Helmut
★★★
avatar
Homepage
Vienna, Austria,
2020-09-28 19:12
(1687 d 23:18 ago)

Posting: # 21947
Views: 4,164
 

 ABEL: Type I Error [RSABE / ABEL]

Dear all,

we know for a good while that under certain conditions the Type I Error (TIE) might be inflated. However, seemingly European assessors were either not aware of it or ignored it. Last week I saw a deficiency letter (don’t ask for the country):

… in case of a value of 30% < CVRR <45%, it is recommended to check the control of the patient's risk type I error at the level of 5%. If an alpha adjustment is necessary, it is recommended that a BE estimate for the new CI of the T/R ratio be submitted to meet the extended bounds.


Kudos! Almost correct. The area of inflated TIEs may reach below 30% and only rarely (say, for a 4-period full replicate in 24 subjects) to 45%.

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,
2020-09-28 19:51
(1687 d 22:40 ago)

@ Helmut
Posting: # 21948
Views: 3,050
 

 Wow!

Dear Helmut!

❝ we know for a good while that under certain conditions the Type I Error (TIE) might be inflated. However, seemingly European assessors were either not aware of it or ignored it. Last week I saw a deficiency letter (don’t ask for the country):

… in case of a value of 30% < CVRR <45%, it is recommended to check the control of the patient's risk type I error at the level of 5%. If an alpha adjustment is necessary, it is recommended that a BE estimate for the new CI of the T/R ratio be submitted to meet the extended bounds.


❝ Kudos! Almost correct. The area of inflated TIEs may reach below 30% and only rarely (say, for a 4-period full replicate in 24 subjects) to 45%.


Can say only: Wow! :clap:

Regards,

Detlew
ElMaestro
★★★

Denmark,
2020-09-29 12:41
(1687 d 05:50 ago)

@ Helmut
Posting: # 21949
Views: 3,052
 

 ABEL: Type I Error

❝ … (don’t ask for the country):

… in case of a value of 30% < CVRR <45%, it is recommended to check the control of the patient's risk type I error at the level of 5%. If an alpha adjustment is necessary, it is recommended that a BE estimate for the new CI of the T/R ratio be submitted to meet the extended bounds.


That subjunction is correct but not part of the everyday linguistic toolbox of those who do not speak a lot of English. My guess is MHRA or the Irish Medicines Board or it comes from someone who spent a lot of time taking English language classes :-)

Pass or fail!
ElMaestro
Helmut
★★★
avatar
Homepage
Vienna, Austria,
2020-09-29 12:49
(1687 d 05:42 ago)

@ ElMaestro
Posting: # 21950
Views: 3,009
 

 Lost in translation

Hi ElMastro,

❝ ❝

… it is recommended that a BE estimate for the new CI of the T/R ratio be submitted to meet the extended bounds.


❝ That subjunction is correct but not part of the everyday linguistic toolbox of those who do not speak a lot of English. My guess is MHRA or the Irish Medicines Board or it comes from someone who spent a lot of time taking English language classes :-)


Not quite. :-D
Just before the mentioned text it read:

… no confirmation is provided that variability in the reference drug exists and is not caused by emissions; please provide confirmation in the form of an emissions estimate.

We guessed that outliers were meant by “emissions”.

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
UA Flag
Activity
 Admin contact
23,424 posts in 4,927 threads, 1,670 registered users;
92 visitors (0 registered, 92 guests [including 69 identified bots]).
Forum time: 18:31 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

No matter what side of the argument you are on,
you always find people on your side
that you wish were on the other.    Thomas Berger

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