Clarc
☆    
Homepage
Romania,
2013-10-24 16:55
(4630 d 00:02 ago)

Posting: # 11748
Views: 7,172
 

 Widening Cmax in EU [RSABE / ABEL]

Dear All

We have to perform a bioequivalence on a HVD in EU.
The intrasubject variability in the literature is 29%, 32% and 36%.
Our statistical software doesn't permit scaling, only widening to 0.75-1.33.
The design is a fully replicated TRTR/RTRT design.

So my question is:
Can I define in the protocol a widening to 0.75-1.33, or I have to perform a reference scaled bioequivalence?

Thanks

I'm always tryin' to do something new, tryin' to look like a beginner.
Meshell Ndegeocello
drgunasakaran1
★★  
avatar

2013-10-24 17:43
(4629 d 23:14 ago)

@ Clarc
Posting: # 11751
Views: 6,158
 

 Widening Cmax in EU

Dear Clarc,

❝ Can I define in the protocol a widening to 0.75-1.33, or I have to perform a reference scaled bioequivalence?


For EU submission, it is suggested to go for Expandable BE limits as per EMA's Guideline on the Investigation of Bioequivalence

Dr Gunasakaran Sambandan MD
Disclaimer: The replies/posts are my personal opinions, and they do not represent my company's views on the same. LinkedIn
Helmut
★★★
avatar
Homepage
Vienna, Austria,
2013-10-25 16:56
(4629 d 00:01 ago)

@ Clarc
Posting: # 11768
Views: 6,005
 

 EMA: ABEL

Hi Clarc,

❝ Our statistical software doesn't permit scaling, only widening to 0.75-1.33. The design is a fully replicated TRTR/RTRT design.


May I guess: Kinetica? If yes, AFAIK you cannot evaluate replicate designs at all.

❝ Can I define in the protocol a widening to 0.75-1.33,


You could, but it will not be accepted…

❝ or I have to perform a reference scaled bioequivalence?


Yes – see Dr. Gunasakaran’s post above. Don’t forget two obstacles:
  • A sound justification that a wider difference in Cmax is clinically irrelevant.
  • A justification that the calculated intra-subject variability is a reliable estimate and that it is not the result of outliers.

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
Clarc
☆    
Homepage
Romania,
2013-10-28 11:04
(4626 d 04:54 ago)

@ Helmut
Posting: # 11790
Views: 5,817
 

 EMA: ABEL

Dear Dr.S.Gunasakaran, Dear Helmut

Thanks for the replies, and for the advices.

❝ May I guess: Kinetica?


Yes, You may... and Yes unfortunately... it is Kinetica.

❝ Don’t forget two obstacles:

  • A sound justification that a wider difference in Cmax is clinically irrelevant.

  • A justification that the calculated intra-subject variability is a reliable estimate and that it is not the result of outliers.

Of course I will not forget about these...

Thanks again.

I'm always tryin' to do something new, tryin' to look like a beginner.
Meshell Ndegeocello
UA Flag
Activity
 Admin contact
23,655 posts in 4,993 threads, 1,571 registered users;
274 visitors (0 registered, 274 guests [including 11 identified bots]).
Forum time: 16:58 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

The real struggle is not between the right and the left
but between the party of the thoughtful
and the party of the jerks.    Jimmy Wales

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