Increasing the delivery of next generation therapeutics from high throughput screening libraries.

The pharmaceutical industry has historically relied on high throughput screening as a cornerstone to identify chemical equity for drug discovery projects. However, with pharmaceutical companies moving through a phase of diminished returns and alternative hit identification strategies proving successful, it is more important than ever to understand how this approach can be used more effectively to increase the delivery of next generation therapeutics from high throughput screening libraries. There is a wide literature that describes HTS and fragment based screening approaches which offer clear direction on the process for these two distinct activities. However, few people have considered how best to identify medium to low molecular weight compounds from large diversity screening sets and increase downstream success.

[1]  Juan J. Marugan,et al.  A High Throughput Screening Assay System for the Identification of Small Molecule Inhibitors of gsp , 2014, PloS one.

[2]  J. Baell,et al.  Chemistry: Chemical con artists foil drug discovery , 2014, Nature.

[3]  Jayme L. Dahlin,et al.  PAINS in the Assay: Chemical Mechanisms of Assay Interference and Promiscuous Enzymatic Inhibition Observed during a Sulfhydryl-Scavenging HTS , 2015, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[4]  James Inglese,et al.  Apparent activity in high-throughput screening: origins of compound-dependent assay interference. , 2010, Current opinion in chemical biology.

[5]  Kevin R Clark,et al.  Small-Molecule Library Subset Screening as an Aid for Accelerating Lead Identification , 2014, Journal of biomolecular screening.

[6]  E. Jacoby,et al.  Theoretical and Experimental Relationships between Percent Inhibition and IC50 Data Observed in High-Throughput Screening , 2013, Journal of biomolecular screening.

[7]  Stephan C Schürer,et al.  Using the BioAssay Ontology for Analyzing High-Throughput Screening Data , 2015, Journal of biomolecular screening.

[8]  Christopher P Austin,et al.  A high-throughput screen for aggregation-based inhibition in a large compound library. , 2007, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[9]  MobergAndreas,et al.  Assessing HTS performance using BioAssay Ontology: screening and analysis of a bacterial phospho-N-acetylmuramoyl-pentapeptide translocase campaign. , 2014 .

[10]  Andrew L Hopkins,et al.  The Joint European Compound Library: boosting precompetitive research. , 2015, Drug discovery today.

[11]  F. Lombardo,et al.  Experimental and computational approaches to estimate solubility and permeability in drug discovery and development settings , 1997 .

[12]  Kristian Kaufmann,et al.  Discovery and SAR of a novel series of GIRK1/2 and GIRK1/4 activators. , 2013, Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry letters.

[13]  P. Leeson,et al.  The influence of drug-like concepts on decision-making in medicinal chemistry , 2007, Nature Reviews Drug Discovery.

[14]  David R Spring,et al.  Rational methods for the selection of diverse screening compounds. , 2011, ACS chemical biology.

[15]  M. Pangalos,et al.  Lessons learned from the fate of AstraZeneca's drug pipeline: a five-dimensional framework , 2014, Nature Reviews Drug Discovery.

[16]  Yunxiang Mu,et al.  Identification of a fragment-like small molecule ligand for the methyl-lysine binding protein, 53BP1. , 2015, ACS chemical biology.

[17]  David J Diller,et al.  Deriving knowledge through data mining high-throughput screening data. , 2004, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[18]  Andrew Bell,et al.  Shaping a Screening File for Maximal Lead Discovery Efficiency and Effectiveness: Elimination of Molecular Redundancy , 2012, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[19]  D. Bojanic,et al.  Impact of high-throughput screening in biomedical research , 2011, Nature Reviews Drug Discovery.

[20]  Jayme L. Dahlin,et al.  The essential roles of chemistry in high-throughput screening triage. , 2014, Future medicinal chemistry.

[21]  Anne Mai Wassermann,et al.  Efficient search of chemical space: navigating from fragments to structurally diverse chemotypes. , 2013, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[22]  J Willem M Nissink,et al.  Quantification of frequent-hitter behavior based on historical high-throughput screening data. , 2014, Future medicinal chemistry.

[23]  Dario Neri,et al.  20 years of DNA-encoded chemical libraries. , 2011, Chemical communications.

[24]  Mohane Selvaraj Coumar,et al.  Identification of ligand efficient, fragment-like hits from an HTS library: structure-based virtual screening and docking investigations of 2H- and 3H-pyrazolo tautomers for Aurora kinase A selectivity , 2014, Journal of Computer-Aided Molecular Design.

[25]  Olivier Sperandio,et al.  Ligand efficiency driven design of new inhibitors of Mycobacterium tuberculosis transcriptional repressor EthR using fragment growing, merging, and linking approaches. , 2014, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[26]  Christopher W Murray,et al.  Efficient exploration of chemical space by fragment-based screening. , 2014, Progress in biophysics and molecular biology.

[27]  J. Medina-Franco,et al.  Expanding the medicinally relevant chemical space with compound libraries. , 2012, Drug discovery today.

[28]  James Inglese,et al.  Innovation in academic chemical screening: filling the gaps in chemical biology. , 2013, Current opinion in chemical biology.

[29]  Asher Mullard,et al.  European Lead Factory opens for business , 2013, Nature Reviews Drug Discovery.

[30]  Monya Baker,et al.  Fragment-based lead discovery grows up , 2012, Nature Reviews Drug Discovery.

[31]  Chris Abell,et al.  A three-stage biophysical screening cascade for fragment-based drug discovery , 2013, Nature Protocols.

[32]  Anne Mai Wassermann,et al.  Large Scale Meta-Analysis of Fragment-Based Screening Campaigns , 2015, Journal of biomolecular screening.

[33]  Stephen Gabriel,et al.  Metal impurities cause false positives in high-throughput screening campaigns. , 2013, ACS medicinal chemistry letters.

[34]  Stefan Schmitt,et al.  Stratified High-Throughput Screening Sets Enable Flexible Screening Strategies from a Single Plated Collection , 2014, Journal of biomolecular screening.

[35]  Karina Martinez-Mayorga,et al.  Balancing novelty with confined chemical space in modern drug discovery , 2014, Expert opinion on drug discovery.

[36]  D. Swinney,et al.  The Contribution of Mechanistic Understanding to Phenotypic Screening for First-in-Class Medicines , 2013, Journal of biomolecular screening.

[37]  Igor V. Tetko,et al.  Identification of Small-Molecule Frequent Hitters from AlphaScreen High-Throughput Screens , 2014, Journal of biomolecular screening.

[38]  Darren V S Green,et al.  Getting physical in drug discovery II: the impact of chromatographic hydrophobicity measurements and aromaticity. , 2011, Drug discovery today.

[39]  M. Edwards,et al.  Using the Golden Triangle to optimize clearance and oral absorption. , 2009, Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry letters.

[40]  Thierry Kogej,et al.  Big pharma screening collections: more of the same or unique libraries? The AstraZeneca-Bayer Pharma AG case. , 2013, Drug discovery today.

[41]  Thierry Kogej,et al.  Physicochemical property profiles of marketed drugs, clinical candidates and bioactive compounds. , 2009, Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry letters.

[42]  Dario Neri,et al.  DNA-encoded chemical libraries: advancing beyond conventional small-molecule libraries. , 2014, Accounts of Chemical Research.

[43]  Christopher W Murray,et al.  Experiences in fragment-based drug discovery. , 2012, Trends in pharmacological sciences.

[44]  Thomas J. Crisman,et al.  Which aspects of HTS are empirically correlated with downstream success? , 2008, Current opinion in drug discovery & development.