Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34272709›Full record

ArticleMethods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.)2021

Case Study 2: Practical Analytical Considerations for Conducting In Vitro Enzyme Kinetic Studies.

Upendra A Argikar, Swati Nagar

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Upendra A ArgikarTranslational Medicine, Novartis Institutes for BioMedical Research, Inc., Cambridge, MA, USA. upendra.argikar@novartis.com.
Swati NagarDepartment of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Temple University School of Pharmacy, Philadelphia, PA, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Characterization of enzyme kinetics in an experiment is dependent on measurement of a change in concentration of either the substrate (loss of parent) or the product (formation of metabolite). Modern analytical techniques such as ultrahigh pressure liquid chromatography, high resolution mass spectrometry, etc. have allowed accurate characterization of minute changes in concentration. Therefore, complex kinetic data such as a sigmoidal phase at low substrate concentrations or terminal half-life in a PK curve can be evaluated by stretching the limits of analytical quantification. This chapter presents some elementary dos and don'ts and provides insight into some of the underlying principles for utilizing the best possible analytical techniques when investigating enzyme kinetics. The objective of this case study is to answer the following questions: (a) Why is it necessary to determine lower and upper limits of quantification (LLOQ and ULOQ, respectively) of a bioanalytical assay, specifically for enzyme kinetic assays? How do you utilize LLOQ and ULOQ to correctly interpret your kinetic data? (b) Why should one use a linear fit and not a quadratic fit for standard curves? (c) Is quantification of an analyte possible without a reference standard? Can one assume equal signal intensities regardless of analytical technique (MS, UV)? (d) In the absence of reference standards, can you still determine kinetic constants? (e) With the need to keep substrate depletion at less than 20% for linearity assumptions, does bioanalytical variability matter? (f) What buffer do you use for your enzyme systems? How do you choose your buffer ? Does choice of bioanalytical methods (LC, MS) dictate your choice of buffer ?

Indexed as

AlgorithmsChromatography, LiquidEnzymesHumansKineticsLimit of DetectionPharmaceutical PreparationsPharmacokineticsReference StandardsResearch DesignTandem Mass SpectrometryEnzymesPharmaceutical PreparationsAssay validationAssay variabilityBioanalytical assayLimit of quantificationReference standard

Identifiers

PMID34272709

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.