Helmut
★★★
avatar
Homepage
Vienna, Austria,
2020-09-28 17:12
(685 d 15:32 ago)

Posting: # 21947
Views: 1,368
 

 ABEL: Type I Error [RSABE / ABEL]

Dear all,

we know for a good while that under certain conditions the Type I Error (TIE) might be inflated. However, seemingly European assessors were either not aware of it or ignored it. Last week I saw a deficiency letter (don’t ask for the country):

… in case of a value of 30% < CVRR <45%, it is recommended to check the control of the patient's risk type I error at the level of 5%. If an alpha adjustment is necessary, it is recommended that a BE estimate for the new CI of the T/R ratio be submitted to meet the extended bounds.


Kudos! Almost correct. The area of inflated TIEs may reach below 30% and only rarely (say, for a 4-period full replicate in 24 subjects) to 45%.

Dif-tor heh smusma 🖖 [image]
Helmut Schütz
[image]

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

Berlin, Germany,
2020-09-28 17:51
(685 d 14:54 ago)

@ Helmut
Posting: # 21948
Views: 1,048
 

 Wow!

Dear Helmut!

» we know for a good while that under certain conditions the Type I Error (TIE) might be inflated. However, seemingly European assessors were either not aware of it or ignored it. Last week I saw a deficiency letter (don’t ask for the country):

… in case of a value of 30% < CVRR <45%, it is recommended to check the control of the patient's risk type I error at the level of 5%. If an alpha adjustment is necessary, it is recommended that a BE estimate for the new CI of the T/R ratio be submitted to meet the extended bounds.


» Kudos! Almost correct. The area of inflated TIEs may reach below 30% and only rarely (say, for a 4-period full replicate in 24 subjects) to 45%.

Can say only: Wow! :clap:

Regards,

Detlew
ElMaestro
★★★

Denmark,
2020-09-29 10:41
(684 d 22:04 ago)

@ Helmut
Posting: # 21949
Views: 1,024
 

 ABEL: Type I Error

» … (don’t ask for the country):

… in case of a value of 30% < CVRR <45%, it is recommended to check the control of the patient's risk type I error at the level of 5%. If an alpha adjustment is necessary, it is recommended that a BE estimate for the new CI of the T/R ratio be submitted to meet the extended bounds.


That subjunction is correct but not part of the everyday linguistic toolbox of those who do not speak a lot of English. My guess is MHRA or the Irish Medicines Board or it comes from someone who spent a lot of time taking English language classes :-)

Pass or fail!
ElMaestro
Helmut
★★★
avatar
Homepage
Vienna, Austria,
2020-09-29 10:49
(684 d 21:56 ago)

@ ElMaestro
Posting: # 21950
Views: 1,021
 

 Lost in translation

Hi ElMastro,

» »

… it is recommended that a BE estimate for the new CI of the T/R ratio be submitted to meet the extended bounds.


» That subjunction is correct but not part of the everyday linguistic toolbox of those who do not speak a lot of English. My guess is MHRA or the Irish Medicines Board or it comes from someone who spent a lot of time taking English language classes :-)

Not quite. :-D
Just before the mentioned text it read:

… no confirmation is provided that variability in the reference drug exists and is not caused by emissions; please provide confirmation in the form of an emissions estimate.

We guessed that outliers were meant by “emissions”.

Dif-tor heh smusma 🖖 [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
22,301 posts in 4,667 threads, 1,585 registered users;
online 9 (0 registered, 9 guests [including 2 identified bots]).
Forum time: Monday 08:45 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

Science… never solves a problem
without creating ten more.    George Bernard Shaw

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