An assessment of the 4-6-20 rule for acceptance of analytical runs in bioavailability, bioequivalence, and pharmacokinetic studies
- PMID: 8058615
- DOI: 10.1023/a:1018922701174
An assessment of the 4-6-20 rule for acceptance of analytical runs in bioavailability, bioequivalence, and pharmacokinetic studies
Abstract
A recent conference report described a decision rule, hereafter referred to as the 4-6-20 rule, for acceptance/rejection of analytical runs in bioavailability, bioequivalence, and pharmacokinetic studies. This procedure requires that quality control specimens at three concentrations (low, medium, and high) be assayed in duplicate in each run. For run acceptance, at least four of the six assay values must be within +/- 20% of their respective nominal concentrations, and at least one of the two values at each concentration must be within these limits. An inherent flaw in this decision rule is that the risk of rejecting runs, when the assay performance has in fact not deteriorated, varies for each assay and is neither known nor controlled. In this paper simulation methods are used to evaluate the operating characteristics of the 4-6-20 rule in comparison to those of classical statistical quality control procedures.
Similar articles
-
Analytical methods validation: bioavailability, bioequivalence and pharmacokinetic studies. Conference report.Eur J Drug Metab Pharmacokinet. 1991 Oct-Dec;16(4):249-55. doi: 10.1007/BF03189968. Eur J Drug Metab Pharmacokinet. 1991. PMID: 1823867
-
[Review and use of decision rules for bioequivalence trials].Therapie. 1993 Jan-Feb;48(1):15-22. Therapie. 1993. PMID: 8356540 Review. French.
-
Update on the statistical analysis of bioequivalence studies.Int J Clin Pharmacol Ther Toxicol. 1990 Mar;28(3):105-10. Int J Clin Pharmacol Ther Toxicol. 1990. PMID: 2318545
-
Evaluation of criteria for the acceptance of bioanalytical data.J Pharm Biomed Anal. 1990;8(8-12):625-8. doi: 10.1016/0731-7085(90)80092-4. J Pharm Biomed Anal. 1990. PMID: 2100598
-
Considerations for metabolite pharmacokinetic data in bioavailability/bioequivalence assessments. Overview of the recent trends.Arzneimittelforschung. 2009;59(4):155-65. doi: 10.1055/s-0031-1296380. Arzneimittelforschung. 2009. PMID: 19517891 Review.
Cited by
-
Measuring precision in bioassays: Rethinking assay validation.Stat Med. 2018 Feb 20;37(4):519-529. doi: 10.1002/sim.7528. Epub 2017 Oct 19. Stat Med. 2018. PMID: 29052234 Free PMC article.
-
A total error approach for the validation of quantitative analytical methods.Pharm Res. 2007 Jun;24(6):1157-64. doi: 10.1007/s11095-007-9242-3. Epub 2007 Mar 21. Pharm Res. 2007. PMID: 17373576
-
Statistical considerations for assessment of bioanalytical incurred sample reproducibility.AAPS J. 2009 Sep;11(3):570-80. doi: 10.1208/s12248-009-9134-z. Epub 2009 Aug 8. AAPS J. 2009. PMID: 19669410 Free PMC article.
-
Bioanalytical method validation--a revisit with a decade of progress.Pharm Res. 2000 Dec;17(12):1551-7. doi: 10.1023/a:1007669411738. Pharm Res. 2000. PMID: 11303967 Clinical Trial. No abstract available.
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources