2011
DOI: 10.1016/j.cmpb.2010.08.003
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Online analysis of in vitro resistance to antimalarial drugs through nonlinear regression

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1

Citation Types

1
87
0

Year Published

2013
2013
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7
2

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 101 publications
(88 citation statements)
references
References 7 publications
1
87
0
Order By: Relevance
“…This approach took into account the biological reality that growth at the highest drug concentration, G(C max ), does not always correspond to the maximum drug effect because of a paradoxical rise in the growth measured at very high drug concentrations (Fig. 1), a phenomenon that has been noted previously (15). To explore this issue further, we prospectively defined two measurements of growth reduction (see Table S1 in the supplemental material) providing distinct measures of drug efficacy: R max1 , calculated as G(C 0 ) Ϫ G(C max ), and the modified measure of efficacy R max2 , calculated as G(C 0 ) Ϫ G min , where G min is defined as the mean growth at the two concentrations ranked as having the lowest mean growth in the concentration-inhibition series.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…This approach took into account the biological reality that growth at the highest drug concentration, G(C max ), does not always correspond to the maximum drug effect because of a paradoxical rise in the growth measured at very high drug concentrations (Fig. 1), a phenomenon that has been noted previously (15). To explore this issue further, we prospectively defined two measurements of growth reduction (see Table S1 in the supplemental material) providing distinct measures of drug efficacy: R max1 , calculated as G(C 0 ) Ϫ G(C max ), and the modified measure of efficacy R max2 , calculated as G(C 0 ) Ϫ G min , where G min is defined as the mean growth at the two concentrations ranked as having the lowest mean growth in the concentration-inhibition series.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Investigators calculate inhibitory constants by a variety of means, including algorithms within software packages and freely available tools based on log probit (14), polynomial (10), and sigmoid inhibition (15) models. In addition, some assays exhibiting poor growth are misleading and should not be used as a basis for defining drug resistance (4,15). Standardized methods to address these issues have been reported on occasion (16), but in general, the classification of concentration-inhibition curves remains a time-consuming and potentially subjective process involving visual inspection of individual curves.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Parasite susceptibility was tested in parallel against chloroquine diphosphate (Sigma-Aldrich) and artesunate (Holly Pharmaceuticals Co. Ltd.), as previously described (17). Doseresponse curves and IC 50 s using duplicate-well data for each drug concentration were determined using ICESTIMATOR (http://www.antimalarial -icestimator.net/MethodIntro.htm) (19,20).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The plates were incubated at ambient temperature for 30 min, and SYBR green I fluorescence was quantified using a FLUOstar OPTIMA instrument (BMG Labtech, Cary, NC). The IC 50 , defined as the drug concentration at which the SYBR green I signal was 50% of that measured from drug-free control wells, was calculated from the inhibitory sigmoid maximum-effect (E max ) model (ICEstimator, version 1.2; http://www.antimalarial-icestimator.net/Method Intro.htm) (21).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%