GM
★    

India,
2018-06-29 05:47
(1026 d 16:55 ago)

Posting: # 18992
Views: 2,599
 

 Drug concentration <LLQ [Bioanalytics]

Hello All,

Hope all are doing well.

As per the Bioanalytical guidance of FDA, all values <LLQ should be declared as zero.

But my doubt is, is there any possibility to use the actual values measured for calculating key parameters?

If yes, how this can be justify?

B’coz, we are not getting best fit (Rsq<0.8) when considering zero instead of actual values.

Thankyou in advance.

GM.

Best Regards,
GM
Ohlbe
★★★

France,
2018-06-29 12:00
(1026 d 10:42 ago)

(edited by Ohlbe on 2018-06-29 17:11)
@ GM
Posting: # 18995
Views: 2,149
 

 Drug concentration <LLQ

Dear GM,

» As per the Bioanalytical guidance of FDA, all values <LLQ should be declared as zero.
»
» But my doubt is, is there any possibility to use the actual values measured for calculating key parameters?

In BE ? Not the slightest. Nada. Forget it.

» B’coz, we are not getting best fit (Rsq<0.8) when considering zero instead of actual values.

So what ? Who says it has to be < 0.8 ?

The question is rather: was your LLOQ low enough ? What you're describing sounds a bit like you're not able to follow the terminal elimination phase but are getting a mix of distribution + elimination. If you messed up, you can't make up for it by extrapolating below your LLOQ, you'll have to re-develop your method, validate, re-assay.

What is your LLOQ, and what is the Cmax range in your study ?


Edit, to make sure there is no misunderstanding: when you write
» B’coz, we are not getting best fit (Rsq<0.8) when considering zero instead of actual values.
I hope you're not using these values as 0 to calculate Kel, right ? These sampling points should just be ignored. They were to be reported as 0 in the tables of the concentration in the report, not to be used as 0 in the calculations. As pointed out by Helmut, in any case they now have to be reported as BQL. [Ohlbe]

Regards
Ohlbe
Helmut
★★★
avatar
Homepage
Vienna, Austria,
2018-06-29 12:15
(1026 d 10:27 ago)

@ GM
Posting: # 18997
Views: 2,139
 

 Report as BLQ

Hi GM,

» As per the Bioanalytical guidance of FDA, all values <LLQ should be declared as zero.

No more – see this thread. For the other points I agree with Ohlbe.

Dif-tor heh smusma 🖖
Helmut Schütz
[image]

The quality of responses received is directly proportional to the quality of the question asked. 🚮
Science Quotes
jag009
★★★

NJ,
2018-06-29 20:49
(1026 d 01:53 ago)

@ Helmut
Posting: # 18999
Views: 2,073
 

 Report as BLQ

Hi Helmut!

» » As per the Bioanalytical guidance of FDA, all values <LLQ should be declared as zero.
» No more – see this thread. For the other points I agree with Ohlbe.

I have never seen values below LLQ declared as 0 in any reports. :confused:
Helmut
★★★
avatar
Homepage
Vienna, Austria,
2018-06-29 21:00
(1026 d 01:41 ago)

@ jag009
Posting: # 19001
Views: 2,079
 

 Report as BLQ

Hi John!

» » » As per the Bioanalytical guidance of FDA, all values <LLQ should be declared as zero.
» » No more – see this thread. For the other points I agree with Ohlbe.
»
» I have never seen values below LLQ declared as 0 in any reports. :confused:

Lucky you. Was indeed stated in the FDA’s 2013 draft. Bizarre. Was a big issue at the first Crystal City (aka Arlington I) conference in 1990. People were shouting at each at other. It was very strange that “zero” reached out from the grave in the draft…

Dif-tor heh smusma 🖖
Helmut Schütz
[image]

The quality of responses received is directly proportional to the quality of the question asked. 🚮
Science Quotes
Activity
 Admin contact
21,419 posts in 4,475 threads, 1,510 registered users;
online 6 (0 registered, 6 guests [including 2 identified bots]).
Forum time: Tuesday 22:42 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

We have to remember that what we observe is not nature herself,
but nature exposed to our method of questioning.    Werner Heisenberg

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