This Article Full Text (PDF) All Versions of this Article: 1087057105275628v1 10/6/581    most recent References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (9) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Wu, X. Articles by Zhang, J.-H. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Wu, X. Articles by Zhang, J.-H. Social Bookmarking                   What's this?

Further Comparison of Primary Hit Identification by Different Assay Technologies and Effects of Assay Measurement Variability

Exelixis

Matthew A. Sills

Pharmacopeia

Ji-Hu Zhang

Leads Discovery, Novartis Institute for Biomedical Research, Cambridge, MA

High-throughput screening (HTS) has grown rapidly in the past decade, with many advances in new assay formats, detection technologies, and laboratory automation. Recently, several studies have shown that the choice of assay technology used for the screening process is particularly important and can yield quite different primary screening outcomes. However, because the screening assays in these previous studies were performed in a single-point determination, it is not clear to what extent the difference observed in the screening results between different assay technologies is attributable to inherent assay variability and day-to-day measurement variation. To address this question, a nuclear receptor coactivator recruitment assay was carried out in 2 different assay formats, namely, AlphaScreen^TM and time-resolved fluorescence resonance energy transfer, which probed the same biochemical binding events but with different detection technologies. For each assay format, 4 independent screening runs in a typical HTS setting were completed to evaluate the run-to-run screening variability. These multiple tests with 2 assay formats allow an unambiguous comparison between the discrepancies of different assay formats and the effects of the variability of assay and screening measurements on the screening outcomes. The results provide further support that the choice of assay format or technology is a critical factor in HTS assay development.

Key Words: high-through put screening • assay comparison • Alpha Screen^TM • TR-FRET • assay variability • assay concordance

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				X. D. Zhang A New Method with Flexible and Balanced Control of False Negatives and False Positives for Hit Selection in RNA Interference High-Throughput Screening Assays J Biomol Screen, August 1, 2007; 12(5): 645 - 655. [Abstract] [PDF]

				A. K. Quercia, W. A. Lamarr, J. Myung, C. C. Ozbal, J. A. Landro, and K. J. Lumb High-Throughput Screening by Mass Spectrometry: Comparison with the Scintillation Proximity Assay with a Focused-File Screen of AKT1/PKB{alpha} J Biomol Screen, June 1, 2007; 12(4): 473 - 480. [Abstract] [PDF]

				M. A. Kashem, R. M. Nelson, J. D. Yingling, S. S. Pullen, A. S. Prokopowicz III, J. W. Jones, J. P. Wolak, G. R. Rogers, M. M. Morelock, R. J. Snow, et al. Three Mechanistically Distinct Kinase Assays Compared: Measurement of Intrinsic ATPase Activity Identified the Most Comprehensive Set of ITK Inhibitors J Biomol Screen, February 1, 2007; 12(1): 70 - 83. [Abstract] [PDF]