Exergoeconomic analysis of an industrial beverage mixer system.

Exergoeconomic analysis is a tool used to identify hidden costs associated with a machine or a system that cannot be identified using typical cost management techniques applied in the industry. While exergoeconomic analysis finds applications in power system innovations and optimization, it has not yet been harnessed by the manufacturing industry to reduce operating costs. The purpose of this study is to use exergoeconomic analysis to identify hidden costs in manufacturing processes, with a focus on the industrial beverage mixer system. The study proposes a methodology of identifying the hidden financial losses in the system and recommends modifying the systems operation and design as a measure to reduce costs and increase profitability. Thermodynamic and economic data for the study were obtained from manufacturing plants. An exergy cost analysis was performed using thermoeconomic analysis software. Exergoeconomic values and variables were obtained using equations based on extant literature. The results reveal that the mixer possesses a low exergoeconomic factor of 5.50% owing to the high irreversibility of the H2O reservoir, flow-mix reservoir, and carbonator. The total hidden cost of the system equaled 733.04 $/h, of which 99.0% is contributed by the mixer. Improvements to the deaeration technique for the H2O reservoir of the mixer component, as well as the H2O treatment procedure, can reduce the irreversibility of the H2O reservoir and the hidden costs.

Exergoeconomic analysis of an industrial beverage mixer system: Process data.

Data presented herein refer to the process data obtained from an industrial beverage mixer system. They include both primary and secondary thermodynamic data pertaining to the material stream flow within the system. Data collection was performed during the production process, and calorimetry experiments were performed to obtain the thermal properties of treated H2O, carbonated H2O, syrup, beverage, and carbonated beverage. These experiments were performed because the properties of these substances are not readily available in the literature, possibly because of the trade secrets of the manufacturing process. This is the first time a dataset for a beverage manufacturing environment has been generated, and it can help researchers to conduct further studies on related subjects. Therefore, data are supplementary to the study results of the Exergoeconomic Analysis of an Industrial Beverage Mixer System.

Role of integrative pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic optimization strategy in the management of Parkinson"s disease patients experiencing motor fluctuations with levodopa.

Parkinson's disease is a progressively debilitating motor neuron disease that affects the dopaminergic neurons within the nigral-striatal and surrounding pathways and which is characterized clinically by rigidity, resting tremor and bradykinesia with or without postural imbalance. Levodopa is the "gold standard" for the treatment and management of Parkinson's disease worldwide. However, following prolonged use of the drug, the "honey-moon" which was once enjoyed by patients on levodopa begins to wane. The clinical as well as the socio-economic costs associated with such failure in response to levodopa is enormous. Various approaches in the management of Parkinson's disease patients experiencing motor fluctuations with levodopa treatment have been suggested and include both pharmacologic and non-pharmacologic strategies involving invasive surgical intervention. Currently, the non-pharmacological approach, which is invasive, remains to be fully perfected and is associated with high morbidity and mortality. The use of the non-invasive, pharmacological approach is currently the most widely accepted approach but would require a review of all possible drug regimens used. This entails evaluating the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamic actions of the drug regimens used and possibly, dosage form and route of administration of the drugs. The use of levodopa formulated for transdermal or intranasal administration might help improve the ease of use and compliance. Controversy abounds as to the role of plasma pharmacokinetics of levodopa in the management of Parkinson's patients, vis a vis its dynamics at the central nerve terminal and its receptor site. However, it is worthy of mention that an integrated optimal pharmacological approach involving the peripheral, and central pharmacokinetics of levodopa as well as its central pharmacodynamics would ensure better treatment and management of this disease. In addition, the choice of alternate formulations and routes of administration will not only improve on the bioavailability and overall pharmacokinetics of levodopa, but also increase compliance. Furthermore, monitoring of both plasma and central concentrations of levodopa and its metabolites might play a major role in individualization of pharmacotherapy in special Parkinsonian patients experiencing motor fluctuations with levodopa.

Phase I study of E7820, an oral inhibitor of integrin alpha-2 expression with antiangiogenic properties, in patients with advanced malignancies.

