Forum Update: Supporting Community-Led Discussion
The forum was created as a space for shared learning and peer support, and as the community grows, we want to lean more fully into that purpose.
Going forward, PAAB will be taking a more listening-first role in forum discussions. Rather than responding immediately to every question, we’ll be encouraging members to engage with one another, share experiences, and help build collective understanding. PAAB will continue to monitor conversations and will step in to:
- Correct any misunderstandings
- Provide guidance when questions remain unanswered after a few days
- Support discussions where official clarification is needed
Our goal is to foster a collaborative, trusted community where knowledge is shared and strengthened by everyone’s contributions.
Thank you for being part of the conversation.
427 - Recently we've seen an APS that have been submitted where p-values were requested for safety data, otherwise it would not be admissible as data. The problem is, virtually no clinical trials power their adverse events to generate p-values. When did this become a requirement?
-
PAAB section 5.9 has required statistical analysis to support inclusion of comparative therapeutic data from clinical trials (whether active comparator or inactive comparator) for as long as I can remember. You might be thinking of comprehensive excerpts from the s/e tables of part 1 of the PM (which don’t require stats). PAAB can also consider claim neutral, non-comparative presentations of the incidences of sponsor drug’s side effects from an acceptable clinical trial provided those incidences are roughly aligned with the product monograph AND the product monograph’s most common adverse events (with incidences) are presented as copy specific balance copy.
-
J Jennifer Carroll referenced this topic on