|
docksr ☆ India, 2013-07-10 13:13 (4732 d 05:30 ago) Posting: # 10969 Views: 4,847 |
|
|
If a three-way crossover design protocol (T1, T2 and R or T with R replicate) with N=X is approved by DCGI for a particular study, and the design is changed to a two-way cross over with >N=X, do we need to seek fresh approval or make necessary amendments to the previously approved protocol Edit: Please follow the Forum’s Policy. [Helmut] |
|
Dr sridevi ☆ India, 2013-07-10 14:28 (4732 d 04:15 ago) @ docksr Posting: # 10970 Views: 4,169 |
|
|
Yes we need to apply for fresh approval with DCGI Edit: Full quote removed. Please delete everything from the text of the original poster which is not necessary in understanding your answer; see also this post! [Ohlbe] Edit: Please follow the Forum’s Policy. [Helmut] |
|
Naveen Kumar ☆ India, 2013-07-11 11:50 (4731 d 06:53 ago) @ docksr Posting: # 10971 Views: 4,103 |
|
|
Dear docksr, Please follow the link http://cdsco.nic.in/prescreening_new_drug_applications.pdf (section 4. Checklist for Protocol Amendment), changes in study design and sample size are considered as major protocol amendments and the checklist for submission was also provided. you may have the chance to justify that the drug exposure on the subjects was decreased (i.e. instead of three doses, you are exposing for only two). Regards, Naveen Kumar SR |
|
Karthikeyan ☆ India, 2013-07-15 15:31 (4727 d 03:12 ago) @ docksr Posting: # 10975 Views: 3,836 |
|
|
Dear Docksr; Amendment in the basic study design should be notified to DCGI and approval is required before teh study initiation. And there is another clause; if you have three way with two sequence (T1RT2 & RT1T2); you can initiate the study and terminate the last period (T2). reason for terminating the last period should be stated in report, and the section change in conduct of the study to be updated with a deviation filled. Regards K@K Edit: Full quote removed. Please delete everything from the text of the original poster which is not necessary in understanding your answer; see also this post! [Helmut] |
|
Helmut ★★★ ![]() Vienna, Austria, 2013-07-15 15:43 (4727 d 03:00 ago) @ Karthikeyan Posting: # 10976 Views: 4,029 |
|
|
Hi K@K, ❝ if you have three way with two sequence (T1RT2 & RT1T2) […] Strange design; it would only “work” if you can rule out any period effects. So far I have only seen
— Dif-tor heh smusma 🖖🏼 Довге життя Україна! ![]() Helmut Schütz ![]() The quality of responses received is directly proportional to the quality of the question asked. 🚮 Science Quotes |
|
Karthikeyan ☆ India, 2013-07-16 08:10 (4726 d 10:33 ago) @ Helmut Posting: # 10983 Views: 3,885 |
|
|
Hi, i agree to you, incase of pilot studies, this two sequence can be used in circumstances like T2 formulation is dropped/cancelled. regards, K@K |
|
Helmut ★★★ ![]() Vienna, Austria, 2013-07-16 15:53 (4726 d 02:50 ago) @ Karthikeyan Posting: # 10986 Views: 3,882 |
|
|
Hi K@K, ❝ incase of pilot studies, this two sequence can be used in circumstances like T2 formulation is dropped/cancelled. What will be the basis of your decision to drop T2 – and not T1? In balanced (!) cross-over designs period effects mean out. This is not the case in your design. Let’s consider an example. Below are the true (though unknown!) values of the formulations:
We have period effects of +20% (P1) and –20% (P2) and get* with the two designs:
— Dif-tor heh smusma 🖖🏼 Довге життя Україна! ![]() Helmut Schütz ![]() The quality of responses received is directly proportional to the quality of the question asked. 🚮 Science Quotes |

![[image]](https://static.bebac.at/pics/Blue_and_yellow_ribbon_UA.png)
![[image]](https://static.bebac.at/img/CC by.png)
![[image]](img/uploaded/image32.png)
