Helmut
★★★
avatar
Homepage
Vienna, Austria,
2020-09-28 19:12
(1302 d 22:11 ago)

Posting: # 21947
Views: 2,547
 

 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 🖖🏼 Довге життя Україна! [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 19:51
(1302 d 21:32 ago)

@ Helmut
Posting: # 21948
Views: 1,850
 

 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 12:41
(1302 d 04:42 ago)

@ Helmut
Posting: # 21949
Views: 1,804
 

 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 12:49
(1302 d 04:34 ago)

@ ElMaestro
Posting: # 21950
Views: 1,802
 

 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 🖖🏼 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
22,991 posts in 4,827 threads, 1,647 registered users;
62 visitors (1 registered, 61 guests [including 6 identified bots]).
Forum time: 17:23 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

If you don’t like something change it;
if you can’t change it, change the way you think about it.    Mary Engelbreit

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