Loky do
★    

Egypt,
2024-11-10 12:52
(71 d 16:30 ago)

Posting: # 24267
Views: 960
 

 reason to exclude volunteer [Study As­sess­ment]

Dears

I am working on fed and fasted studies for a bilayer drug containing empagliflozin/metformin XR. In the fed study, one volunteer showed no measurable concentration of empagliflozin for the test product, although a measurable concentration of metformin was observed in the same individual. The sponsor asserts that empagliflozin does not require a reliable concentration in the fed state since it is intended to be taken in the fasted state and is immediate-release, which would, in their view, negate the need for fed-state evaluation.

We attempted to include this subject in the statistical calculations; however, SAS and WinNonLin automatically excluded the subject due to the missing concentration for empagliflozin, resulting in a passed study.

As the CRO, we have raised concerns, viewing the lack of measurable concentration for empagliflozin in the fed state as a potential issue regarding product conformity. How can we configure the statistical software to include this subject in the analysis, potentially yielding a failed study outcome? Alternatively, what rationale could we provide in the study documentation to ensure regulatory acceptance of our approach and prevent potential questions for the CRO?.
Thanks in advance


Edit: Category changed; see also this post #1[Helmut]
Helmut
★★★
avatar
Homepage
Vienna, Austria,
2024-11-10 13:33
(71 d 15:49 ago)

@ Loky do
Posting: # 24268
Views: 809
 

 FDC: No measurable concentrations of one drug

Hi Loky do,

❝ […] one volunteer showed no measurable concentration of empagliflozin for the test product, although a measurable concentration of metformin was observed in the same individual. […]

❝ We attempted to include this subject in the statistical calculations; however, SAS and WinNonLin automatically excluded the subject due to the missing concentration for empagliflozin, resulting in a passed study.

Of course.

❝ As the CRO, we have raised concerns, viewing the lack of measurable concentration for empagliflozin in the fed state as a potential issue regarding product conformity.

I would be concerned as well.

❝ How can we configure the statistical software to include this subject in the analysis, potentially yielding a failed study outcome?

Actually \(\lim_{x \to 0}\log(x)\small{=-\infty}\) and therefore, if we ask [image] to calculate log(0) we will get -Inf as the – mathematically correct – answer. Nice, though not helpful if we want to use such a value in further calculations. Only by convention we say that \(\log(0)\) is ‘undefined’. There­fore, any \(\small{x\leq0}\) is either excluded in software or throws an error. There is no way to get around it.
You could only perform a sensitivity analysis setting all BQLs to say, LLOQ/2. Unless the study is not very large and the CV very small, quite likely it would fail.

❝ Alternatively, what rationale could we provide in the study documentation to ensure regulatory acceptance of our approach and prevent potential questions for the CRO?.

Well, the fact that you had measurable concentrations of one drug and none of the other in the same subject clearly demonstrates that there was no problem with the administration of the FDC.* You should discuss that in the report. The agency likely would raise questions about content uniformity. But these questions will go to the sponsor. Not your problem.


  • According to the guidelines reanalysis is not acceptable based on PK (only the predose-sample). However, I would do it in order to have an argument in discussions with the sponsor. Otherwise, they will blame you to have screwed up in bioanalytics.

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
Loky do
★    

Egypt,
2024-11-10 13:48
(71 d 15:34 ago)

@ Helmut
Posting: # 24269
Views: 800
 

 FDC: No measurable concentrations of one drug

Hi Helmut
Thanks for your reply

❝ Actually \(\lim_{x \to 0}\log(x)\small{=-\infty}\) and therefore, if we ask [image] to calculate log(0) we will get -Inf as the – mathematically correct – answer. Nice, though not helpful if we want to use such a value in further calculations. Only by convention we say that \(\log(0)\) is ‘undefined’. There­fore, any \(\small{x\leq0}\) is either excluded in software or throws an error. There is no way to get around it.

❝ You could only perform a sensitivity analysis setting all BQLs to say, LLOQ/2. Unless the study is not very large and the CV very small, quite likely it would fail.


as we use SAS im calculation, are there any way to calculate with SAS, in addition what if we assumed that lin(PK) equal zero, is this applicable ? another question could we consider these values as 5% of loq not LLOQ/2 as the observed results around 5-10 % of LLQ

Thanks
UA Flag
Activity
 Admin contact
23,363 posts in 4,906 threads, 1,678 registered users;
211 visitors (0 registered, 211 guests [including 16 identified bots]).
Forum time: 05:22 CET (Europe/Vienna)

The combination of some data and an aching desire
for an answer does not ensure that a reasonable answer
can be extracted from a given body of data.    John W. Tukey

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