Which aspects of HTS are empirically correlated with downstream success?

Current Opinion in Drug Discovery and Development

Volumn 11, Issue 3, 2008, Pages 327-337

  Bender, A ^a   Bojanic, D ^a   Davies, J W ^a   Crisman, T J ^a   Mikhailov, D ^a   Scheiber, J ^a   Jenkins, J L ^a   Deng, Z ^a   Hill, W Adam G ^a   Popov, M ^b   Jacoby, E ^b   Glick, M ^a  

^a NOVARTIS INSTITUTES FOR BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH   (United States)

^b NOVARTIS PHARMA AG   (Switzerland)

Author keywords

Assay; Assay development; Assay technology; Biochemical; Cell based; Cellular; Compound profiling; High throughput screening; Hit to lead; in silico; Lead declaration

Indexed keywords

PHOSPHOTRANSFERASE;

ASSAY; BIOCHEMISTRY; CELL ASSAY; COMPUTER MODEL; CORRELATIONAL STUDY; DRUG DESIGN; DRUG INDUSTRY; DRUG RESEARCH; DRUG SCREENING; DRUG TARGETING; HIGH THROUGHPUT SCREENING; MEDICAL TECHNOLOGY; POWDER; PROTEIN INTERACTION; QUALITY CONTROL; REVIEW; STRUCTURE ACTIVITY RELATION;

ANIMALS; BIOLOGICAL ASSAY; DRUG DESIGN; HUMANS; MOLECULAR STRUCTURE; POWDERS; PROGRAM EVALUATION; PROTEIN CONFORMATION; PROTEIN INTERACTION MAPPING; SMALL MOLECULE LIBRARIES; STRUCTURE-ACTIVITY RELATIONSHIP; TECHNOLOGY, PHARMACEUTICAL;

EID: 42449106583     PISSN: 13676733     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Review

References (52)

