상세검색
최근 검색어 삭제
다국어입력
즐겨찾기0
논문
학술저널

Comparison of Parametric and Bootstrap Method in Bioequivalence Test

Comparison of Parametric and Bootstrap Method in Bioequivalence Test

  • 이용수 11
커버이미지 없음

키워드

초록

The estimation of 90% parametric confidence intervals (CIs) of mean AUC and Cmax ratios in bioequivalence (BE) tests are based upon the assumption that formulation effects in log-transformed data are normally distributed. To compare the parametric CIs with those obtained from nonparametric methods we performed repeated estimation of bootstrap-resampled datasets. The AUC and Cmax values from 3 archived datasets were used. BE tests on 1,000 resampled datasets from each archived dataset were performed using SAS (Enterprise Guide Ver.3). Bootstrap nonparametric 90% CIs of formulation effects were then compared with the parametric 90% CIs of the original datasets. The 90% CIs of formulation effects estimated from the 3 archived datasets were slightly different from nonparametric 90% CIs obtained from BE tests on resampled datasets. Histograms and density curves of formulation effects obtained from resampled datasets were similar to those of normal distribution. However, in 2 of 3 resampled log (AUC) datasets, the estimates of formulation effects did not follow the Gaussian distribution. Bias-corrected and accelerated (BCa) CIs, one of the nonparametric CIs of formulation effects, shifted outside the parametric 90% CIs of the archived datasets in these 2 non-normally distributed resampled log (AUC) datasets. Currently, the 80∼125% rule based upon the parametric 90% CIs is widely accepted under the assumption of normally distributed formulation effects in log-transformed data. However, nonparametric CIs may be a better choice when data do not follow this assumption.

목차

등록된 목차 정보가 없습니다.

참고문헌 (0)

등록된 참고문헌 정보가 없습니다.

해당 권호 수록 논문 (0)

등록된 수록 논문 정보가 없습니다.

로딩중