Uncategorized

PART 1: A comparison of dose accuracy of each formulation The following

Posted by

admin

On August 4, 2024

Comments Off

PART 1: A comparison of dose accuracy of each formulation

The following antacids have been prepared:

Calcium Carbonate (Heavy)

2.0 g

Sodium Pyrophosphate (deflocculating agent)

0.1 g

Xanthan gum solution

(thickening agent)

20 cm3

Water to

100 cm3

Mass of calcium carbonate (g) in a 20 mL dose poured immediately after shaking

Mass of calcium carbonate (g) in a 20 mL dose poured 5 minutes after shaking

0.453

0.051

0.416

0.091

0.041

0.404

0.412

0.046

0.395

0.082

0.039

0.383

0.433

0.049

0.374

0.087

0.046

0.363

0.391

0.044

0.437

0.078

0.046

0.424

0.371

0.042

0.458

0.074

0.048

0.444

0.453

0.051

0.416

0.091

0.044

0.404

0.412

0.046

0.437

0.082

0.046

0.424

0.391

0.044

0.395

0.078

0.041

0.383

0.371

0.042

0.374

0.074

0.039

0.363

0.412

0.046

0.458

0.082

0.048

0.444

0.391

0.044

0.416

0.078

0.048

0.404

0.371

0.042

0.395

0.074

0.044

0.383

0.433

0.049

0.374

0.087

0.046

0.363

0.433

0.049

0.437

0.087

0.041

0.424

0.453

0.051

0.458

0.091

0.039

0.444

0.412

0.046

0.416

0.082

0.048

0.404

0.453

0.051

0.416

0.091

0.041

0.404

0.412

0.046

0.395

0.082

0.039

0.383

0.433

0.049

0.374

0.087

0.046

0.363

0.391

0.044

0.437

0.078

0.046

0.424

Table 1: The mass of calcium carbonate (g) in a 20 mL dose of suspensions A – C poured (i) immediately and (ii) 5 minutes after shaking each of 20 bottles that have been stored for 6 months.

In the dataset the results from the four different formulations A-C are presented.

All suspensions were manufactured 6 months ago and have been stored on a shelf since then. A 20 mL dose is poured from 20 bottles of each formulation (i) immediately after shaking and (ii) 5 minutes after shaking.

Using Excel, plot a bar graph of the mean values plus appropriate error bars. Once this is done you can carry out statistical tests on the data.

(a) Compare the results obtained from the three different formulations immediately after shaking using an ANOVA.

(b) For each formulation individually, compare the dose poured immediately with the dose poured at 5 minutes using a t-test.

This will involve a total of five statistical analyses.

Click the data icon at the top of the page and then choose data analysis and in the drop-down menu choose the appropriate statistical test (most likely this will be a single factor ANOVA otherwise known as a one-way ANOVA when comparing more than two sets of data or a t-test when comparing two sets of data). Then follow the instructions to generate the statistical output. The table generated will provide you with a probability value (p-value) between the groups. If this is less than 0.05 then the data are statistically different.

PART 2: Report

Please submit an appropriately labelled bar graph of the dose accuracy data (from Table 1).

From the graphs and the results of the ANOVA, is there any significant difference between accuracy of the dose poured from the formulations?

From the graphs and the results of the t-tests, describe the effect of waiting 5 minutes on the accuracy of the dose poured for each formulation?

Which formulation do you think is most suitable for use as an antacid? What is the effect of a deflocculating agent on dose accuracy in the short term and long term? What is the effect of a thickening agent on dose accuracy in the short term and long term?

You will need to submit a report and it will be helpful to refer to the experimental work you carried out in the lab:

You must not exceed the word limit of 500 words. Only the first 500 words will be marked. The word count does not include references and citations.

