Compare rec. lab reagents for research




Suppliers for Lab polyclonals


HIV-1, HIV-2 Protease Substrate Peptide

abx265644-200tests Abbexa 200 tests

HIV-1, HIV-2 Protease Substrate Peptide

abx265644-50tests Abbexa 50 tests

HIV Reverse Transcriptase (HIV-RT) Recombinant

GWB-56D50E GenWay Biotech 0.025 mg

HIV Rev

GWB-96E989 GenWay Biotech 0.05 ml

HIV QK10

5-01336 CHI Scientific 4 x 5mg

HIV QK10

MBS8246609-10mg MyBiosource 10mg

HIV QK10

MBS8246609-1mg MyBiosource 1mg


Polyclonal ETO polyclonal antibody

APR00372G Leading Biology 0.05ml 580.8 EUR

Polyclonal SHH Polyclonal Antibody

APR00434G Leading Biology 0.1mg 580.8 EUR

Polyclonal ETO polyclonal antibody

APR00435G Leading Biology 0.1ml 633.6 EUR

Polyclonal p53 polyclonal antibody

APR00443G Leading Biology 0.05mg 633.6 EUR

Polyclonal G9a polyclonal antibody

APR00448G Leading Biology 0.1ml 580.8 EUR

Polyclonal PML polyclonal antibody

AMR09397G Leading Biology 0.05mg 580.8 EUR

Polyclonal YY1 polyclonal antibody

APR14018G Leading Biology 0.1ml 580.8 EUR

Polyclonal RARA polyclonal antibody

APR00370G Leading Biology 0.05ml 580.8 EUR


Our used polyclonals in Pubmed.

Polyclonal G9a polyclonal antibody

APR00448G Leading Biology 0.1ml 580.8 EUR

Polyclonal PML polyclonal antibody

AMR09397G Leading Biology 0.05mg 580.8 EUR

Polyclonal YY1 polyclonal antibody

APR14018G Leading Biology 0.1ml 580.8 EUR

Polyclonal RARA polyclonal antibody

APR00370G Leading Biology 0.05ml 580.8 EUR

Polyclonal EzH2 polyclonal antibody

APR00373G Leading Biology 0.05mg 580.8 EUR



Compare rec. lab reagents for research






Suppliers for Lab Assays


Rat Caspase-2(Caspase-2) ELISA Kit

ER1468 FN Test 96T
Description: Method of detection: Double Antibody, Sandwich ELISA;Reacts with: Rattus;Sensitivity: 0.094 ng/ml

Rat Caspase-9(Caspase-9)ELISA Kit

NSL1644r Sunlong 96 Tests

Rat Caspase-8(Caspase-8)ELISA Kit

NSL1645r Sunlong 96 Tests

Rat Caspase-3(Caspase-3)ELISA Kit

NSL1646r Sunlong 96 Tests

Goat Caspase-9(Caspase-9) ELISA Kit

NSL1100Gt Sunlong 96T

Goat Caspase-3(Caspase-3) ELISA Kit

NSL1101Gt Sunlong 96T

Goat Caspase-8(Caspase-8)ELISA Kit

NSL1162Gt Sunlong 96T


Recombinant Humanp21 Recombinant Protein

92-035 ProSci 0.05 mg 821.4 EUR

TWEAK, recombinant / TNFSF12, recombinant (Human)

054-85 PHOENIX PEPTIDE 10 μg 261.36 EUR

TAGLN Recombinant Protein (Rat) (Recombinant- Tag)

RP232205 ABM 100 ug Ask for price

TAGLN2 Recombinant Protein (Rat) (Recombinant Tag)

RP232208 ABM 100 ug Ask for price

TAGLN3 Recombinant Protein (Rat) (Recombinant Tag)

RP232211 ABM 100 ug Ask for price

TAGLN3 Recombinant Protein (Rat) (Recombinant Tag)

RP232214 ABM 100 ug Ask for price

TAGAP Recombinant Protein (Human) (Recombinant- Tag)

RP030880 ABM 100 ug Ask for price

TAGLN Recombinant Protein (Human) (Recombinant- Tag)

RP030883 ABM 100 ug Ask for price


Our used References in Pubmed.

rec PDGF AA (human)

H-7640.0002 Bachem 2.0µg 194.4 EUR

rec PDGF AA (human)

H-7640.0010 Bachem 10.0µg 457.2 EUR

rec IGF-I (human)

H-5555.0050 Bachem 50.0µg 290.4 EUR

rec IGF-I (human)

