Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 1993 Jun 30;12(12):1109-24.
doi: 10.1002/sim.4780121202.

On population and individual bioequivalence

Affiliations
Comparative Study

On population and individual bioequivalence

R Schall et al. Stat Med. .

Abstract

In a traditional assessment of the bioequivalence of two formulations of a drug one compares the average bioavailability from the two formulations. Anderson and Hauck argued that in some situations it is not sufficient to demonstrate average bioequivalence, and they proposed a method for the assessment of what they called individual bioequivalence, which essentially is the comparison of the individual responses to the two drug formulations within subjects. In this paper we propose a unified strategy for the assessment of bioequivalence that encompasses new approaches to the assessment of both population bioequivalence, which is the comparison of the marginal or population distributions of bioavailabilities, and individual bioequivalence, which is the comparison of the conditional or within-subject distributions of bioavailabilities. The general idea is to use a comparison of the reference formulation to itself as the basis for the comparison of the test with the reference formulation. The new approaches overcome the main weakness of the current methods for the assessment of bioequivalence by considering the variability of bioavailabilities in addition to their means. The current methods for the assessment of bioequivalence, namely the conventional assessment of average bioequivalence and the proposal by Anderson and Hauck for the assessment of individual bioequivalence, emerge as special cases. One can evaluate the new bioequivalence criteria statistically by use of bootstrap confidence intervals.

PubMed Disclaimer

Publication types