msmnainar
★    

India,
2012-06-24 11:06
(5103 d 14:23 ago)

Posting: # 8836
Views: 9,009
 

 Back calculation for QC purpose [General Sta­tis­tics]

Hello everyone

Can anybody explain how to back calculate (formula captured below) to compare the results of phosphate binding capacity.


Langmuir equation: Ceq/(x/m)=1/k1·k2+Ceq/k2

Where Ceq is the concentration, in mM, of phosphate remaining in solution at equilibrium or the unbound concentration.

x/m is the amount of phosphate bound per weight of polymer in mmol/g.

k1 Affinity Constant

k2 Capacity Constant

Sundar. M
ElMaestro
★★★

Denmark,
2012-06-24 13:12
(5103 d 12:17 ago)

@ msmnainar
Posting: # 8837
Views: 8,008
 

 Back calculation for QC purpose

Hi msmnainar,

❝ Can anybody explain how to back calculate (formula captured below) to compare the results of phosphate binding capacity.

❝ Langmuir equation: Ceq/(x/m)=1/k1.k2+Ceq/k2


Do you mean isolating Ceq?

Let a=(x/m)

C/a=1/(k1k2)+(C/k2)
<=>
C/a-C/k2=1/(k1k2)
<=>
C(1/a-1/k2)=1/(k1k2)
<=>
C=(1/(k1k2))/((1/a-1/k2))
or
C=(1/(k1k2))/((1/(x/m)-1/k2))

The latter can be re-arranged as necessary.

Pass or fail!
ElMaestro
msmnainar
★    

India,
2012-06-25 07:12
(5102 d 18:17 ago)

@ ElMaestro
Posting: # 8838
Views: 8,020
 

 Back calculation for QC purpose

Thanks for your response.

Sundar. M
msmnainar
★    

India,
2012-06-25 10:46
(5102 d 14:43 ago)

@ ElMaestro
Posting: # 8839
Views: 7,912
 

 Back calculation for QC purpose

Dear ElMaestro

Post to your response am having few queries reg back calculation, kindly guide me,

For eg.,

Obtained Total Bound Bile acid Concentration, mM (x/m)

Concentration   Product X
     1            1.2595
     2            1.9113
     3            3.2978
     4            4.3539
     5            4.8442
     6            6.251
     7            5.843
     8            5.772
     9            4.6759
Mean              4.2454
Sum              38.2086


Obtained Total Unbound Bile acid Concentration, mM (ceq)

Concentration   Product X
     1            0.7409
     2            1.0893
     3            1.7033
     4            2.6475
     5            5.1578
     6            8.7521
     7           14.161
     8           19.233
     9           25.3301
Mean              8.7572
Sum              78.815


Obtained k1 and k2 values:
k1 = 1.2071
k2 = 5.4189

Back calculated value for Ceq = 2.9970 using mean data (x/m), as per the provided formula
C = (1/(k1k2))/((1/(x/m)-1/k2))

Kindly guide me, if am correct this value should matches with obtained Ceq value for product x mean value or any further comparison should be done.

----------

Hello Helmutji

It was very nice to meet you at Budapest during 3rd international regulatory conference. Need your expertise in this regard.

Sundar. M
ElMaestro
★★★

Denmark,
2012-06-25 12:36
(5102 d 12:53 ago)

@ msmnainar
Posting: # 8840
Views: 7,923
 

 maths versus understanding

Hi msmnaimar,

❝ Kindly guide me, if am correct this value should matches with obtained Ceq value for product x mean value or any further comparison should be done.


Sorry, I have to confess that I do not have any insight into the Langmuir stuff or ad(/b)sorption phenomena. What I merely did was rearranging an equation.
From the description and data you gave I cannot make sense of the task. I will be happy to take a closer look if you can describe what's going on in mathematical terms: You have what plotted against what? What term of the equation are you trying to backcalculate given which value of which other term?

Many thanks and I am sorry for having little insight into the practical use of the equation.

Pass or fail!
ElMaestro
msmnainar
★    

India,
2012-06-25 12:59
(5102 d 12:30 ago)

@ ElMaestro
Posting: # 8841
Views: 7,898
 

 maths versus understanding

Dear ElMaestro

Thanks for your swift reply,

A plot of Ceq/(x/m) versus Ceq was depicted to obtain k1 and k2 values.
Ceq/(x/m) values are depicted for your ready reference.

Concentration   Ceq/(x/m)
                Product X
     1            0.5882
     2            0.5699
     3            0.5165
     4            0.6081
     5            1.0647
     6            1.4001
     7            2.4236
     8            3.3321
     9            5.4172


Regression analysis applied to yield a slope (a) and intercept (b) of the line.

