Home>>Lipids>> Sphingolipids>>SOBRAC

SOBRAC Sale

目录号 : GC49666

An inhibitor of acid ceramidase

SOBRAC Chemical Structure

Cas No.:362678-28-2

规格 价格 库存 购买数量
1 mg
¥872.00
现货
5 mg
¥2,840.00
现货
10 mg
¥4,806.00
现货

电话:400-920-5774 Email: sales@glpbio.cn

Customer Reviews

Based on customer reviews.

Sample solution is provided at 25 µL, 10mM.

产品文档

Quality Control & SDS

View current batch:

产品描述

SOBRAC is an irreversible inhibitor of acid ceramidase (Ki = 29.7 nM) and a derivative of the acid ceramidase inhibitor SABRAC .1

1.OrdÓÑez, Y.F., Abad, J.L., Aseeri, M., et al.Activity-based imaging of acid ceramidase in living cellsJ. Am. Chem. Soc.141(19)7736-7742(2019)

Chemical Properties

Cas No. 362678-28-2 SDF Download SDF
Canonical SMILES CCCCCCCCCCCCC/C=C/[C@@H](O)[C@@H](NC(CBr)=O)CO
分子式 C20H38BrNO3 分子量 420.4
溶解度 DMF: 2 mg/ml,DMSO: 10 mg/ml,Ethanol: 5 mg/ml,PBS (pH 7.2): insol 储存条件 -20°C
General tips 请根据产品在不同溶剂中的溶解度选择合适的溶剂配制储备液;一旦配成溶液,请分装保存,避免反复冻融造成的产品失效。
储备液的保存方式和期限:-80°C 储存时,请在 6 个月内使用,-20°C 储存时,请在 1 个月内使用。
为了提高溶解度,请将管子加热至37℃,然后在超声波浴中震荡一段时间。
Shipping Condition 评估样品解决方案:配备蓝冰进行发货。所有其他可用尺寸:配备RT,或根据请求配备蓝冰。

溶解性数据

制备储备液
1 mg 5 mg 10 mg
1 mM 2.3787 mL 11.8934 mL 23.7869 mL
5 mM 0.4757 mL 2.3787 mL 4.7574 mL
10 mM 0.2379 mL 1.1893 mL 2.3787 mL
  • 摩尔浓度计算器

  • 稀释计算器

  • 分子量计算器

质量
=
浓度
x
体积
x
分子量
 
 
 
*在配置溶液时,请务必参考产品标签上、MSDS / COA(可在Glpbio的产品页面获得)批次特异的分子量使用本工具。

计算

动物体内配方计算器 (澄清溶液)

第一步:请输入基本实验信息(考虑到实验过程中的损耗,建议多配一只动物的药量)
给药剂量 mg/kg 动物平均体重 g 每只动物给药体积 ul 动物数量
第二步:请输入动物体内配方组成(配方适用于不溶于水的药物;不同批次药物配方比例不同,请联系GLPBIO为您提供正确的澄清溶液配方)
% DMSO % % Tween 80 % saline
计算重置

Research Update

Recommendations for the organization of electrophysiology and cardiac pacing services during the COVID-19 pandemic : Latin American Heart Rhythm Society (LAHRS) in collaboration with: Colombian College Of Electrophysiology, Argentinian Society of Cardiac Electrophysiology (SADEC), Brazilian Society Of Cardiac Arrhythmias (SOBRAC), Mexican Society Of Cardiac Electrophysiology (SOMEEC)

J Interv Card Electrophysiol 2020 Nov;59(2):307-313.PMID:32350745DOI:10.1007/s10840-020-00747-5.

COVID-19 is a rapidly evolving public health emergency that has largely impacted the provision of healthcare services around the world. The challenge for electrophysiology teams is double; on one side preventing disease spread by limiting all nonessential face-to-face interactions, but at the same time ensuring continued care for patients who need it. These guidelines contain recommendations regarding triaging in order to define what procedures, device checks and clinic visits can be postponed during the pandemic. We also discuss best practices to protect patients and healthcare workers and provide guidance for the management of COVID-19 patients with arrhythmic conditions.