1. Bajorath J: Integration of virtual and high-throughput screening. Nat Rev Drug Discov (2002) 1(11):882-894. • Describes the integration of experimental and in silico screening methods, namely knowledge-based approaches to biological screening.
2. Davies JW, Glick M, Jenkins JL: Streamlining lead discovery by aligning in silico and high-throughput screening. Curr Opin Chem Biol (2006) 10(4):343-351. • Describes in silico techniques where Novartis achieved best practice and how these techniques are applied in hit finding.
3. Pereira DA, Williams JA: Origin and evolution of high-throughput screening. Br J Pharmacol (2007) 152(1):53-61.
4. Spring DR: Diversity-oriented synthesis; A challenge for synthetic chemists. Org Biomol Chem (2003) 1(22):3867-3870.
5. Fergus S, Bender A, Spring DR: Assessment of structural diversity in combinatorial synthesis. Curr Opin Chem Biol (2005) 9(3): 304-309.
6. Thomas GL, Wyatt EE, Spring DR: Enriching chemical space with diversity-oriented synthesis. Curr Opin Drug Discovery Dev (2006) 9(6):700-712.
7. Gordon EJ: Small-molecule screening: It takes a village. ACS Chem Biol (2007) 2(1):9-16.
8. Entzeroth M: Emerging trends in high-throughput screening. Curr Opin Pharmacol (2003) 3(5):522-529.
9. Fox S, Farr-Jones S, Sopchak L, Boggs A, Nicely HW, Khoury R, Biros M: High-throughput screening: Update on practices and success. J Biomol Screen (2006) 11(7):864-869.
10. Brandt DW: Core system model: Understanding the impact of reliability on high-throughput screening systems. Drug Disc Today (1998) 3(2):61-68.
11. Parker CN, Schreyer SK: Application of chemoinformatics to high-throughput screening: Practical considerations. Methods Mol Biol (2004) 275:85-110.
12. Kevorkov D, Makarenkov V: Statistical analysis of systematic errors in high-throughput screening. J Biomol Screen (2005) 10(6):557-567.
13. Makarenkov V, Zentilli P, Kevorkov D, Gagarin A, Malo N, Nadon R: An efficient method for the detection and elimination of systematic error in high-throughput screening. Bioinformatics (2007) 23(13):1648- 1657.
14. Zhang JH, Chung TD, Oldenburg KR: Confirmation of primary active substances from high-throughput screening of chemical and biological populations: A statistical approach and practical considerations. J Comb Chem (2000) 2(3):258-265.
15. Moore K, Rees S: Cell-based versus isolated target screening: How lucky do you feel? J Biomol Screen (2001) 6(2):69-74. • Provides a good review discussing the pros and cons of cell-based and biochemical assays.
16. Sundberg SA: High-throughput and ultra-high-throughput screening: Solution- and cell-based approaches. Curr Opin Biotechnol (2000) 11(1):47-53.
17. Warrior U, Gopalakrishnan SM, Traphagen L, Freiberg G, Towne D, Humphrey P, Kofron J, Burns DJ: Maximizing the identification of leads from compound mixtures. Lett Drug Des Discovery (2007) 4(3):215-223.
18. Glick M, Klon AE, Acklin P, Davies JW: Prioritization of high-throughput screening data of compound mixtures using molecular similarity. Mol Physics (2003) 101(9):1325-1328.
19. Hann M, Hudson B, Lewell X, Lifely R, Miller L, Ramsden N: Strategic pooling of compounds for high-throughput screening. J Chem Inf Comput Sci (1999) 39(5):897-902.
20. Turlais F, Hardcastle A, Rowlands M, Newbatt Y, Bannister A, Kouzarides T, Workman P, Aherne GW: High-throughput screening for identification of small molecule inhibitors of histone acetyltransferases using scintillating microplates (FlashPlate). Anal Biochem (2001) 298(1):62-68.
21. Kowski TJ, Wu JJ: Fluorescence polarization is a useful technology for reagent reduction in assay miniaturization. Comb Chem High Throughput Screen (2000) 3(5):437-444.
22. Klenk JA: Characteristics and value of machine learning for imaging in high-content screening. Methods Mol Biol (2007) 356:83-94.
23. Warner G, Illy C, Pedro L, Roby P, Bossé R: AlphaScreen kinase HTS platforms. Curr Med Chem (2004) 11(6):721-730.
24. Glickman JF, Wu X, Mercuri R, Illy C, Bowen BR, He Y, Sills M: A comparison of AlphaScreen, TR-FRET, and TRF as assay methods for FXR nuclear receptors. J Biomol Screen (2002) 7(1):3-10.
25. Guilbault G: Use of luminescence spectroscopy for assay of pharmaceutical compounds. J Pharm Biomed Anal (1986) 4(6):771-775.
26. Schenborn E, Groskreutz D: Reporter gene vectors and assays. Mol Biotechnol (1999) 13(1):29-44.
27. 2+] using the fluorometric imaging plate reader (FLIPR). Methods Mol Biol (1999) 114:125-133.
28. Rüdiger M, Haupts U, Moore KJ, Pope AJ: Single-molecule detection technologies in miniaturized high-throughput screening: Binding assays for G-protein-coupled receptors using fluorescence intensity distribution analysis and fluorescence anisotropy. J Biomol Screen (2001) 6(1):29-37.
29. Parnham AJ, Tarbit IF: 'Delfia' and 'Amerlite': Two sensitive nonisotopic immunoassay systems for assay of thyrotropin compared. Clin Chem (1987) 33(8):1421-1424.
