chronic myeloid leukemia
Description Details Attached Files (16)
Assignment type : Lab Report
The Report should be as concise as possible and written in a style that is accessible to the broad readership.
The total word count must be 2000 (maximum) words in length (excluding bibliography/references)
A maximum of seven figures and/or tables can be included
Up to 50 references can be included
Practical Report Guidelines and marking Criteria
Example paper: Chiappinelli et al (2015)
One word processed report of 2000 (maximum) words in length (excluding bibliography/references)
Submitted via Turnitin submission only
The report should be formatted as if it were to be submitted to the Journal Cell. The Highlights, in Brief and Summary (10% final mark), Introduction (30% final mark), Results (30% final mark) and Discussion (30% final mark) sections will be marked. In addition to the level of subject expertise and critical thinking, marks will be awarded for the level of presentation of the report, using the “Suitability for publication in a peer reviewed scientific journal” guidelines; see bottom of this page.
Summary: 150 words (±10%)
The key to writing a good abstract/summary is to break it down into 5 key sentences, and then use these to structure the abstract. The sentences should contain key information ‘abstracted’ from each section of your finished report.
The first sentence. This should introduce the overall topic and the key question asked. If you can’t summarize your report into one key question, then you don’t yet understand what you’re trying to write about! Keep working at this step until you have a single, concise (and understandable) question.
The second sentence. This should be derived from your literature review/introduction and should summarise the relevance of the practical. Boil this information down to one key sentence. Don’t try to cover everything just explain how this particular practical fits into Chronic Myeloid Leukemia research and clinical testing
The third sentence. This should explain what the overall intention of the practical was
The fourth sentence This should come from the results. What experiments did you do? This is likely to be the longest sentence, but don’t overdo it! It should still be just one sentence, that you could read aloud, without having to stop for breath. Remember, an ‘abstract’ means a summary of the main ideas with most of the minute detail left out.
The fifth sentence This should come from the discussion. It should state what the key impact of your findings. It should include the the overall outcome and a summary of any implications/conclusions drawn. Why should people care about these ‘results’? What could/should they do with these findings?
Introduction: approximately 600 words
The introduction must contain at least 3 subsections.
– Subsection 1: Appropriate background literature and information on Chronic Myeloid Leukemia, as a disease, and the BCR-ABL1 fusion gene.
– Subsection 2: The use of RQ-PCR for assessing BCR-ABL1 transcript levels in CML
– Subsection 3: An overview of the key aims of the practical, what did we intend to do?
The introduction must be well and correctly referenced with up to date relevant primary literature/reviews from peer reviewed scientific journals. Appropriate web links from approved associations and governing bodies may also be included
Results: approximately 400 words.
The results should be a concise text divided into number of subsections. Each subsection should present fully processed data/results (Figures and tables) related to a specific aims/objectives of the practical. You must decide how many sections should be presented and how best to structure and order them to enable a logical progression through the experiments performed, to the ‘final result’ achieved.
All figures and/or tables must ‘support and compliment’ the text ‘explanations’ presented and must be ‘referred too’ in the text example: (Figure 1). Each figure must be ‘fitted within’ the text sections of the results, at appropriate points. Each figure must have a suitable and explanatory title and full explanatory legend (below the figure); which must provide note form information on all key data/points in the figure. Although explained in the text each figure/table should be able to to ‘stand alone’ i.e. the reader should not have to refer back to the main results and discussion text for key information on how to interpret or understand the main findings presented.
For this report the results sections must contain the following figures and tables.
See Practical: Class results for data files
Bar graphs for these figures must be created using the BioRad CFX manager program
Bar Graph Figure presenting the normalised [removed]∆∆Cq) of BCR-ABL1 (BA) expression levels, in untreated and treated samples.
You will need to set the Endogenous control (EC) as the ‘reference gene’ to create this figure
(A) Your results for (∆∆Cq) BCR-ABL1
(B) The most ‘reliable’ class data values, from the morning and/or afternoon session(s) for (∆∆Cq) of BCR-ABL1
You should decide which data values are the ‘most reliable’ to use for this figure
The figure 1 legend must explain what the overall figure shows, what part A and B show, state the regulation (expression) status of BCR-ABL1 in treated, compared to untreated samples, and the ‘significance’ of BCR-ABL1 expression, when P threshold is set as ≤0.05, untreated sample set as the ‘control sample’ and EC set as ‘reference’ gene
This table should present the data values used to create Figure 1 A and B. The table must present the Sample names, mean Cq values and SEM values. If any data value is not available it should be presented as N/A
A Standard curves figure for determination of BCR-ABL and ABL1 copy number (see MSE-4040 standard curve chart.xlsx spreadsheet in Practical: European Leukemia Network note. The legend for this figure must explain what the figure shows
This table should present the Normalised copy numbers, and % copy number for BCR-ABL1 in untreated and treated samples
See Normalised copy number (NCN) determination in Practical: European Leukemia Network
Discussion: approximately 1000 words
The discussion should have at least 3 subsections.
**Subsection 1** should be a discussion of the results you obtained in the practical. Highlight any issues that may have affected the accuracy/precision of your results and relate these to your figure 1 data. You should then discuss the figure 2 data you presented, give scientific reasons for why you choose to use and analyse this data to determine BCR-ABL1 expression in both untreated and treated.
**Subsection 2** This should be a final conclusion discussion of the ’normalised expression levels’ and normalised copy numbers of BCR-ABL1 in untreated and treated samples. Discuss what conclusions can you draw from this data, in relation to the ‘success’ of the current TKI therapy regime for the patient.
**Subsection 3** Here you should finally discuss what treatment options you recommend for the patient, based on your discussion of subsections 1 and 2, and discuss other further ‘tests’ that should be carried out to validate this treatment option. All the discussion sections should be well referenced.
Suitability for publication in a peer reviewed scientific journal
Note for students with PLSP, this criteria will be applied in the context of their specific PLSP guidelines
In addition to the knowledge and critical thinking understanding this assessment will gauge the ‘presentation’ quality of report as a whole. It will judge the quality of and how clear and easily interpreted are the figures and tables, the level of concise Scientific English used and the quality/quantity of referencing in the text and final bibliography.
Presentation quality of the data:
All figures must be presented as outlined in the guidelines and the template document. All figures must be fully processed with key all data clear and unobscured. Figures must be fully annotated (e.g. arrows, lane numbers, sample identification, etc. Annotations must not obscure any figure data.
You’re writing this thesis/report for scientists, who expect to read accurate unambiguous scientific English. Sentences like ‘the band is bright’ or ‘I saw a fat band in the gel’ are examples of poor scientific English. Band 1 shows a higher intensity relative to band 2, indicating it contains a higher concentration of DNA’ is an example of higher quality scientific English. If, for example, you can attach figures to the intensity, and refer to these either in a table or the main text, even better.
Quality/quantity of referencing and final bibliography
For research to pass ‘peer review’ and be published in a quality journal, the paper presenting it must contain sufficient current relevant background literature to support the experimental plan, and set the findings and final discussion/conclusions into context. Without such referencing you will not be able to publish your research in a quality journal.
this an example
result will send later
Academic Level: –
Volume of 7 pages (1925 words)
Type of service: Custom writing