Journal
JOURNAL OF BIOMOLECULAR SCREENING
Volume 10, Issue 3, Pages 225-234Publisher
SAGE PUBLICATIONS INC
DOI: 10.1177/1087057104272546
Keywords
acid sphingomyelinase; lipid retention; atherosclerosis; high-throughput screening; hydrophobic interaction chromatography
Funding
- NHLBI NIH HHS [HL 56984] Funding Source: Medline
Ask authors/readers for more resources
Secreted extracellular acid sphingomyelinase (sASM) activity has been suggested to promote atherosclerosis by enhancing subendothelial aggregation and retention of low-density lipoprotein (LDL) with resultant foam cell formation. Compounds that inhibit sASM activity, at neutral pH, may prevent lipid retention and thus would be expected to be anti-atherosclerotic. With the goal of identifying novel compounds that inhibit sASM at pH 7.4, a high-throughput screen was perfort-ned. Initial screening was run using a modification of a proven system that measures the hydrolysis of radiolabeled sphingomyelin presented in detergent micelles in a 96-well forinat. Separation of the radiolabeled aqueous phosphory1choline reaction product from uncleaved sphingomyelin lipid substrate was achieved by chloroform/methanol extraction. During the screening campaign, a novel extraction procedure was developed to eliminate the use of the hazardous organic reagents. This new procedure exploited the ability of uncleaved, radiolabeled lipid substrate to interact with hydrophobic phenyl-sepharose beads. A comparison of the organic-based and the bead-based extraction sASM screening assays revealed Z factor values ranging from 0.7 to 0.95 for both formats. In addition, both assay formats led to the identification of sub- to low micromolar inhibitors of sASM at pH 7.4 with similar IC50 values. Subsequent studies demonstrated that both methods were also adaptable to run in a 384-well format. In contrast to the results observed at neutral pH, however, only the organic extraction assay was capable of accurately measuring sASM activity at its pH optimum of 5.0. The advantages and disadvantages of both sASM assay formats are discussed. (Journal of Biomolecular Screening 2005:225-234).
Authors
I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.
Reviews
Recommended
No Data Available