1993
DOI: 10.1016/0001-706x(93)90083-n
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A comparison of three methods of estimating EC50 in studies of drug resistance of malaria parasites

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

2
346
0
3

Year Published

2006
2006
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
10

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 450 publications
(351 citation statements)
references
References 2 publications
2
346
0
3
Order By: Relevance
“…Compounds were measured in duplicate, and results were recorded and expressed as a percentage of the untreated controls. Fifty percent inhibitory concentrations (IC 50 ) were estimated by linear interpolation (56).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Compounds were measured in duplicate, and results were recorded and expressed as a percentage of the untreated controls. Fifty percent inhibitory concentrations (IC 50 ) were estimated by linear interpolation (56).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The activities of miltefosine among the Leishmania species were compared using an analysis of variance and p value ≤ 0.05 was considered to be significant. The IC 50 , IC 90 and CC 50 were calculated using linear regression analysis or interpolation (miniTab 13.0 or microsoft Office Excel 2003) (Huber & Koella 1993). Linear regression was used when the distribution was normal (parametric method) and linear interpolation was applied when the distribution was not normal (non-parametric).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Serial dilutions of inhibitor were prepared in culture medium (0.05-50 M) and added with [ 3 H]hypoxanthine (0.5 Ci/well) to asynchronous cultures at a 0.5% parasitaemia and 2% hematocrit. After a 48-h incubation, the amount of [ 3 H]hypoxanthine incorporated into the parasites was measured, and the concentrations of inhibitor required to prevent incorporation by 50% (EC 50 ) were determined by linear interpolation of inhibition curves (28). Each assay was performed in triplicate on three separate occasions, and data were pooled and are presented as mean Ϯ S.E.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%