Bioequivalence and Bioavailability Forum

Main page Policy/Terms of Use Abbreviations Latest Posts

 Log in |  Register |  Search

Back to the forum  2018-07-23 01:43 CEST (UTC+2h)
Elena777
Junior

Belarus,
2018-01-20 11:13
(edited by Elena777 on 2018-01-21 08:46)

Posting: # 18229
Views: 1,156
 

 Usage of function CVfromCI (package PowerTOST) [R for BE/BA]

Dear participants of forum, I am relatively new to R and RStudio. And I really need your advise to clear some questions up which are important for my self-education and professional skills.

1. A BE study of Sotalol HCl 160 mg tablets (Mylan) and Betapace 160 mg tablets (Berlex Laboratories) with standard 2x2 cross-over design was described in one of the applications on FDA (application number 75-725). They planned to enroll 24 subjects. But in fact that study was conducted with 23 subjects. I would like to calculate CV from CI using data of that study. What data should I write for arguments "n" and "design"? If I input such data:

CVfromCI(pe = 0.99, lower = 0.87, upper = 1.13, n = 23, design = "2x2", alpha = 0.05, robust=FALSE)

RStudio gives me a result but with the following note:

CVfromCI(pe = 0.99, lower = 0.87, upper = 1.13, n = 23, design = "2x2", alpha = 0.05, robust=FALSE)
Unbalanced 2x2 design. n(i)= 12/11 assumed.
[1] 0.2617363


Can I use this result for futher calculations of CVpooled by means of using PowerTOST or should I correct my data?

2. While calculating CV from CI with data from another study I`ve got the following result:

CVfromCI(pe = 0.96, lower = 0.9075, upper = 1.0089, n = 24, design = "2x2", alpha = 0.05, robust=FALSE)
[1] 0.1071475
Warning message:
sigma based on pe & lower CL more than 10% different than sigma based on pe & upper CL. Check input.


My input is correct because numbers are taken from that application not from my head. Should I pay attention to this warning message and can I use this result for futher calculations of CVpooled by PowerTOST?

3. While calculating CV from CI is it prefered to use CI for log-transformed parameters (for example LCmax) or for non-transformed parameters(Cmax)?


Big thanks in advance. :-)
Helmut
Hero
avatar
Homepage
Vienna, Austria,
2018-01-21 17:56

@ Elena777
Posting: # 18241
Views: 877
 

 Usage of function CVfromCI (package PowerTOST)

Dear Elena,

» 1. A BE study […] planned to enroll 24 subjects. But in fact that study was conducted with 23 subjects. […] If I input such data:
»
» CVfromCI(pe=0.99, lower=0.87, upper=1.13, n=23, design="2x2", alpha=0.05, robust=FALSE)
»
» RStudio gives me a result but with the following note:
»
» CVfromCI(pe=0.99, lower=0.87, upper=1.13, n=23, design="2x2", alpha=0.05, robust=FALSE)
» Unbalanced 2x2 design. n(i)= 12/11 assumed.
» [1] 0.2617363

»
» Can I use this result for futher calculations of CVpooled by means of using PowerTOST or should I correct my data?

The function does not “know” how many subjects in each of the sequences were dosed. The function tries to keep a 2×2 study with an odd number of subjects as balanced as possible (here 12 subjects in one sequence and 11 in the other) and throws this message.
CVfromCI(pe=0.99, lower=0.87, upper=1.13, n=23, design="2x2")
Unbalanced 2x2 design. n(i)= 12/11 assumed.
[1] 0.2617363

If you know the subjects per sequence and specify them in the argument n, you get the same result but without a message.
CVfromCI(pe=0.99, lower=0.87, upper=1.13, n=c(12, 11), design="2x2")
[1] 0.2617363

But the study might have been even more unbalanced. Let’s try 14 subjects in one sequence and 9 in the other:
CVfromCI(pe=0.99, lower=0.87, upper=1.13, n=c(14, 9), design="2x2")
[1] 0.255524

Given that if you don’t know the subjects / sequence the code’s attempt to keep the sequences as balanced as possible gives you the highest (i.e., most conservative) estimate. For the background see this presentation (slides 25–29).

» 2. While calculating CV from CI with data from another study I`ve got the following result:
»
» CVfromCI(pe=0.96, lower=0.9075, upper=1.0089, n=24, design="2x2", alpha=0.05, robust=FALSE)
» [1] 0.1071475
» Warning message:
» sigma based on pe & lower CL more than 10% different than sigma based on pe & upper CL. Check input.

»
» My input is correct because numbers are taken from that application not from my head.

Please check it again. The PE is given by √lower × upper. In your case that’s sqrt(0.9075*1.0089) or 0.9568577. The function checks the input for plausibility. Hence, the message is correct since your 0.96 is different to 0.9568577.

» Should I pay attention to this warning message

Yes. Check the PE.

» and can I use this result for futher calculations of CVpooled by PowerTOST?

I would (after checking the data for correctness) suggest the ones with the highest numeric precision.

» 3. While calculating CV from CI is it prefered to use CI for log-transformed parameters (for example LCmax) or for non-transformed parameters(Cmax)?

The former. According to all guidelines the analysis for Cmax (and AUC as well) is done on log-transformed data.

Cheers,
Helmut Schütz
[image]

The quality of responses received is directly proportional to the quality of the question asked. ☼
Science Quotes
Elena777
Junior

Belarus,
2018-01-27 10:02

@ Helmut
Posting: # 18295
Views: 747
 

 Usage of function CVfromCI (package PowerTOST)

Dear Helmut, thanks, I really appreciate it.
Back to the forum Activity
 Thread view
Bioequivalence and Bioavailability Forum |  Admin contact
18,547 posts in 3,941 threads, 1,190 registered users;
online 13 (0 registered, 13 guests [including 12 identified bots]).

[The] impatience with ambiguity can be criticized in the phrase:
absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.    Carl Sagan

The BIOEQUIVALENCE / BIOAVAILABILITY FORUM is hosted by
BEBAC Ing. Helmut Schütz
HTML5 RSS Feed