The 2017 hormone therapy position statement of The North American Menopause Society

Menopause 2017 Jul;24(7):728-753.PMID:28650869DOI:10.1097/GME.0000000000000921.

The 2017 Hormone Therapy Position Statement of The North American Menopause Society (NAMS) updates the 2012 Hormone Therapy Position Statement of The North American Menopause Society and identifies future research needs. An Advisory Panel of clinicians and researchers expert in the field of women's health and menopause was recruited by NAMS to review the 2012 Position Statement, evaluate new literature, assess the evidence, and reach consensus on recommendations, using the level of evidence to identify the strength of recommendations and the quality of the evidence. The Panel's recommendations were reviewed and approved by the NAMS Board of Trustees.Hormone therapy (HT) remains the most effective treatment for vasomotor symptoms (VMS) and the genitourinary syndrome of menopause (GSM) and has been shown to prevent bone loss and fracture. The risks of HT differ depending on type, dose, duration of use, route of administration, timing of initiation, and whether a progestogen is used. Treatment should be individualized to identify the most appropriate HT type, dose, formulation, route of administration, and duration of use, using the best available evidence to maximize benefits and minimize risks, with periodic reevaluation of the benefits and risks of continuing or discontinuing HT.For women aged younger than 60 years or who are within 10 years of menopause onset and have no contraindications, the benefit-risk ratio is most favorable for treatment of bothersome VMS and for those at elevated risk for bone loss or fracture. For women who initiate HT more than 10 or 20 years from menopause onset or are aged 60 years or older, the benefit-risk ratio appears less favorable because of the greater absolute risks of coronary heart disease, stroke, venous thromboembolism, and dementia. Longer durations of therapy should be for documented indications such as persistent VMS or bone loss, with shared decision making and periodic reevaluation. For bothersome GSM symptoms not relieved with over-the-counter therapies and without indications for use of systemic HT, low-dose vaginal estrogen therapy or other therapies are recommended.This NAMS position statement has been endorsed by Academy of Women's Health, American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists, American Association of Nurse Practitioners, American Medical Women's Association, American Society for Reproductive Medicine, Asociación Mexicana para el Estudio del Climaterio, Association of Reproductive Health Professionals, Australasian Menopause Society, Chinese Menopause Society, Colegio Mexicano de Especialistas en Ginecologia y Obstetricia, Czech Menopause and Andropause Society, Dominican Menopause Society, European Menopause and Andropause Society, German Menopause Society, Groupe d'études de la ménopause et du vieillissement Hormonal, HealthyWomen, Indian Menopause Society, International Menopause Society, International Osteoporosis Foundation, International Society for the Study of Women's Sexual Health, Israeli Menopause Society, Japan Society of Menopause and Women's Health, Korean Society of Menopause, Menopause Research Society of Singapore, National Association of Nurse Practitioners in Women's Health, SOBRAC and FEBRASGO, SIGMA Canadian Menopause Society, Società Italiana della Menopausa, Society of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists of Canada, South African Menopause Society, Taiwanese Menopause Society, and the Thai Menopause Society. The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists supports the value of this clinical document as an educational tool, June 2017. The British Menopause Society supports this Position Statement.

Atrial fibrillation ablation in Brazil: results of the registry of the Brazilian Society of Cardiac Arrhythmias

Arq Bras Cardiol 2007 Nov;89(5):258-62, 285-9.PMID:18066447DOI:10.1590/s0066-782x2007001700002.