H-5555.0100 Bachem 100.0µg 457.2 EUR

rec IGF-I (human)

H-5555.0500 Bachem 0.5mg 1720.8 EUR



https://tumori.net/

Difference between isolated and hydrolyzed proteins

In recent years, the use of food supplements has undergone a real surge. Accomplices are the hectic and increasingly selective lifestyles, which do not allow you to take on all the elements necessary for a complete diet, but also an increasingly high quality of products, which attracts more and more athletes, the elderly and future mothers. For many companies, this was the beginning of a business that continues today and marks positive points: the nutraceutical market.
A large clientele is looking for food supplements containing proteins, which can be found in isolated or hydrolyzed form. To direct the customer towards one type of product, rather than another, correct information is important, i.e. explaining the content of the product and the advantages of one over the other.

What is the difference between isolated and hydrolyzed proteins?

We state that focusing on isolated or hydrolyzed proteins depends on the company’s objective and the technologies available.
The isolated proteins are produced by purification techniques and, once isolated, they do not undergo further modifications. The absorption time by the body changes depending on the source of origin of the protein, it can vary between 40 minutes and an hour.
Hydrolysed proteins, on the other hand, undergo a further hydrolysis process, usually by enzymes, which allows the macromolecules to be broken down into shorter peptides. If on the one hand the cost of the product increases, on the other the great advantage is that the assimilation times of the product are reduced and the product. Hydrolysed proteins, in fact, can be assimilated in just over ten minutes. In addition, there is several experimental evidence showing that hydrolysates facilitate post-workout recovery and maximize muscle anabolism.
There are several companies that have decided to send both types into production, thus covering a large portion of the market.

It is important to rely on an innovative laboratory!

Since it is a very competitive and fast growing market, given the constant demand from consumers, it is necessary to entrust the development and research of these products to a laboratory that is actually innovative and competent, such as Bict, which offers solutions and standardized chemical and biotechnological processes applicable directly to the type of production desired (supplements, isolated proteins, hydrolysates, for example) thanks to an expert and creative team and an automated system that reduces both development time and human error.

Estimating the Impact of Switching from a Lower to Higher Valent Pneumococcal Conjugate Vaccine in Colombia, Finland, and The Netherlands: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis

Estimating the Impact of Switching from a Lower to Higher Valent Pneumococcal Conjugate Vaccine in Colombia, Finland, and The Netherlands: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis

Widespread use of ten-valent (Synflorix™, GSK) or 13-valent (Prevenar 13™; Pfizer) conjugate vaccination packages has successfully lowered invasive pneumococcal illness (IPD) globally. However, IPD attributable to serotypes not contained inside the respective vaccines continues to enhance, notably serotypes 3, 6A, and 19A in nations utilizing lower-valent vaccines. Our goal was to estimate the scientific and financial profit of changing PCV10 with PCV13 in Colombia, Finland, and The Netherlands.Country-specific databases, supplemented with revealed and unpublished information, knowledgeable the historic incidence of pneumococcal illness in addition to direct and oblique medical prices.

A decision-analytic forecasting mannequin was utilized, and each prices and outcomes have been discounted. The noticed invasive pneumococcal illness (IPD) traits from every nation have been used to forecast the future quantity of IPD circumstances given a PCV13 or PCV10 program.

Estimating the Impact of Switching from a Lower to Higher Valent Pneumococcal Conjugate Vaccine in Colombia, Finland, and The Netherlands: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis
Estimating the Impact of Switching from a Lower to Higher Valent Pneumococcal Conjugate Vaccine in Colombia, Finland, and The Netherlands: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis

Over a 5-year time horizon, a change to a PCV13 program was estimated to cut back general IPD amongst 0-2 yr olds by an incremental – 37.6% in Colombia, – 32.9% in Finland, and – 26% in The Netherlands, respectively, over PCV10. Adults > 65 years skilled a comparable incremental lower in general IPD in Colombia (- 32.2%), Finland (- 15%), and The Netherlands (- 3.7%). Serotypes 3, 6A, and 19A drove the incremental lower in illness for PCV13 over PCV10 in each age teams. A PCV13 program was dominant in Colombia and Finland and cost-effective in The Netherlands at 1 × GDP per capita (€34,054/QALY).

In Colombia, Finland, and The Netherlands, nations with numerous epidemiologic and inhabitants distributions, switching from a PCV10 to PCV13 program would considerably cut back the burden of IPD in all three nations in as few as 5 years.

