Abstract:In a 2×2 crossover trial for establishing average bioequivalence (ABE) of a generic agent and a currently marketed drug, the recommended approach to hypothesis testing is the two one-sided test (TOST) procedure, which depends, among other things, on the estimated within-subject variability. The power of this procedure, and therefore the sample size required to achieve a minimum power, depends on having a good estimate of this variability. When there is uncertainty, it is advisable to plan the design in two stages, with an interim sample size reestimation after the first stage, using an interim estimate of the within-subject variability. One method and 3 variations of doing this were proposed by Potvin et al. Using simulation, the operating characteristics, including the empirical type I error rate, of the 4 variations (called Methods A, B, C, and D) were assessed by Potvin et al and Methods B and C were recommended. However, none of these 4 variations formally controls the type I error rate of falsely claiming ABE, even though the amount of inflation produced by Method C was considered acceptable. A major disadvantage of assessing type I error rate inflation using simulation is that unless all possible scenarios for the intended design and analysis are investigated, it is impossible to be sure that the type I error rate is controlled. Here, we propose an alternative, principled method of sample size reestimation that is guaranteed to control the type I error rate at any given significance level. This method uses a new version of the inverse-normal combination of p-values test, in conjunction with standard group sequential techniques, that is more robust to large deviations in initial assumptions regarding the variability of the pharmacokinetic endpoints. The sample size reestimation step is based on significance levels and power requirements that are conditional on the first-stage results. This necessitates a discussion and exploitation of the peculiar properties of the power curve of the TOST testing procedure. We illustrate our approach with an example based on a real ABE study and compare the operating characteristics of our proposed method with those of Method B of Povin et al.

In Vitro Bioequivalence Testing.

Determining Equivalence for Generic Locally Acting Drug Products

Statistical Tests for Population Bioequivalence

Bioequivalence requirements for orally inhaled and nasal drug products and use of novel physiologically based biopharmaceutics modeling approaches for assessing in vivo performance

A Bioequivalence Test by the Direct Comparison of Concentration-Versus-Time Curves Using Local Polynomial Smoothers

EXPLORATION THE POTENTIAL IMPACT OF BATCH-TO-BATCH VARIABILITY OF INHALATION POWDER DRUG PRODUCTS ON PHARMACOKINETIC BIOEQUIVALENCE STUDY POWER.

Controlling the type I error rate in two-stage sequential adaptive designs when testing for average bioequivalence

Novel bioequivalence approach for narrow therapeutic index drugs.

Efficient model-based bioequivalence testing

Frequency estimator for assessing of follow-on biologics.

A Two-Way Proposal for the Determination of Bioequivalence for Narrow Therapeutic Index Drugs in the European Union

Comparative Analyses of Bioequivalence Assessment Methods for In Vitro Permeation Test Data

A Bioequivalence Approach for Generic Narrow Therapeutic Index Drugs: Evaluation of the Reference-Scaled Approach and Variability Comparison Criterion

On the Confidence Intervals in Bioequivalence Studies.

Methods to Control the Empirical Type I Error Rate in Average Bioequivalence Tests for Highly Variable Drugs

Bioequivalence of Two Tiotropium Dry Powder Inhalers and the Utility of Realistic Impactor Testing

An In Vitro–In Vivo Simulation Approach for the Prediction of Bioequivalence

Comparison of methods for the determination of sample size and power in assessing the equivalence of average bioavailability

Discussion on the problems and strategies in bioequivalence tests of drug preparations

Design and inference for 3-stage bioequivalence testing with serial sampling data.

Sample Size Estimation and Hypothesis Testing of Assessing Equivalence/noninferiority for Paired Binary Data