The affinity constant, k 1, and capacity constant, k 2, are calculated from the slope and intercept as follows:

K1=a/b
K2=1/a

Here, actually we need to confirm whether the calculated steps/values are reproducible using back calculation.

Hope I am explained properly.

M. Sundar, India

Sundar. M
ElMaestro
★★★

Denmark,
2012-06-25 13:03
(5102 d 12:26 ago)

@ msmnainar
Posting: # 8842
Views: 7,878
 

 maths versus understanding

Hi msnaimar,

❝ A plot of Ceq/(x/m) versus Ceq was depicted to obtain k1 and k2 values.

Please explain the bold part.

❝ (...) Here, actually we need to confirm whether the calculated steps/values are reproducible using back calculation.


What do you wish to back-calculate? And when you do it, which is the input parameter (and at which value) that you want an output from?

Pass or fail!
ElMaestro
msmnainar
★    

India,
2012-06-25 13:26
(5102 d 12:03 ago)

@ ElMaestro
Posting: # 8843
Views: 7,956
 

 maths versus understanding

Dear ElMaestro

❝ ❝ A plot of Ceq/(x/m) versus Ceq was depicted to obtain k1 and k2 values.

❝ Please explain the bold part.


Obtained Total Unbound Bile acid Concentration, mM (ceq)

Obtained Total Bound Bile acid Concentration, mM (x/m)


❝ What do you wish to back-calculate? And when you do it, which is the input parameter (and at which value) that you want an output from?


The results obtained from Langmuir equation (Ceq/(x/m) =1/k1.k2+Ceq/k2) to be back calculated.

Inputs are,

k1 = 1.2071
k2 = 5.4189

Obtained Ceq values for 9 different concentrations, mean and sum values are presented below,

Concentration   (ceq)
     1          0.7409
     2          1.0893
     3          1.7033
     4          2.6475
     5          5.1578
     6          8.7521
     7         14.161
     8         19.233
     9         25.3301
Mean            8.7572
Sum            78.815



Obtained Ceq/(x/m) values
Concentration   Ceq/(x/m)
     1           0.5882
     2           0.5699
     3           0.5165
     4           0.6081
     5           1.0647
     6           1.4001
     7           2.4236
     8           3.3321
     9           5.4172

Sundar. M
ElMaestro
★★★

Denmark,
2012-06-25 13:35
(5102 d 11:54 ago)

@ msmnainar
Posting: # 8844
Views: 7,866
 

 Back calculation for QC purpose

Hi msnaimar,

❝ Obtained k1 and k2 values:

❝ k1 = 1.2071

❝ k2 = 5.4189


So far so good.
I can reproduce your values using this code in R:
x.by.m=c(1.2595, 1.9113, 3.2978, 4.3539, 4.8442, 6.251, 5.843, 5.772, 4.6759)
Ceq=c(0.7409, 1.0893, 1.7033, 2.6475, 5.1578, 8.7521, 14.161, 19.233, 25.3301)
Ceq.by.xbym=Ceq/x.by.m
Muddle=lm(Ceq.by.xbym~Ceq)
Muddle
summary(Muddle)
k2=1/coef(Muddle)[2]
plot(Ceq.by.xbym, Ceq)
k1=1/(k2*coef(Muddle)[1])


When I look at the summary and the plot, the curve does not strike me as necessarily linear all across.

Pass or fail!
ElMaestro
msmnainar
★    

India,
2012-06-25 14:00
(5102 d 11:30 ago)

@ ElMaestro
Posting: # 8845
Views: 7,927
 

 Back calculation for QC purpose

Dear ElMaestro

Thanks for your response.

Sundar. M
ElMaestro
★★★

Denmark,
2012-06-25 15:19
(5102 d 10:10 ago)

@ msmnainar
Posting: # 8846
Views: 7,848
 

 Back calculation for QC purpose

Hi msmnainar,

it strikes me as very odd if you want to back-calculate Ceq on basis of a mean of a range of x/m calibrators.

Pass or fail!
ElMaestro
UA Flag
Activity
 Admin contact
23,653 posts in 4,991 threads, 1,570 registered users;
100 visitors (0 registered, 100 guests [including 20 identified bots]).
Forum time: 01:30 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

I have never in my life learned anything
from any man who agreed with me.    Dudley Field Malone

The Bioequivalence and Bioavailability Forum is hosted by
BEBAC Ing. Helmut Schütz
HTML5