High-throughput drug discovery: What can we expect from HTS?

Drug Discovery Today

Volumn 10, Issue 1, 2005, Pages 17-22

  Gribbon, Phillip ^a   Andreas, Sewing ^a  

^a PFIZER GLOBAL RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

ADME assays; Chemical Biology; Compound files; Compound optimization; Drug Discovery; Pharmaceutical Science; Physicochemical; Pipelines; Techniques Methods

Indexed keywords

COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; HIGH THROUGHPUT SCREENING; MOLECULAR WEIGHT; PHYSICAL CHEMISTRY; REVIEW; SOLUBILITY;

EID: 12844283957     PISSN: 13596446     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S1359-6446(04)03275-1     Document Type: Short Survey

References (45)

1. Peakman T., et al. Delivering the power of discovery in large pharmaceutical organizations. Drug Discov. Today. 8:2003;203-211
2. Gershell L.J., Atkins J.H. A brief history of novel drug discovery technologies. Nat. Rev. Drug Discov. 2:2003;321-327
3. Hefti, E. and Bolten, B.M. (2003) Advances in high-throughput screening - do they lead to new drugs? Decision Resources (http://www.dresources.com/ stellent/groups/public/documents/abstract/dr_005477.hcsp)
4. Lipinski C., et al. Experimental and computational approaches to estimate solubility and permeability in drug discovery and development settings. Adv. Drug Deliv. Rev. 23:1997;3-25
5. Darvas F., et al. In silico and ex silico ADME approaches for drug discovery. Curr. Top. Med. Chem. 2:2002;1287-1304
6. Di L., Kerns E.H. Profiling dug-like properties in discovery research. Curr. Opin. Chem. Biol. 7:2003;402-408
7. Curatolo W. Physical chemical properties of oral drug candidates in the discovery and exploratory development setting. Pharm. Sci. Technol. Today. 1:1998;387-393
8. Lipinski C.A. Drug-like properties and the causes of poor solubility and poor permeability. J. Pharmacol. Toxicol. Methods. 44:2000;235-249
9. Wenlock M.C., et al. A comparison of physicochemical property profiles of development and marketed oral drugs. J. Med. Chem. 46:2003;1250-1256
10. Vieth M., et al. Characteristic physical properties and structural fragments of marketed oral drugs. J. Med. Chem. 47:2004;224-232
11. Everett J., et al. The application of non-combinatorial chemistry to lead discovery. Drug Discov. Today. 6:2001;779-786
12. Rishton G.M. Reactive compounds and in vitro false positives in HTS. Drug Discov. Today. 2:1997;382-384
13. Rishton G.M. Nonleadlikeness and leadlikeness in biochemical screening. Drug Discov. Today. 8:2003;86-96
14. Walters W.P., Namchuk M. Designing screens: how to make your hits a hit. Nat. Rev. Drug Discov. 2:2003;259-266
15. Teague S.J., et al. The design of leadlike combinatorial libraries. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. Engl. 38:1999;3743-3747
16. Oprea T.I. Property distribution of drug-related chemical databases. J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des. 14:2000;251-264
17. Muegge I. Selection criteria for drug-like compounds. Med. Res. Rev. 23:2003;302-321
18. Oprea T.I., et al. Is there a difference between leads and drugs? A historical perspective. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 41:2001;1308-1315
19. Opera T.I. Current trends in lead discovery: are we looking for the appropriate properties? J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des. 16:2002;325-334
20. Kuhn P., et al. The genesis of high-throughput structure-based drug discovery using protein crystallography. Curr. Opin. Chem. Biol. 6:2002;704-710
21. Stahura F.L., et al. Methods for compound selection focused on hits and application in drug discovery. J. Mol. Graph. Model. 20:2002;439-446
22. Laird E.R., Blake J.F. Structure-based generation of viable leads from small combinatorial libraries. Curr. Opin. Drug Discov. Devel. 7:2004;354-359
23. Jimonet P., Jaeger R. Strategies for designing GPCR-focused libraries and screening sets. Curr. Opin. Drug Discov. Devel. 7:2004;325-333
24. Valler M.J., Green D. Diversity screening versus focussed screening in drug discovery. Drug Discov. Today. 5:2000;286-293
25. Lipinski C.A. Avoiding investments in doomed drugs. Curr. Drug Disc. 4:2001;17-19
26. Spencer R.W. High-throughput screening of historic collections: observations on file size, biological targets, and file diversity. Biotechnol. Bioeng. 61:1998;61-67
27. Harper G., et al. Design of a compound screening selection for use in high-throughput screening. Comb. Chem. High Throughput Screen. 7:2004;63-71
28. Bajorath J. Integration of virtual and high-throughput screening. Nat. Rev. Drug Discov. 1:2002;882-894
29. Wintner E.A., Moallemi C.C. Quantized surface complementarity diversity (QSCD): a model based small molecule-target complementarity. J. Med. Chem. 43:2000;1993-2006
30. Stahura F.L., et al. Molecular scaffold based design and comparison of combinatorial libraries focused on the ATP-binding site of protein kinases. J. Mol. Graph. Model. 17:1999;1-9
31. Balakin K.V. Property based design of GPCR-targeted libraries. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 42:2002;1332-1342
32. Young S.S., et al. Initial compound selection for sequential screening. Curr. Opin. Drug Discov. Devel. 5:2002;422-427
33. Kuntz I.D., et al. The maximal affinity of ligands. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 96:1999;9997-10002
34. Hann M.M., et al. Molecular complexity and its impact on the probability of finding leads for drug discovery. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 41:2001;856-864
35. Hopkins A.L., et al. Ligand efficiency: a useful metric for lead selection. Drug Discov. Today. 9:2004;430-431
36. Viswanadhan V.N.V., et al. Knowledge-based approaches in the design and selection of compound libraries for drug discovery. Curr. Opin. Drug Discov. Devel. 5:2002;400-406
37. Alanine A., et al. Lead generation - enhancing the success of drug discovery by investing in the hit to lead process. Comb. Chem. High Throughput Screen. 6:2003;51-66
38. Bleicher K.H., et al. Hit and lead generation: beyond high-throughput screening. Nat. Rev. Drug Discov. 2:2003;369-378
39. Kerns E.H., Di L. Pharmaceutical profiling in drug discovery. Drug Discov. Today. 8:2003;316-323
40. Caldwell G.W., et al. The new pre-preclinical paradigm: compound optimization in early and late phase drug discovery. Curr. Top Med. Chem. 1:2001;353-366
41. Smith D.A. Hello Drug Discovery, I am from Insilico, take me to your President. Drug Discov. Today. 7:2002;1080-1081
42. Garyantes T. 1536-well assay plates: when do they make sense? Drug Discov. Today. 7:2002;489-490
43. Schmid E.F., Smith D.A. Should scientific innovation be managed? Drug Discov. Today. 7:2002;941-944
44. Golebiowski A., et al. Lead compounds discovered from libraries. Curr. Opin. Chem. Biol. 5:2001;273-284
45. Golebiowski A., et al. Lead compounds discovered from libraries: Part 2. Curr. Opin. Chem. Biol. 7:2003;308-325