3.9 Article

A chemoinformatics analysis of hit lists obtained from high-throughput affinity-selection screening

Journal

JOURNAL OF BIOMOLECULAR SCREENING
Volume 11, Issue 2, Pages 123-130

Publisher

SAGE PUBLICATIONS INC
DOI: 10.1177/1087057105283579

Keywords

affinity-based high-throughput screening; SpeedScreen; chemoinformatics; chemoinformatics; scaffolds; genetic algorithms; subset selection; diversity

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The high-throughput affinity-selection screening platform SpeedScreen was recently reported by the Novartis Institutes for BioMedical Research as a homogeneous, label-free screening technology with mass-spectrometry readout. SpeedScreen relies on the screening of compound mixtures with various target proteins and uses fast size-exclusion chromatography to separate target-bound from unbound substances. After disintegration of the target-binder complex, the binder molecules are identified by their molecular masses using liquid chromatography/mass spectrometry. The authors report an analysis of the molecular properties of hits obtained with SpeedScreen on 26 targets screened within the past few years at Novartis using this technology. Affinity-based SpeedScreen is a robust high-throughput screening technology that does not accumulate frequent hitters or potential covalent binders. The hits are representative of the most commonly identified scaffold classes observed for known drugs. Validated SpeedScreen hits tend to be enriched on more lipophilic and larger-molecular-weight compounds compared to the whole library. The potential for a reduced SpeedScreen screening set to be used in case only limited protein quantities are available is evaluated. Such a reduced compound set should also maximize the coverage of the high-performing regions of the chemical property and class spaces; chemoinformatics methods including genetic algorithms and divisive K-means clustering are used for this aim.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

3.9
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available