PURPOSE: This phase I study was conducted to characterize the safety profile, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, dose-limiting toxicity (DLT), and the maximum-tolerated dose of E7820, a novel oral sulfonamide derivative with antiangiogenic properties, when administered to patients with advanced solid malignancies. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients received single daily doses of E7820 orally for 28 days in cycle 1, followed by a 7-day no-treatment period, after which time-uninterrupted daily dosing ensued. The starting dose of E7820 was 10 mg/d, which was increased to 20, 40, 70, 100, and 200 mg/d in cohorts of new patients. RESULTS: Thirty-seven patients [21 male; median age 65 (40-82] were enrolled. At 100 mg/d, 1 patient experienced a DLT consisting of grade 3 neutropenia, thrombocytopenia, and elevated liver enzymes. At the 200-mg dose level, 2 patients experienced grade 4 thrombocytopenia and neutropenia. No partial or complete responses were observed; 8 patients had stable disease (≥ 4 months), including 5 patients with protracted stable disease exceeding 6 months. Mean time to maximum plasma concentration values ranged from 1 to 12 hours, whereas mean terminal half-life values ranged from 5.6 to 8.6 hours. Flow cytometric analysis of platelet integrin α-2 expression showed a sustained greater than 50% decrease beyond day 28 in 3 of 4 patients at 200 mg, whereas moderate (<30%) decreases were observed at 70- and 100-mg dose levels. CONCLUSIONS: The recommended phase II dose of E7820 is 100 mg/d, based on a fasting schedule. E7820 downregulates integrin α-2 expression in surrogate tissues (platelets) and is associated with stable disease in a wide variety of heavily pretreated malignancies.

Concurrent administration of donepezil HCl and levodopa/carbidopa in patients with Parkinson's disease: assessment of pharmacokinetic changes and safety following multiple oral doses.

AIM: The use of acetylcholinesterase inhibitors for the treatment of comorbid Alzheimer's disease in Parkinson's disease (PD) patients stabilized on a levodopa regimen may potentially disrupt cholinergic balance. This randomized, double-blind, crossover study investigated the safety of, and possible drug-drug interaction between, donepezil HCl and levodopa/carbidopa. METHODS: Twenty-five patients with PD who were taking physician-optimized doses of levodopa/carbidopa (with daytime dosing intervals of 4-8 h) were administered once-daily doses of either donepezil HCl (5 mg) or placebo for 15 days, in two treatment periods, separated by a washout of at least 2 weeks. Some patients took a second dose of levodopa/carbidopa after 4 h, therefore subanalysis of the levodopa/carbidopa data was conducted up to 4 h and 8 h after dosing. Twenty-six healthy matched controls received open-label donepezil HCl only, for a single 15-day period. Blood samples were collected before, during and after the 15 doses of donepezil HCl for pharmacokinetic (PK) assessments. Pharmacokinetic parameters included maximum attained plasma drug concentration (C(max)), time at which C(max) is attained (t(max)), plasma drug concentration at steady state (C(ss)), and area under the drug concentration-time curve over the dosing interval. Safety assessments included monitoring adverse events, and the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) motor examination. RESULTS: The mean age of all subjects was 72.6 +/- 1.3 years. Donepezil PK assessments of PD patients receiving levodopa/carbidopa were similar to the PK results from healthy controls who received donepezil HCl only (mean AUC(0-12 h)= 281.6 +/- 17.6 and 268.6 +/- 19.9 ng.h ml(-1), respectively). Carbidopa PK were not significantly altered by the concomitant administration of multiple doses of donepezil HCl, compared with when PD patients received placebo (mean AUC(0-8 h)= 921.8 +/- 160 and 821.8 +/- 113 ng.h ml(-1), respectively). Four hours after administration of donepezil HCl in PD patients, AUC(0-4 h), C(max) and C(ss) of levodopa were higher than when PD patients received placebo (P < 0.05). Eight hours after donepezil HCl, however, only C(max) and t(max) were observed to change compared with when PD patients received placebo (mean C(max) = 2652 +/- 429 and 2077 +/- 276 ng ml(-1), respectively; mean t(max) = 1.7 +/- 0.4 and 2.9 +/- 0.5 h, respectively; P< or = 0.05). The number of PD patients who experienced at least one adverse event during the study (13/25) was higher when they received donepezil HCl than when they received placebo (5/25), but was the same as healthy subjects who received donepezil HCl only (13/26). There were no significant differences in change from baseline on the UPDRS motor examination parameters in PD patients when they took donepezil HCl and when they took placebo. CONCLUSIONS: No clinically significant drug-drug interactions between donepezil HCl and levodopa/carbidopa were observed at steady state. The small changes in the pharmacokinetics of levodopa did not result in any change in motor symptoms. Co-administration of the two drugs led to a small increase in adverse events compared with administration of levodopa/carbidopa alone in PD patients. These adverse events, however, were consistent with donepezil's cholinomimetic effect, and their incidence was comparable to that observed following the administration of donepezil HCl alone.