30. Robertson DR: A competitive inhibition enzyme-linked immunosorbant assay for frog calcitonin. Gen Comp Endocrinol (1981) 45(1):12-20.
31. McCaman MW, McCaman RE, Lees GJ: Liquid cation exchange - A basis for sensitive radiometric assays for aromatic amino acid decarboxylases. Anal Biochem (1972) 45(1):242-252.
32. Lebakken CS, Hee Chol K, Vogel KW: A fluorescence lifetime-based binding assay to characterize kinase inhibitors. J Biomol Screen (2007) 12(6):828-841.
33. Feng BY, Shoichet BK: Synergy and antagonism of promiscuous inhibition in multiple-compound mixtures. J Med Chem (2006) 49(7):2151-2154.
34. Mercier KA, Powers R: Determining the optimal size of small molecule mixtures for high-throughput NMR screening. J Biomol NMR (2005) 31(3):243-258.
35. Glick M, Klon AE, Acklin P, Davies JW: Enrichment of extremely noisy high-throughput screening data using a naïve Bayes classifier. J Biomol Screen (2004) 9(1):32-36.
36. Xia X, Maliski EG, Gallant P, Rogers D: Classification of kinase inhibitors using a Bayesian model. J Med Chem (2004) 47(18):4463-4470.
37. Azzaoui K, Hamon J, Faller B, Whitebread S, Jacoby E, Bender A, Jenkins JL, Urban L: Modeling promiscuity based on in vitro safety pharmacology profiling data. ChemMedChem (2007) 2(6):874-880.
38. Nidhi, Glick M, Davies JW, Jenkins JL: Prediction of biological targets for compounds using multiple-category Bayesian models trained on chemogenomics databases. J Chem Inf Model (2006) 46(3):1124- 1133. • Provides a seminal paper describing the deconvolution of a generic phenotypic observation to a specific protein target using a biologically annotated chemical database.
39. Von Ahsen O, Schmidt A, Klotz M, Parczyk K: Assay concordance between SPA and TR-FRET in high-throughput screening. J Biomol Screen (2006) 11(6):606-616.
40. Sills MA, Weiss D, Pham Q, Schweitzer R, Wu X, Wu JJ: Comparison of assay technologies for a tyrosine kinase assay generates different results in high-throughput screening. J Biomol Screen (2002) 7(3):191-214. • Shows that different detection methods are likely to yield different hitlists in HTS.
41. Wu X, Sills MA, Zhang JH: Further comparison of primary hit identification by different assay technologies and effects of assay measurement variability. J Biomol Screen (2005) 10(6): 581-589.
42. Zhang JH, Wu X, Sills MA: Probing the primary screening efficiency by multiple replicate testing: A quantitative analysis of hit confirmation and false screening results of a biochemical assay. J Biomol Screen (2005) 10(7):695-704.
43. Pearce BC, Sofia MJ, Good AC, Drexler DM, Stock DA: An empirical process for the design of high-throughput screening deck filters. J Chem Inf Model (2006) 46(3):1060-1068.
44. Roche O, Schneider P, Zuegge J, Guba W, Kansy M, Alanine A, Bleicher K, Danel F, Gutknecht EM, Rogers-Evans M, Neidhart W et al: Development of a virtual screening method for identification of 'frequent hitters' in compound libraries. J Med Chem (2002) 45(1):137-142.
45. Brown N, Zehender H, Azzaoui K, Schuffenhauer A, Mayr LM, Jacoby E: A chemoinformatics analysis of hit lists obtained from high-throughput affinity-selection screening. J Biomol Screen (2006) 11(2):123-130.
46. Crisman TJ, Parker CN, Jenkins JL, Scheiber J, Thoma M, Kang ZB, Kim R, Bender A, Nettles JH, Davies JW, Glick M: Understanding false positives in reporter gene assays: In silico chemogenomics approaches to prioritize cell-based HTS data. J Chem Inf Model (2007) 47(4):1319-1327.
47. Faller B, Wang J, Zimmerlin A, Bell L, Hamon J, Whitebread S, Azzaoui K, Bojanic D, Urban L: High-throughput in vitro profiling assays: Lessons learnt from experiences at Novartis. Expert Opin Drug Metab Toxicol (2006) 2(6):823-833.
48. Whitebread S, Hamon J, Bojanic D, Urban L: In vitro safety pharmacology profiling: An essential tool for successful drug development. Drug Disc Today (2005) 10(21-24):1421-1433.
49. Williams PD: The role of pharmacological profiling in safety assessment. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol (1990) 12(3 Pt 1):238-252.
50. Bender A, Scheiber J, Glick M, Davies JW, Azzaoui K, Hamon J, Urban L, Whitebread S, Jenkins JL: Analysis of pharmacology data and the prediction of adverse drug reactions and off-target effects from chemical structure. ChemMedChem (2007) 2(6):861-873. • Provides a seminal paper describing the links between in silico models for adverse drug reactions and in vitro binding assays.
51. Bender A, Jenkins JL, Glick M, Deng Z, Nettles JH, Davies JW: 'Bayes affinity fingerprints' improve retrieval rates in virtual screening and define orthogonal bioactivity space: When are multitarget drugs a feasible concept? J Chem Inf Model (2006) 46(6):2445-2456.
52. Bemis GW, Murcko MA: The properties of known drugs. 1. Molecular frameworks. J Med Chem (1996) 39(15):2887-2893.