|
Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
|
Comparison of Assay Technologies for a Nuclear Receptor Assay Screen Reveals Differences in the Sets of Identified Functional Antagonists
Xiang Wu
Exelixis, South San Francisco, CA
J. Fraser Glickman
Novartis Institute for Biomedical Research, Summit, NJ
Benjamin R. Bowen
Novartis Institute for Biomedical Research, Summit, NJ
Matthew A. Sills
Pharmacopeia, Princeton, NJ
Many assay technologies currently exist to develop high-throughput screening assays, and the number of choices continues to increase. Results from a previous study comparing assay technologies in our laboratory do not support the common assumption that the same hits would be found regardless of which assay technology is used. To extend this investigation, a nuclear receptor antagonist assay was developed using 3 assay formats: AlphaScreen, time-resolved fluorescence (TRF), and time-resolved fluorescence resonance energy transfer (TR-FRET). Compounds ( 42,000) from the Novartis library were evaluated in all 3 assay formats. A total of 128 compounds were evaluated in dose-response experiments, and 109 compounds were confirmed active from all 3 formats. The AlphaScreen, TRF, and TR-FRET assay technologies identified 104, 23, and 57 active compounds, respectively, with only 18 compounds active in all 3 assay formats. A total of 128 compounds were evaluated in a cell-based functional assay, and 35 compounds demonstrated activity in this cellular assay. Furthermore, 34, 11, and 16 hits that were originally identified in the dose-response experiment by AlphaScreen, TRF, and TR-FRET assay technologies, respectively, were functionally active. The results of the study indicated that AlphaScreen identified the greatest number of functional antagonists.
Key Words: high-throughput screening • nuclear receptor assay screens • AlphaScreen • time-resolved fluorescence (TRF) • time-resolved fluorescence resonance energy transfer (TR-FRET)
Journal of Biomolecular Screening, Vol. 8, No. 4,
381-392 (2003)
DOI: 10.1177/1087057103256466
 CiteULike  Complore  Connotea  Del.icio.us  Digg  Reddit  Technorati  Twitter What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
|
|
 
M. Harndahl, S. Justesen, K. Lamberth, G. Roder, M. Nielsen, and S. Buus
Peptide Binding to HLA Class I Molecules: Homogenous, High-Throughput Screening, and Affinity Assays
J Biomol Screen,
February 1, 2009;
14(2):
173 - 180.
[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]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
O. Von Ahsen, A. Schmidt, M. Klotz, and K. Parczyk
Assay Concordance between SPA and TR-FRET in High-Throughput Screening
J Biomol Screen,
September 1, 2006;
11(6):
606 - 616.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
P. W. Woodward, C. Williams, A. Sewing, and N. Benson
Improving the Design and Analysis of High-Throughput Screening Technology Comparison Experiments Using Statistical Modeling
J Biomol Screen,
February 1, 2006;
11(1):
5 - 12.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
J.-h. Zhang, X. Wu, and M. A. Sills
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,
October 1, 2005;
10(7):
695 - 704.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
X. Wu, M. A. Sills, and J.-H. Zhang
Further Comparison of Primary Hit Identification by Different Assay Technologies and Effects of Assay Measurement Variability
J Biomol Screen,
September 1, 2005;
10(6):
581 - 589.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
D. Sun, A. Whitty, J. Papadatos, M. Newman, J. Donnelly, S. Bowes, and S. Josiah
Adopting a Practical Statistical Approach for Evaluating Assay Agreement in Drug Discovery
J Biomol Screen,
August 1, 2005;
10(5):
508 - 516.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A. Von Leoprechting, R. Kumpf, S. Menzel, D. Reulle, R. Griebel, M. J. Valler, and F. H. Buttner
Miniaturization and Validation of a High-Throughput Serine Kinase Assay Using the Alpha Screen Platform
J Biomol Screen,
December 1, 2004;
9(8):
719 - 725.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
