ssussu ☆ China, 2017-08-16 13:45 (2776 d 14:49 ago) Posting: # 17690 Views: 10,348 |
|
Dear all, I have questions on the BE study design of long half life drug, please kindly give me some advice. According to FDA GL: You can use Cmax and a suitably truncated AUC to characterize peak and total drug exposure, respectively. For drugs that demonstrate low intrasubject variability in distribution and clearance, you can use an AUC truncated at 72 hours (AUC0-72 hr) in place of AUC0–t or AUC0–inf. The question is Should I just need to design the sampling time to 72hr or need to longer than 72hr? If I just sampling for 72hr, how can I prove the drug is a long half life drug? Best regards! |
ElMaestro ★★★ Denmark, 2017-08-16 14:53 (2776 d 13:42 ago) @ ssussu Posting: # 17691 Views: 9,350 |
|
Hi ssussu, ❝ Should I just need to design the sampling time to 72hr or need to longer than 72hr? ❝ If I just sampling for 72hr, how can I prove the drug is a long half life drug? In my humble opinion and experience:
— Pass or fail! ElMaestro |
ssussu ☆ China, 2017-08-17 12:18 (2775 d 16:16 ago) @ ElMaestro Posting: # 17703 Views: 9,189 |
|
Thank you, ElMaestro! I have another question describe below(reply to Helmut), but I don't how to quote two people(you and Helmet) at one post at the same time. Sorry! |
Helmut ★★★ ![]() ![]() Vienna, Austria, 2017-08-16 16:18 (2776 d 12:16 ago) @ ssussu Posting: # 17693 Views: 9,354 |
|
Hi ssussu, which is your “target” agency? If you want to submit the study to the (US)FDA you have to provide the protocol to the OGD for review anyway. BTW, I never understood why the FDA allows AUC0–72 for drugs with “low intrasubject variability in distribution and clearance” only. The latter might be possible to show based on published data (though difficult because one needs the subjects’ λz). The former is ❝ If I just sampling for 72hr, how can I prove the drug is a long half life drug? I agree with what ElMaestro wrote. You posted in the right category – that’s a design issue. Think about planing the washout. It is based on an expected half-life (literature, previous studies). No agency* asks for a demonstration that f.i. the washout was 5–10×t½ of subjects (only that there are no residual concentrations >5% of Cmax in higher periods). It is an open question what a “long half-life drug” is. An numerous conferences both the FDA and the EMA refused to give a definition. Only the Canadian HPFB formerly stated t½ ≥24 hours.
— 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 |
ssussu ☆ China, 2017-08-17 12:15 (2775 d 16:19 ago) @ Helmut Posting: # 17702 Views: 9,325 |
|
Dear ElMaestro &Helmut, Thank you two for your reply!Thank you so much! ❝ which is your “target” agency? If you want to submit the study to the (US)FDA you have to provide the protocol to the OGD for review anyway. ![]() I am still confused for another question ![]() Then if I choose truncated AUC0-72 instead of AUClast and AUCinf in the protocol,while most of the subjects half-life is not long enough (i.e 18hr) , actually, in this situation, it is possible the time point of 72hr sample concentration is BQL or can not be detected, then what I shoud do? Then if I choose AUClast and AUCinf instead of AUC0-72,while most of subjects half life is very long actually, then at this situation AUCinf will be not accurately estimated. Could I pre specify in the protocol alternatively? Best regards! |
ElMaestro ★★★ Denmark, 2017-08-17 12:47 (2775 d 15:47 ago) @ ssussu Posting: # 17705 Views: 9,239 |
|
Hi again ssussu, ❝ Then if I choose truncated AUC0-72 instead of AUClast and AUCinf in the protocol,while most of the subjects half-life is not long enough (i.e 18hr) , actually, in this situation, it is possible the time point of 72hr sample concentration is BQL or can not be detected, then what I shoud do? Well... it would be a bit unusual to this often when the drug generally has an excessive long half-life but OK it might happen. Between-subject variability etc. You may need to invest at least 90 seconds of your time in figuring this one out with pen and paper. You have some subjects that go below the LLOQ, which means they comfortably display an elimination phase. From those subjects you can routinely derive an elimination constant and extrapolate AUClast (least measurable) to AUCinfinity. This is where you sadly need to invest this obscenely large amount of your precious time: use the same logic and jommetry and extrapolate areas to 72 hrs. in stead of infinity. You'll end up with a full data listing of AUC72 estimates, and Bob's your uncle. Good luck. — Pass or fail! ElMaestro |
ssussu ☆ China, 2017-08-18 09:13 (2774 d 19:21 ago) @ ElMaestro Posting: # 17708 Views: 9,198 |
|
Thank you again, ElMaestro! I got you. And I will leave this thing to WinNonlin ![]() Best regards! |
jag009 ★★★ NJ, 2017-08-18 01:50 (2775 d 02:44 ago) @ Helmut Posting: # 17707 Views: 9,197 |
|
Hi Helmut, ❝ It is an open question what a “long half-life drug” is. An numerous conferences both the FDA and the EMA refused to give a definition. Only the Canadian HPFB formerly stated t½ ≥24 hours. So far no problems for me w FDA. I've ran 6 - 10 of these with t1/2=24 and up (okay, 3 drugs w mean 24 hrs.) John |