Literature DB >> 14567790

Comparison of assay technologies for a nuclear receptor assay screen reveals differences in the sets of identified functional antagonists.

Xiang Wu1, J Fraser Glickman, Benjamin R Bowen, Matthew A Sills.   

Abstract

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 ( approximately 42000) 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.

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2003        PMID: 14567790     DOI: 10.1177/1087057103256466

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Biomol Screen        ISSN: 1087-0571


  7 in total

1.  Ligand binding assays in the 21st Century laboratory: platforms.

Authors:  Franklin P Spriggs; Zhandong Don Zhong; Afshin Safavi; Darshana Jani; Narasaiah Dontha; Anita Kant; Jenny Ly; Lia Brilando; Karolina Österlund; Nathalie Rouleau; Saloumeh Kadkhodayan Fischer; Martin Boissonneault; Chad Ray
Journal:  AAPS J       Date:  2012-03       Impact factor: 4.009

2.  Synergy and antagonism of promiscuous inhibition in multiple-compound mixtures.

Authors:  Brian Y Feng; Brian K Shoichet
Journal:  J Med Chem       Date:  2006-04-06       Impact factor: 7.446

3.  The challenge of selecting protein kinase assays for lead discovery optimization.

Authors:  Haiching Ma; Sean Deacon; Kurumi Horiuchi
Journal:  Expert Opin Drug Discov       Date:  2008-06       Impact factor: 6.098

4.  A dual-readout F2 assay that combines fluorescence resonance energy transfer and fluorescence polarization for monitoring bimolecular interactions.

Authors:  Yuhong Du; Zaneta Nikolovska-Coleska; Min Qui; Lian Li; Iestyn Lewis; Raymond Dingledine; Jeanne A Stuckey; Krzysztof Krajewski; Peter P Roller; Shaomeng Wang; Haian Fu
Journal:  Assay Drug Dev Technol       Date:  2011-03-11       Impact factor: 1.738

5.  Comparison of luminescence ADP production assay and radiometric scintillation proximity assay for Cdc7 kinase.

Authors:  Toshimitsu Takagi; David Shum; Monika Parisi; Ruth E Santos; Constantin Radu; Paul Calder; Zahra Rizvi; Mark G Frattini; Hakim Djaballah
Journal:  Comb Chem High Throughput Screen       Date:  2011-09       Impact factor: 1.339

6.  A time-resolved fluorescence resonance energy transfer assay for high-throughput screening of 14-3-3 protein-protein interaction inhibitors.

Authors:  Yuhong Du; Robert W Fu; Bin Lou; Jing Zhao; Min Qui; Fadlo R Khuri; Haian Fu
Journal:  Assay Drug Dev Technol       Date:  2013-08-01       Impact factor: 1.738

7.  The use of AlphaScreen technology in HTS: current status.

Authors:  Richard M Eglen; Terry Reisine; Philippe Roby; Nathalie Rouleau; Chantal Illy; Roger Bossé; Martina Bielefeld
Journal:  Curr Chem Genomics       Date:  2008-02-25
  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.