Comparison of pharmacokinetic traits of sildenafil citrate chewable tablets and film-coated tablets in wholesome male topics

UI14SDF100CW is a chewable pill of sildenafil citrate, which was developed to enhance compliance via comfort of administration. The goal of this examine was to examine the pharmacokinetic (PK) properties of sildenafil citrate chewable tablets (UI14SDF100CW) and typical sildenafil citrate film-coated tablets (Viagra®, Pfizer).

A randomized, open-label, single dose, two-treatment, two-period, two-way crossover examine was performed in 60 wholesome male volunteers. In every interval, the topics acquired a single oral dose of UI14SDF100CW or Viagra® (each tablets comprise 140.45 mg of sildenafil citrate, which is equal to 100 mg of sildenafil).

Serial blood samples have been collected up to 24 h post-dose for PK evaluation. The plasma focus of sildenafil was decided utilizing a validated HPLC-MS/MS assay. PK parameters of sildenafil have been calculated utilizing non-compartmental strategies.

The plasma concentration-time profiles of sildenafil in each formulations have been related. For UI14SDF100CW, the Cmax and AUCfinal of sildenafil have been 1068.69 ± 458.25 (imply ± customary deviation) mg/L and 3580.59 ± 1680.29 h·mg/L, and the corresponding values for Viagra® have been 1146.84 ± 501.70 mg/L and 3406.35 ± 1452.31 h·/L, respectively.

The geometric imply ratios (90% confidence intervals) of UI14SDF100CW to Viagra® for Cmax and AUClast have been 0.933 (0.853-1.021) and 1.034 (0.969-1.108), respectively, which met the bioequivalence standards of Korean regulatory company. In conclusion, UI14SDF100CW and Viagra® confirmed related PK properties. Therefore, UI14SDF100CW could be an alternate to sildenafil for the remedy of erectile dysfunction, offering higher compliance.

Process and Clinical Outcomes of a Biosimilar Adoption Program with Infliximab-Dyyb

Process and Clinical Outcomes of a Biosimilar Adoption Program with Infliximab-Dyyb

In 2016, the FDA authorised infliximab-dyyb (IFX-dyyb) as a biosimilar to infliximab (IFX). Deemed to have comparable efficacy and security to IFX, IFX-dyyb is 20%-30% cheaper, permitting vital value financial savings for establishments and some payers. In 2018, IFX was reported to be the drug with the best spend since 2013, costing $3.Eight billion;

nonetheless, transition to IFX-dyyb would save $1.1 billion. Regardless, many establishments haven’t transitioned to IFX-dyyb or different IFX biosimilars (e.g., IFX-abda) as a result of of considerations about medical outcomes, uncertainty relating to monetary impression, and obstacles to operationalizing biosimilar adoption.

At Boston Medical Center, a choice was made in March 2018 to undertake IFX-dyyb and transition sufferers who’ve been on IFX for ≥ 6 months for all indications to IFX-dyyb.To (a) describe a biosimilar adoption course of of IFX-dyyb in sufferers on IFX for ≥ 6 months; (b) characterize value financial savings of transitioning sufferers to IFX-dyyb; and (c) consider real-world medical outcomes of grownup sufferers with inflammatory bowel illness (IBD) who transitioned to IFX-dyyb.

Process and Clinical Outcomes of a Biosimilar Adoption Program with Infliximab-Dyyb
Process and Clinical Outcomes of a Biosimilar Adoption Program with Infliximab-Dyyb

This is a retrospective cohort examine of sufferers eligible for the IFX-dyyb change from March 2018 to June 2019 at a giant tutorial medical heart. For course of outcomes, we collected the proportion of sufferers who transitioned to IFX-dyyb and calculated the fee financial savings generated.

To assess medical outcomes of grownup IBD sufferers who transitioned, we collected IFX and IFX-dyyb dosage, Harvey Bradshaw Index (HBI) or Simple Clinical Colitis Activity Index (SCCAI) scores, c-reactive protein (CRP) ranges, and colonoscopy outcomes. Descriptive statistics, Wilcoxon signed-rank take a look at, and McNemar’s take a look at had been used for statistical analyses.

RESULTS

Of 151 eligible sufferers, 146 (97%) efficiently transitioned to IFX-dyyb. Based on our conversion charge to IFX-dyyb, our well being system is forecasted to save lots of roughly $500,000 yearly. From March to June 2018, 63 of 75 (84%) eligible IBD sufferers transitioned from IFX to IFX-dyyb. In this cohort, of the 40 sufferers with HBI or SCCAI scores earlier than and after transition, 36 (90%) maintained remission.

