Re: Ka>Ke?

From: Rik Shoemaker Date: August 11, 2003 technical Source: cognigencorp.com
From: Rik Shoemaker <RS@chdr.nl> Subject: Re: [NMusers] Ka>Ke? Date: 8/11/2003 4:06 AM Dear Nick, This sounds like a very good idea to me and solves my problem of obtaining estimates of not very usefull parameters. I'll certainly try it when the need arises. Thanks! I'm personally not that worried about Ka>Ke for some and the reverse for others; the point of the flip flop -as far as I understand- is that your curves are not capable of telling you if one is larger than the other (equally good fits can be obtained by reversing the two) and therefore the choice is almost arbitrary (at least not data driven, but rather driven by what you think your drug behaves like). If you do get better fits if you have reversal on the individual level, I would indeed assume there is something else going on... Rik
Aug 07, 2003 Yaning Wang TVKa>TVKe or Ka>Ke?
Aug 07, 2003 Kenneth Kowalski RE: TVKa>TVKe or Ka>Ke?
Aug 07, 2003 Chuanpu Hu RE: TVKa>TVKe or Ka>Ke?
Aug 07, 2003 Nick Holford Re: TVKa>TVKe or Ka>Ke?
Aug 07, 2003 Yaning Wang Re: TVKa>TVKe or Ka>Ke?
Aug 08, 2003 Justin Wilkins RE: TVKa>TVKe or Ka>Ke?
Aug 08, 2003 Kenneth Kowalski RE: TVKa>TVKe or Ka>Ke?
Aug 11, 2003 Rik Shoemaker Re: Ka>Ke?
Aug 11, 2003 Kenneth Kowalski RE: Ka>Ke?
Aug 11, 2003 Rik Shoemaker RE: Ka>Ke?
Aug 11, 2003 Serge Guzy RE: Ka>Ke?