|
Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
|
 |
Quality Assessment and Analysis of Biogen Idec Compound Library
Scott Bowes1,
Dongyu Sun2*,
Azita Kaffashan3,
Chenhui Zeng4,
Claudio Chuaqui2,
Xiaoping Hronowski2,
Alex Buko2,
Xin Zhang2,
Serene Josiah2
1 BiogenIdec, Cambridge, MA.; Current address: Novartis Institutes for BioMedical Research, Cambridge, MA.
2 BiogenIdec, Cambridge, MA.
3 BiogenIdec, Cambridge, MA.; Current address: Dionex Corporation, Sunnyvale, CA.
4 BiogenIdec, Cambridge, MA.; Current address: Beyond Genomics Medicine, Waltham, MA.
* To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: dongyu.sun{at}biogenidec.com.
 |
Abstract |
|---|
A subset of the compound repository for lead identification at Biogen Idec was characterized for its chemical stability over a 3-year period. Compounds were stored at 4 °C as 10 mM DMSO stocks, and a small subset of compounds was stored as lyophilized dry films. Compound integrity of 470 discrete compounds (Compound Set I) and 1917 combinatorial chemistry-derived compounds (Compound Set II) was evaluated by liquid chromatography/mass spectrometry from the time of acquisition into the library collection and after 3 years of storage. Loss of compound integrity over the 3 years of storage was observed across the 2 subsets tested. Of Compound Set I, 63% of samples retained > 80% purity, whereas 57% of samples from Compound Set II had purity greater than 60%. The stability of the lyophilized samples was superior to the samples stored as DMSO solution. Although storage at 4 °C as DMSO solution was adequate for the majority of compounds, the authors observed and quantified the level of degradation within the compound collection. Their study provides general insight into compound storage and selection of library subsets for future lead identification activities.
Key Words:
compound management, compound purity analysis, compound precipitation, chemical stability, LC/MS
First published on September 6, 2006, doi:10.1177/1087057106290993
Journal of Biomolecular Screening 2006;11:828.
A more recent version of this article appeared on October 1, 2006

CiteULike Complore Connotea Del.icio.us Digg Reddit Technorati Twitter What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:

|
 |

|
 |
 
Z. Blaxill, S. Holland-Crimmin, and R. Lifely
Stability Through the Ages: The GSK Experience
J Biomol Screen,
June 1, 2009;
14(5):
547 - 556.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
W. P. Janzen and I. G. Popa-Burke
Review: Advances in Improving the Quality and Flexibility of Compound Management
J Biomol Screen,
June 1, 2009;
14(5):
444 - 451.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
R. MacArthur, W. Leister, H. Veith, P. Shinn, N. Southall, C. P. Austin, J. Inglese, and D. S. Auld
Monitoring Compound Integrity With Cytochrome P450 Assays and qHTS
J Biomol Screen,
June 1, 2009;
14(5):
538 - 546.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
I. Burr, T. Winchester, W. Keighley, and A. Sewing
Compound Management Beyond Efficiency
J Biomol Screen,
June 1, 2009;
14(5):
485 - 491.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
C. Engeloch, U. Schopfer, I. Muckenschnabel, F. Le Goff, H. Mees, K. Boesch, and M. Popov
Stability of Screening Compounds in Wet DMSO
J Biomol Screen,
December 1, 2008;
13(10):
999 - 1006.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
 |
|
|
|