SAMPLE SIZES FOR BIOEQUIVALENCE STUDIES

被引:18
作者
METZLER, CM
机构
[1] The Upjohn Company, Kalamazoo, Michigan
关键词
D O I
10.1002/sim.4780100617
中图分类号
Q [生物科学];
学科分类号
07 ; 0710 ; 09 ;
摘要
In recent years a number of decision rules, based on sound statistical principles, have been proposed for deciding if a test formulation is bioequivalent to a reference formulation. The decision rule based on confidence intervals has been accepted by regulatory agencies, at least by the Food and Drug Administration of the United States. A useful property of this decision rule is that the regulatory agency need not require a certain sample size, since the level of protection against wrongly deciding bioequivalence is set by the choice of the alpha level used to compute the confidence intervals. The manufacturer claiming bioequivalence is concerned about sample size, for sample size determines the probability of falsely deciding non-bioequivalence when the test formulation does indeed have an acceptable relative bioavailability. Curves of probability of rejecting bioequivalence have been computed for error coefficient of variation of 10, 20 and 30 per cent, for relative bioavailability from 70 to 130 per cent, and for protection levels of 90 and 95 per cent. These curves can be used for choosing the sample size for a bioequivalence study.
引用
收藏
页码:961 / 970
页数:10
相关论文
共 13 条
[1]  
Metzler C.M., Bioavailability‐a problem in equivalence, Biometrics, 30, pp. 309-317, (1974)
[2]  
Westlake W.J., Bioavailability and bioequivalence of pharmaceutical formulations, Biopharmaceutical Statistics for Drug Development, pp. 329-352, (1988)
[3]  
Metzler C.M., Statistical methods for deciding bioequivalence of formulations, Drug Absorption from Sustained Release Formulations, pp. 217-238, (1988)
[4]  
O'Quigley J., Baudoin C., General approaches to the problem of bioequivalence, The Statistician, 37, pp. 51-58, (1988)
[5]  
von Peil H., Haselbarth V., On the statistical testing of bioequivalence, Arzneimittel‐Forschung/Drug Research, 35, pp. 1489-1494, (1985)
[6]  
Skelly J.P., Shah V.P., Schuirmann D.J., Reply to “Assessment of variance in bioavailability studies: comments on the article by McNamara et al.”, Pharmaceutical Research, 5, (1988)
[7]  
Westlake W.J., Use of confidence intervals in analysis of comparative bioavailability trials, Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences, 61, pp. 1340-1341, (1972)
[8]  
Westlake W.J., Symmetrical confidence intervals for bioequivalence trials, Biometrics, 32, pp. 741-744, (1976)
[9]  
Anderson S., Hauck W.W., A new procedure for testing equivalence in comparative bioavailability and other clinical trials, Communication in Statistics ‐ Theory and Methods, 12, pp. 2663-2692, (1983)
[10]  
Rodda B.E., Davis R.L., Determining the probability of an important difference in bioavailability, Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics, 28, (1980)