For 32 sufferers, the imply CRP (SD) earlier than transition was 11.2 (22) and 4.1 (4.8) after transition (P = 0.09). Since the IFX-dyyb transition, 9 sufferers had a colonoscopy, of which 5 (56%) had been in endoscopic remission. As of October 2018, 56 (89%) sufferers continued with IFX-dyyb after transition. Of the 46 sufferers who had 12-15 months posttransition knowledge, 38 (83%) remained on IFX-dyyb.Implementation of a biosimilar adoption program will be profitable and lead to vital value financial savings with out compromising medical outcomes.

A mannequin that makes use of actionable methods and embraces collaboration amongst stakeholders is described right here, with outcomes demonstrating profitable IFX-dyyb uptake and no adjustments in medical outcomes of transitioned grownup sufferers with IBD.No exterior funding supported this examine. Farraye studies advisory board charges from Janssen, Merck, and Pfizer. Shah studies speaker charges from Pfizer. The different authors don’t have anything to reveal.

Incidence of Serious Infections and Design of Utilization and Safety Studies for Biologic and Biosimilar Surveillance

There is a want for postmarketing proof technology for novel biologics and biosimilars.To assess the feasibility, strengths, and limitations of the Biologics and Biosimilars Collective Intelligence Consortium (BBCIC) Distributed Research Network (DRN) to look at the utilization and comparative security of immune-modulating brokers amongst sufferers with autoimmune illnesses.

We performed a retrospective cohort examine amongst sufferers enrolled in medical health insurance plans collaborating within the BBCIC DRN between January 1, 2006, and September 30, 2015. Eligible sufferers had been grownup (≥18 years) new customers of a disease-modifying nonbiologic and/or biologic agent with a prior prognosis of rheumatoid arthritis (RA), different inflammatory circumstances (psoriasis, psoriatic arthritis, ankylosing spondylitis), or inflammatory bowel illness (IBD). Follow-up began at therapy initiation and ended on the earliest of end result incidence (critical an infection); therapy discontinuation; or switching, dying, disenrollment, or finish of examine interval.

The examine leveraged the FDA Sentinel System infrastructure for knowledge administration and evaluation; descriptive statistics of affected person traits and unadjusted incidence charges of examine outcomes throughout follow-up had been calculated.

Eligible affected person drug episodes included 111,611 with RA (75% feminine), 61,050 with different inflammatory circumstances (51% feminine), and 30,628 with IBD (52% feminine). Across all Three cohorts, roughly half of the affected person drug episodes initiated a biologic (50% in RA; 60% in psoriasis, psoriatic arthritis, ankylosing spondylitis; and 55% in IBD). The crude incidence charge of critical an infection was 9.8 (9.5-10.0) circumstances per 100 person-years in RA, 7.1 (6.8-7.5) in different inflammatory circumstances, and 14.2 (13.6-14.8) in IBD sufferers.

This examine efficiently recognized giant numbers of new customers of biologics and produced outcomes that had been constant with these from earlier printed research. The BBCIC DRN is a potential useful resource for surveillance of biologics.This examine was funded by the Biologics and Biosimilars Collective Intelligence Consortium (BBCIC).

HealthCore performed this examine in collaboration with Harvard Pilgrim Health Care. Zhang and Sridhar had been employed by HealthCore on the time of this examine. Haynes is employed by HealthCore funded by PCORI, the NIH, and the FDA.

Barr and Eichelberger had been employed by AMCP on the time of this examine. Lockhart is employed by the BBCIC. Holmes and Clewell are employed by AbbVie. Accrott is an worker of and shareholder in Amgen. Marshall and Brown are employed by Harvard Pilgrim Health Care. Barr is a shareholder in Roche/Genentech. Curtis has obtained analysis grants from and consults with the next:

Amgen, AbbVie, BMS, CORRONA, Lilly, Janssen, Myriad, Pfizer, Roche, Regeneron, and UCB. Brown has obtained analysis grants from GSK and Pfizer and consulting charges from Bayer, Roche, and Jazz Pharmaceuticals, alongside with funding from the Reagan-Udall Foundation for the FDA to conduct research for medical product producers, together with Eli Lilly, Novartis, Abbvie, and Merck.

Brown can also be funded by PCORI, the NIH, and the FDA. McMahill-Walraven subcontracts with Harvard Pilgrim Health Care Institute for public well being and security surveillance distributed knowledge community activtities and with the FDA, GSK, and Pfizer. She additionally studies charges from Reagan Udall Foundation for the FDA and the Patient Centered Outcomes Research Institute.

