docksr
☆    

India,
2013-07-10 13:13
(4732 d 05:30 ago)

Posting: # 10969
Views: 4,847
 

 Change in study design and required approval [Regulatives / Guidelines]

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
 

 Change in study design and required approval

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
 

 Change in study design and required approval

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
 

 Change in study design and required approval

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
★★★
avatar
Homepage
Vienna, Austria,
2013-07-15 15:43
(4727 d 03:00 ago)

@ Karthikeyan
Posting: # 10976
Views: 4,029
 

 Three-way with two sequences?

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
  • latin squares
    T1 T2 R
    T2 R  T1
    R  T1 T2

  • Williams’ designs
    T1 T2 R
    T2 R  T1
    R  T1 T2
    T1 R  T2
    T2 T1 R
    R  T2 T1


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
Karthikeyan
☆    

India,
2013-07-16 08:10
(4726 d 10:33 ago)

@ Helmut
Posting: # 10983
Views: 3,885
 

 Three-way with two sequences?

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
★★★
avatar
Homepage
Vienna, Austria,
2013-07-16 15:53
(4726 d 02:50 ago)

@ Karthikeyan
Posting: # 10986
Views: 3,882
 

 Period effects!

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:

R   100
T1   95
(expected to be BE)
T2  140 (superior ≠ BE)


We have period effects of +20% (P1) and –20% (P2) and get* with the two designs:
  1. T1 T2 R    95 168  80
    T2 R  T1  140 120  76
    R  T1 T2  100 114 112

    T1/R  ( 95+ 76+114)/(80+120+100) =  95.00% [image]
    T2/R  (168+140+112)/(80+120+100) = 140.00% [image]


  2. T1 R  T2   95 120 112
    R  T1 T2  100 114 112

    T1/R  ( 95+114)/(120+100) =  95.00% [image]
    T2/R  (112+112)/(120+100) = 101.82% [image]
Based on the results of design #2 why would you drop T2? Due to period effects it looks better than T1…


  • No carry-over (or unequal sequence effects). Values are the means of arbitrary sized studies. Raw scale for simplicity.

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
23,655 posts in 4,993 threads, 1,570 registered users;
124 visitors (0 registered, 124 guests [including 22 identified bots]).
Forum time: 18:43 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

Scientists often have a naïve faith that
if only they could discover enough facts about a problem,
these facts would somehow arrange themselves
in a compelling and true solution.    Theodosius Dobzhansky

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