Simulations Abstract Requirements
Organization
All abstract submissions are required to be structured under these headings:
-
Purpose
-
Methods
-
Results
-
Conclusions
Abstracts that are not organized in this manner will not be reviewed. If you
have questions about the content or topic placement of your abstract, contact
AAPS at 703-248-4792.
Back to Abstract Requirements
Size
The maximum size for your abstract is 300 words (excluding title and author
block). If you include a graphic or table, reduce the character count
accordingly (1000 characters + 2 x 3.25" graphic, for example).
Please use Times New Roman for text and symbol font for symbols only. The font
size used does not matter.
Back to Abstract Requirements
Acceptance Criteria
Acceptance of the abstract for presentation will be based on the concise,
accurate presentation of new data. Criteria for rejection include lack of data,
commerciality, inconsistent or ambiguous data, reviews of literature, lack of
novelty or innovation, or failure to follow format guidelines.
It is imperative that the data is presented in the results section so that AAPS
screeners can judge the scientific value of your abstract.
The submission of multiple abstracts covering the same or similar work is
discouraged. Authors are strongly encouraged to submit one strong abstract
instead of several abstracts presenting the work in Part I, Part II, Part III,
etc. Abstracts submitted in this fashion will be rejected.
Back to Abstract Requirements
Copyright Assignment
Submission of an abstract to AAPS assigns all rights, titles, and interests,
including copyright, to the Association, and the Association will have and may
exercise all rights of whatever kind or nature in the work that now or may
hereafter be protected by the copyright laws of the United States of America
and all foreign countries.
Back to Abstract Requirements
Ethics
All scientific presentations at AAPS-sponsored events must adhere to the
highest standards of scientific ethics, including appropriate acknowledgements
or references to sources, both scientific and financial, and the absence of
promotional content or endorsement of commercial products. Conflicts of
interest should be disclosed.
Back to Abstract Requirements
Permissions/Clearances
It is the responsibility of the author(s) to obtain all necessary permissions
and clearances for all research prior to submission of the abstract. AAPS
assumes no liability or responsibility for the publication of any material that
is submitted.
Back to Abstract Requirements
Abstract Revisions
Revisions to your abstract will not be allowed after submission. Please
proofread and spell check your abstract carefully before submitting it.
Back to Abstract Requirements
Sample Abstract
Sample Abstract
Purpose.
To compare Caco-2 monolayer permeability
coefficients to intestinal drug permeation rates constants for the
human
gastrointestinal tract after clinical dosing of oral solid dosage
forms.
Methods.
Compounds were selected to represent the Biopharmaceutical
Classification of Drugs: High Permeability/High Solubility (metoprolol
tartrate), High Permeability/Low Solubility (piroxicam) and Low
Permeability/High
Solubility (ranitidine HCl). Four formulations of each drug were
administered
in human clinical studies in a cross-over design and drug permeation
rate
constants were estimated from:
F
a
= f
a
-1(1 - a(a-1)
-1
(1 -F
d
) + (a - 1) -1(1 -F
d
)
a
), where
F
a
is the fraction of the total amount of drug absorbed
at time
t
,
fa
the fraction of the dose absorbed at
t
= 8, a is the ratio of the first-order permeation rate constant
(
k
p
) to the first-order
dissolution rate constant (
k
d
) and
F
d
is the
fraction of the dose dissolved
in vitro
at time
t
.
Dissolution tests were performed using the USP procedure.
Results.
Caco-2 monolayer permeability coefficients followed a rank-order
relationship to
k
p
. Permeability
coefficients for metoprolol tartrate, piroxicam and ranitidine HCl were
1.07x10
-5
, 9.13x10
-5
and 4.25x10
-7
(cm/sec), respectively. Intestinal first-order permeation rate
constants
were 0.762, 9.00 and 0.597 (hr
-1
), respectively.
Conclusions.
Results suggest that Caco-2 monolayer permeability may
be indicative of "clinical" human intestinal permeation rate.
|
| 
