15        11.58%
Ln(AUClast)     96.23        92.78        99.82        12.33%
Ln(Cmax)        90.20        86.02        94.58        16.04%


The 90% CI for Ln(Cmax) is not within the limits 90% to 111.11%. As per the EMEA guideline on Investigation of BE study for the BE criteria of NTI drugs.

The maximum Ratio[%Ref]= 90.20% and corresponding Intrasubject CV= 16.04% for Ln(Cmax).

If we take T/R ratio = 90.20% and Intrasubject CV= 16.04% then sample size will be greater than 20000 to get 90% confidence intervals of log transformed Cmax, AUC0-t and AUC0-inf for data within 90.00 - 111.11 % to achieve 80 % power at 5% level of significance.(Ref. of formula: Shein-Chung Chow,Jan Shao (sample size calculation in clinical reserch, page 31, 32 ). Instead of ln (1.25)=0.20, I have taken ln(1.11)=0.10.

Is it right way to choose sample size for the next study

If we take T/R ratio = 95% to 105% and Intrasubject CV= 16.04% then sample size will be 109.

Please suggest me.


Edit: Table coded, UTF-8 characters removed. [Helmut]

Best Regards,
Yuvraj
Helmut
★★★
avatar
Homepage
Vienna, Austria,
2010-04-15 17:43
(5910 d 12:00 ago)

@ yuvrajkatkar
Posting: # 5150
Views: 5,380
 

 Warning

Dear Yuvraj!

I'm bored of editing your posts almost all the time. Don't use tabs, UTF-8 characters, sloppy spelling, etc. You expect answers. Fine. Use the preview before posting.
If you don't comply with the forum's Policy, your account will be blocked.

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
d_labes
★★★

Berlin, Germany,
2010-04-16 12:11
(5909 d 17:32 ago)

@ yuvrajkatkar
Posting: # 5152
Views: 5,169
 

 Googol

Dear yuvrajkatkar,

❝ The maximum Ratio[%Ref]= 90.20% and corresponding Intrasubject CV= 16.04% for Ln(Cmax).


Is the minimum ratio but maximum CV.

❝ If we take T/R ratio = 90.20% and Intrasubject CV= 16.04% then sample size will be greater than 20000 to get 90% confidence intervals of log-transformed Cmax ...


Exactly 63750 (power=80.0003%) using my super code. Approximate Googol :cool:!
I think this is a very great opportunity to earn a big lot of money and have occupation until sunset of your years. If you find someone to spend ... :-D

❝ Instead of ln(1.25)=0.20, I have taken ln(1.11)=0.10.


ln(1.25) = 0.2231436, ln(1.11)=0.1043600 on my machine (Intel® Pentium 4, 1 GB RAM; Win XP Professional, SAS9.2 or R10.0).
BE upper acceptance limits with your numbers: exp(0.2)=122.14% and exp(0.1)=110.52%.

In the light of the FDA guidance and the new EMA guidance both asking for CI within 80.00 to 125.00 % it is IMHO not a good idea to use only 1 decimal. :no:

❝ Is it right way to choose sample size for the next study


:no:
Since I guess your results came from a BE study with approx. 38 subjects why do you expect that your point estimates are unreliable?
With such a point estimate you never achieve BE within the acceptance range 90 ... 111.11%
So the right suggestion for a next study is: reformulate is the question.

Regards,

Detlew
UA Flag
Activity
 Admin contact
23,655 posts in 4,993 threads, 1,570 registered users;
145 visitors (0 registered, 145 guests [including 22 identified bots]).
Forum time: 05:43 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

Science is simply common sense at its best that is,
rigidly accurate in observation, and
merciless to fallacy in logic.    Thomas Henry Huxley

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