Novel trends in high-throughput screening.

High-throughput screening (HTS) is a well-established process for lead discovery in Pharma and Biotech companies and is now also being used for basic and applied research in academia. It comprises the screening of large chemical libraries for activity against biological targets via the use of automation, miniaturized assays and large-scale data analysis. Since its first advent in the early to mid 1990s, the field of HTS has seen not only a continuous change in technology and processes, but also an adaptation to various needs in lead discovery. HTS has now evolved into a mature discipline that is a crucial source of chemical starting points for drug discovery. Whereas in previous years much emphasis has been put on a steady increase in screening capacity ('quantitative increase') via automation and miniaturization, the past years have seen a much greater emphasis on content and quality ('qualitative increase'). Today, many experts in the field see HTS at a crossroad with the need to decide on either higher throughput/more experimentation or a greater focus on assays of greater physiological relevance, both of which may lead to higher productivity in pharmaceutical R&D. In this paper, we describe the development of HTS over the past decade and point out our own ideas for future directions of HTS in biomedical research. We predict that the trend toward further miniaturization will slow down with the balanced implementation of 384 well, 1536 well, and 384 low volume well plates. Furthermore, we envisage that there will be much more emphasis on rigorous assay and chemical characterization, particularly considering that novel and more difficult target classes will be pursued. In recent years we have witnessed a clear trend in the drug discovery community toward rigorous hit validation by the use of orthogonal readout technologies, label free and biophysical methodologies. We also see a trend toward a more flexible use of the various screening approaches in lead discovery, that is, the use of both full deck compound screening as well as the use of focused screening and iterative screening approaches. Moreover, we expect greater usage of target identification strategies downstream of phenotypic screening and the more effective implementation of affinity selection technologies as a result of advances in chemical diversity methodologies. We predict that, ultimately, each hit finding strategy will be much more project-related, tailor-made, and better integrated into the broader drug discovery efforts.

[1]  Thomas D. Y. Chung,et al.  A Simple Statistical Parameter for Use in Evaluation and Validation of High Throughput Screening Assays , 1999, Journal of biomolecular screening.

[2]  Chong Li,et al.  Structural basis for high-affinity peptide inhibition of p53 interactions with MDM2 and MDMX , 2009, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[3]  John P. Overington,et al.  How many drug targets are there? , 2006, Nature Reviews Drug Discovery.

[4]  C. Tse,et al.  ABT-263: a potent and orally bioavailable Bcl-2 family inhibitor. , 2008, Cancer research.

[5]  Andreas Sewing,et al.  Evaluating Real-Life High-Throughput Screening Data , 2005, Journal of biomolecular screening.

[6]  Lorenz M Mayr,et al.  The Future of High-Throughput Screening , 2008, Journal of biomolecular screening.

[7]  U. Hassiepen,et al.  A Fluorescence Lifetime-Based Assay for Protease Inhibitor Profiling on Human Kallikrein 7 , 2009, Journal of biomolecular screening.

[8]  C. Craik,et al.  Inhibition of a Viral Enzyme by a Small Molecule Dimer Disruptor , 2009, Nature chemical biology.

[9]  L. Vassilev,et al.  In Vivo Activation of the p53 Pathway by Small-Molecule Antagonists of MDM2 , 2004, Science.

[10]  Andreas Bender,et al.  “Plate Cherry Picking”: A Novel Semi-Sequential Screening Paradigm for Cheaper, Faster, Information-Rich Compound Selection , 2007, Journal of biomolecular screening.

[11]  Alastair Binnie,et al.  Case study: impact of technology investment on lead discovery at Bristol-Myers Squibb, 1998-2006. , 2008, Drug discovery today.

[12]  Johannes Ottl,et al.  Readout Technologies for Highly Miniaturized Kinase Assays Applicable to High-Throughput Screening in a 1536-Well Format , 2006, Journal of biomolecular screening.

[13]  Alexander Shekhtman,et al.  Screening of small molecule interactor library by using in-cell NMR spectroscopy (SMILI-NMR). , 2009, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[14]  D. Pereira,et al.  Origin and evolution of high throughput screening , 2007, British journal of pharmacology.

[15]  Wei Zheng,et al.  A Cell-Based Ultra-High-Throughput Screening Assay for Identifying Inhibitors of D-Amino Acid Oxidase , 2006, Journal of biomolecular screening.

[16]  Philip Denner,et al.  High-content analysis in preclinical drug discovery. , 2008, Combinatorial chemistry & high throughput screening.

[17]  P. Hajduk,et al.  A decade of fragment-based drug design: strategic advances and lessons learned , 2007, Nature Reviews Drug Discovery.

[18]  Christopher L. McClendon,et al.  Reaching for high-hanging fruit in drug discovery at protein–protein interfaces , 2007, Nature.

[19]  B. Shoichet Screening in a spirit haunted world. , 2006, Drug discovery today.

[20]  Stuart L Schreiber,et al.  Diversity-oriented organic synthesis and proteomics. New frontiers for chemistry & biology. , 2002, Chemistry & biology.

[21]  Ricardo Macarron,et al.  Critical review of the role of HTS in drug discovery. , 2006, Drug discovery today.

[22]  L M Mayr Tackling the chemogenomic space by novel screening technologies. , 2006, Ernst Schering Research Foundation workshop.

[23]  H. Jhoti,et al.  Fragment-based drug discovery using rational design. , 2007, Ernst Schering Foundation symposium proceedings.