Background: Aiming to define the profile of curative atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation in Brazil, the Brazilian Cardiac Arrhythmia Society [Sociedade Brasileira de Arritmias Cardíacas] (SOBRAC) created the Brazilian Registry of AF Ablation [Registro Brasileiro de Ablação da FA]. Objective: To describe the results of this registry. Methods: A questionnaire was sent to SOBRAC members asking about data on patients submitted to AF ablation between September 2005 and November, 2006. Results: A total of 29 groups from 13 states completed the forms. Of these, 22 (76%) had performed AF ablations. Between 1998 and 2001, 7 groups (32%) initiated AF ablations and between 2002 and 2006, 15 groups began to perform them (68%). From 1998 to 2006, 2,374 patients were submitted to ablation, 755 (32%) of them during the registry period. Most (70%) were males and 89% presented with paroxysmal or persistent AF. Ancillary imaging methods (intracardiac echocardiography and electroanatomic mapping) were used by 9 groups (41%). During an average five-month follow-up period, total success was 82% and success without use of antiarrhythmic agents was 57%. Nevertheless, 35% of the patients required two or more procedures. There were 111 complications (14.7%) and 2 deaths (0.26%). Conclusion: Curative AF ablation has been increasing significantly in our country, with success rates comparable to international indexes, but often more than one procedure is necessary. Despite promising results, AF ablation still results in significant morbidity. Supplementary imaging methods have been used more and more in an effort to increase efficacy and safety of the procedure. These findings should be considered by public and private funding agencies.

The 2017 hormone therapy position statement of The North American Menopause Society

Menopause 2018 Nov;25(11):1362-1387.PMID:30358733DOI:10.1097/GME.0000000000001241.

The 2017 Hormone Therapy Position Statement of The North American Menopause Society (NAMS) updates the 2012 Hormone Therapy Position Statement of The North American Menopause Society and identifies future research needs. An Advisory Panel of clinicians and researchers expert in the field of women's health and menopause was recruited by NAMS to review the 2012 Position Statement, evaluate new literature, assess the evidence, and reach consensus on recommendations, using the level of evidence to identify the strength of recommendations and the quality of the evidence. The Panel's recommendations were reviewed and approved by the NAMS Board of Trustees.Hormone therapy (HT) remains the most effective treatment for vasomotor symptoms (VMS) and the genitourinary syndrome of menopause (GSM) and has been shown to prevent bone loss and fracture. The risks of HT differ depending on type, dose, duration of use, route of administration, timing of initiation, and whether a progestogen is used. Treatment should be individualized to identify the most appropriate HT type, dose, formulation, route of administration, and duration of use, using the best available evidence to maximize benefits and minimize risks, with periodic reevaluation of the benefits and risks of continuing or discontinuing HT.For women aged younger than 60 years or who are within 10 years of menopause onset and have no contraindications, the benefit-risk ratio is most favorable for treatment of bothersome VMS and for those at elevated risk for bone loss or fracture. For women who initiate HT more than 10 or 20 years from menopause onset or are aged 60 years or older, the benefit-risk ratio appears less favorable because of the greater absolute risks of coronary heart disease, stroke, venous thromboembolism, and dementia. Longer durations of therapy should be for documented indications such as persistent VMS or bone loss, with shared decision making and periodic reevaluation. For bothersome GSM symptoms not relieved with over-the-counter therapies and without indications for use of systemic HT, low-dose vaginal estrogen therapy or other therapies are recommended.This NAMS position statement has been endorsed by Academy of Women's Health, American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists, American Association of Nurse Practitioners, American Medical Women's Association, American Society for Reproductive Medicine, Asociación Mexicana para el Estudio del Climaterio, Association of Reproductive Health Professionals, Australasian Menopause Society, Chinese Menopause Society, Colegio Mexicano de Especialistas en Ginecologia y Obstetricia, Czech Menopause and Andropause Society, Dominican Menopause Society, European Menopause and Andropause Society, German Menopause Society, Groupe d'études de la ménopause et du vieillissement Hormonal, HealthyWomen, Indian Menopause Society, International Menopause Society, International Osteoporosis Foundation, International Society for the Study of Women's Sexual Health, Israeli Menopause Society, Japan Society of Menopause and Women's Health, Korean Society of Menopause, Menopause Research Society of Singapore, National Association of Nurse Practitioners in Women's Health, SOBRAC and FEBRASGO, SIGMA Canadian Menopause Society, Società Italiana della Menopausa, Society of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists of Canada, South African Menopause Society, Taiwanese Menopause Society, and the Thai Menopause Society. The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists supports the value of this clinical document as an educational tool, June 2017. The British Menopause Society supports this Position Statement.