Costs and Health Outcomes Associated with Tofacitinib Treatment for Active Psoriatic Arthritis in the United States

Costs and Health Outcomes Associated with Tofacitinib Treatment for Active Psoriatic Arthritis in the United States

Psoriatic arthritis (PsA) is a power progressive inflammatory situation related with important direct and oblique prices. Tofacitinib is an oral Janus kinase inhibitor for the remedy of PsA. Economic evaluations, alongside scientific knowledge, assist inform papers and formulary choices in the United States.

Costs and Health Outcomes Associated with Tofacitinib Treatment for Active Psoriatic Arthritis in the United States
Costs and Health Outcomes Associated with Tofacitinib Treatment for Active Psoriatic Arthritis in the United States

To consider outcomes and prices of together with tofacitinib in remedy methods for PsA from a third-party U.S. payer perspective, utilizing a well being financial mannequin.A call tree mannequin was developed to guage remedy sequences (as much as four strains of superior PsA remedy) with or with out tofacitinib. Patients included in the mannequin had lively PsA and a earlier insufficient response (IR) to standard artificial disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (csDMARD) or tumor necrosis issue inhibitor (TNFi) remedy.

The evaluation time horizon was 2 years; choice factors for persevering with/switching therapies occurred quarterly, based mostly on scientific response (assessed utilizing the main rheumatoid measure of efficacy, American College of Rheumatology [ACR]20 response solely) and antagonistic drug reactions (ADRs). Costs included these associated to ADRs and drug acquisition, monitoring, and administration.

Other endpoints of PsA, resembling evaluation of enthesitis and dactylitis, weren’t built-in into the mannequin.Treatment methods together with tofacitinib have been related with price financial savings versus methods with out tofacitinib throughout all modeled eventualities, with an estimated 2-year price saving of as much as $8,454,858, based mostly on 1 million insurants. Similarly, prices per member per 30 days and per ACR20 responder have been decrease for sequences together with tofacitinib versus sequences with out.

These financial savings arose due to decrease ADR and drug acquisition/administration prices for sequences together with tofacitinib. Deterministic sensitivity analyses confirmed these outcomes to be strong.This evaluation means that together with tofacitinib in the remedy of lively PsA in csDMARD-IR or TNFi-IR sufferers is a cost-saving various to sequences with out tofacitinib, doubtlessly lowering prices for PsA superior therapies by as much as $8.four million over 2 years for payers insuring 1 million people.

This work was sponsored by Pfizer Inc. Bungey is an worker of Decision Resources Group, which obtained monetary assist from Pfizer Inc to develop the treatment-cost mannequin used in the growth of this manuscript. Chang-Douglass was an worker of Decision Resources Group at the time of the evaluation. During growth of this publication, Chang-Douglass began a job at the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE).

The publication solely displays her views and doesn’t replicate the views of NICE. Hsu, Cappelleri, Young, and Woolcott are staff of Pfizer Inc and personal inventory or inventory choices in Pfizer Inc. The knowledge reported in this manuscript have been beforehand offered at the American College of Rheumatology Annual Scientific Meeting; October 19-24, 2018; Chicago, IL, and the AMCP Annual Meeting and Expo; March 25-28, 2019; San Diego, CA.

Antagonistes du récepteur CCR5 et an infection par le VIH-1 : bases et conséquences de cette approche thérapeutique

CCR5 molecule is a chemokine receptor with an essential position in infectious illnesses; not solely is it the major coreceptor for HIV-1, but it surely has additionally been concerned in the immune protection towards varied transmissible brokers. CCR5 antagonists represent a brand new class of antiretrovirals.

Three molecules of this class have reached phases 2B and three of scientific growth: aplaviroc (GlaxoSmithKine), vicriviroc (Schering-Plough) and maraviroc (Pfizer). The growth of aplaviroc was stopped due to some instances of drug-induced hepatitis.

In ACTG 5211 and Motivate trials, including vicriviroc (in part three trials) or maraviroc (now permitted for scientific use) respectively to an optimized background routine in treatment-experienced sufferers has resulted in a big virologic profit.

The place of this new therapeutic class in methods of preliminary, change or rescue remedy wants additional investigation, and its curiosity in immunological non-responders, in extreme immunosuppressed sufferers or in topics harbouring non-R5 HIV-1 strains, stays to be addressed. Major considerations about their use nonetheless stay, together with long-term tolerability, the threat of inducing an R5 to X4 change, significantly in compartments apart from blood, and the threat of interfering with some immune responses.