Sections required

Marks awards for

Calculation of the mean mass of calcium carbonate in each formulation at both time points from the information in Table 1

Correct values for the mean mass of calcium carbonate in each formulation calculated from the information in Table 1

Calculation of the standard deviation of the mass of calcium carbonate in each formulation at both time points in Table 1

Correct values for the standard deviation of calcium carbonate in each formulation calculated from the information in Table 1

Clearly presented bar graph of the mean mass of calcium carbonate in each formulation with error bars showing standard deviation

Full and descriptive title for figure

Correct axes labels with appropriate units

Error bars of standard deviation values

Values to correct level of accuracy

Also, see below ‘Graphs’

Statistical comparison of:

(a) the calcium carbonate content in the doses poured immediately from the four different formulations

Correct statistical test used and correct interpretation of the result

Explanation of dose accuracy data (a)

Correct explanation of dose accuracy data (a)

Statistical comparison of:

(b) the calcium carbonate content of the doses poured immediately with the doses poured after 5 minutes

Correct statistical tests used and correct interpretation of the results

Explanation of dose accuracy data (b)

Correct explanation of dose accuracy data (b)

Decision on which suspension is best for use as an antacid and why, related to the excipients and its stability in the short and long term

Correct decision on which suspension is best for use as an antacid and clear explanation why, related to the excipients and its stability in the short and long term

Graphs: Graphs must be plotted using appropriate graphing software (e.g. Microsoft Excel), and imported into the word-processed document. To avoid unintended formatting issues, it is advisable to import graphs as bitmap images (e.g. using the ‘paste special’ command in Microsoft Word). Marks are awarded for: (a) appropriate annotation to enable meaningful interpretation of data, including suitable graph format (e.g. scatter plot, bar chart, etc.), axis labels, axis titles, legend and title/caption, (b) visual clarity of plot, and (c) accuracy of plot. Note that improper annotation may lead to loss of marks elsewhere if the graph cannot be meaningfully interpreted. You are advised to use a suitable colour scheme and avoid superfluous elements such as excessive use of gridlines.

Section 2: Analysis of a new muscarinic receptor antagonist.

Drug ‘ABC2001’ is an antagonist for the muscarinic acetylcholine receptor that is being tested in Guinea pig ileum.

From the data in the table below draw a line graph of logarithm (Log10) of the molar concentration acetylcholine (calculate and insert into the table) versus contractile response (mN) line graph both in the absence and presence of ABC2001 include a figure legend.

(50 words, 10 marks)

ACh concentration (M)

Log10 Ach concentration (M)

Response (mN)

Alone

Plus ABC2001

[1 x 10-8 M]

Mean

Standard Deviation

Mean

Standard Deviation

1 x 10-8 M

4.8

1.4

5.1

1.2

3 x 10-8 M

11.2

2.3

10.9

3.1

1 x 10-7 M

22.4

6.1

20.2

4.2

3 x 10-7 M

36.8

5.1

30.1

6.1

1 x 10-6 M

58.4

3.2

32.4

3.4

3 x 10-6 M

61.2

4.8

34.8

5.2

1 x 10-5 M

62.9

5.1

35.1

2.6

From the dose response curve is ABC2001a competitive or non-competitive inhibitor, explain how you came to your conclusion.

(350 words, 10 marks)

On a cellular mechanistic level explain how acetylcholine mediates ileum smooth muscle contraction and why a muscarinic antagonist inhibits this response.

(100 words, 5 marks)

You must not exceed the word limit indicated for each question. The word count does not include references and citations.

Sections required

Marks awards for

Complete the table with the appropriate Log10 for each concentration of Ach. Clearly present a line graph of logarithm (Log10) of the molar concentration acetylcholine versus contractile response (mN) both in the absence and presence of UoB2024. Including an appropriate figure legend.

Clear and correct graph with both responses present. Appropriate and correctly labelled axis. Full and well written figure legend

Interpret the graph to determine what type of inhibitor UoB2024.

Correct interpretation of the graph with detailed reasons why you came to the conclude what type of inhibitor UoB2024 is

Describe how acetylcholine causes ileum smooth muscle contraction.

Full and descriptive mechanisms including the 2nd messenger systems involved.

Graphs: Graphs must be plotted using appropriate graphing software (e.g. Microsoft Excel), and imported into the word-processed document. To avoid unintended formatting issues, it is advisable to import graphs as bitmap images (e.g. using the ‘paste special’ command in Microsoft Word). Marks are awarded for: (a) appropriate annotation to enable meaningful interpretation of data, including suitable graph format (e.g. scatter plot, bar chart, etc.), axis labels, axis titles, legend, (b) visual clarity of plot, and (c) accuracy of plot. Note that improper drawing or annotation may lead to loss of marks elsewhere if the graph cannot be meaningfully interpreted. You are advised to use a suitable colour scheme and avoid superfluous elements such as excessive use of gridlines.

Blog