Robert P. Hertzberg

Impact of high-throughput screening in biomedical research

High-throughput screening (HTS) has been postulated in several quarters to be a contributory factor to the decline in productivity in the pharmaceutical industry. Moreover, it has been blamed for stifling the creativity that drug discovery demands. In this article, we aim to dispel these myths and present the case for the use of HTS as part of a proven scientific tool kit, the wider use of which is essential for the discovery of new chemotypes.

High-throughput screening: new technology for the 21st century

New technologies in high-throughput screening have significantly increased throughput and reduced assay volumes. Key advances over the past few years include new fluorescence methods, detection platforms and liquid-handling technologies. Screening 100,000 samples per day in miniaturized assay volumes will soon become routine. Furthermore, new technologies are now being applied to information-rich cell-based assays, and this is beginning to remove one of the key bottlenecks downstream from primary screening.

Identification of a Potent, Selective Non-peptide CXCR2 Antagonist That Inhibits Interleukin-8-induced Neutrophil Migration

Interleukin-8 (IL-8) and closely related Glu-Leu-Arg (ELR) containing CXC chemokines, including growth-related oncogene (GRO)α, GROβ, GROγ, and epithelial cell-derived neutrophil-activating peptide-78 (ENA-78), are potent neutrophil chemotactic and activating peptides, which are proposed to be major mediators of inflammation. IL-8 activates neutrophils by binding to two distinct seven-transmembrane (7-TMR) G-protein coupled receptors CXCR1 (IL-8RA) and CXCR2 (IL-8RB), while GROα, GROβ, GROγ, and ENA-78 bind to and activate only CXCR2. A chemical lead, which selectively inhibited CXCR2 was discovered by high throughput screening and chemically optimized. SB 225002 (N-(2-hydroxy-4-nitrophenyl)-N′-(2-bromophenyl)urea) is the first reported potent and selective non-peptide inhibitor of a chemokine receptor. It is an antagonist of 125I-IL-8 binding to CXCR2 with an IC50 = 22 nm. SB 225002 showed >150-fold selectivity over CXCR1 and four other 7-TMRs tested. In vitro, SB 225002 potently inhibited human and rabbit neutrophil chemotaxis induced by both IL-8 and GROα. In vivo, SB 225002 selectively blocked IL-8-induced neutrophil margination in rabbits. The present findings suggest that CXCR2 is responsible for neutrophil chemotaxis and margination induced by IL-8. This selective antagonist will be a useful tool compound to define the role of CXCR2 in inflammatory diseases where neutrophils play a major role.

Molecular Cloning and Characterization of the Human Anaphylatoxin C3a Receptor

In a human neutrophil cDNA library, an orphan G-protein-coupled receptor, HNFAG09, with 37% nucleotide identity to the C5a receptor (C5a-R, CD88) was identified. A novel feature of this gene, unlike C5a-R and other G-protein-coupled receptors, is the presence of an extraordinarily large predicted extracellular loop comprised of in excess of 160 amino acid residues between transmembrane domains 4 and 5. Northern blot analysis revealed that expression of mRNA for this receptor in human tissues, while similar, was distinct from C5a-R expression. Although there were differences in expression, transcripts for both receptors were detected in tissues throughout the body and the central nervous system. Mammalian cells stably expressing HNFAG09 specifically bound 125I-C3a and responded to a C3a carboxyl-terminal analogue synthetic peptide and to human C3a but not to rC5a with a robust calcium mobilization response. HNFAG09 encodes the human anaphylatoxin C3a receptor.

Design and Implementation of High Throughput Screening Assays

High throughput screening (HTS) is at the core of the drug discovery process, and so it is critical to design and implement HTS assays in a comprehensive fashion involving scientists from the disciplines of biology, chemistry, engineering, and informatics. This requires careful analysis of many variables, starting with the choice of assay target and ending with the discovery of lead compounds. At every step in this process, there are decisions to be made that can greatly impact the outcome of the HTS effort, to the point of making it a success or a failure. Although specific guidelines should be established to insure that the screening assay reaches an acceptable level of quality, many choices require pragmatism and the ability to compromise opposing forces.

A standard operating procedure for assessing liquid handler performance in high-throughput screening

The thrust of early drug discovery in recent years has been toward the configuration of homogeneous miniaturized assays. This has allowed organizations to contain costs in the face of exponential increases in the number of screening assays that need to be run to remain competitive. Miniaturization brings with it an increasing dependence on instrumentation, which over the past several years has seen the development of nanodispensing capability and sophisticated detection strategies. To maintain confidence in the data generated from miniaturized assays, it is critical to ensure that both compounds and reagents have been delivered as expected to the target wells. The authors have developed a standard operating procedure for liquid-handling quality control that has enabled them to evaluate performance on 2 levels. The first level provides for routine daily testing on existing instrumentation, and the second allows for more rigorous testing of new dispensing technologies. The procedure has shown itself to be useful in identifying both method programming and instrumentation performance shortcomings and has provided a means to harmonizing instrumentation usage by assay development and screening groups. The goal is that this type of procedure be used for facilitating the exchange of liquid handler performance data across the industry.

Design and implementation of high throughput screening assays.

HTS remains at the core of the drug discovery process, and so it is critical to design and implement HTS assays in a comprehensive fashion involving scientists from the disciplines of biology, chemistry, engineering, and informatics. This requires careful consideration of many options and variables, starting with the choice of screening strategy and ending with the discovery of lead compounds. At every step in this process, there are decisions to be made that can greatly impact the outcome of the HTS effort, to the point of making it a success or a failure. Although specific guidelines should be established to ensure that the screening assay reaches an acceptable level of quality, many choices require pragmatism and the ability to compromise opposing forces.

Automated Assay Optimization with Integrated Statistics and Smart Robotics

The transition from manual to robotic high throughput screening (HTS) in the last few years has made it feasible to screen hundreds of thousands of chemical entities against a biological target in less than a month. This rate of HTS has increased the visibility of bottlenecks, one of which is assay optimization. In many organizations, experimental methods are generated by therapeutic teams associated with specific targets and passed on to the HTS group. The resulting assays frequently need to be further optimized to withstand the rigors and time frames inherent in robotic handling. Issues such as protein aggregation, ligand instability, and cellular viability are common variables in the optimization process. The availability of robotics capable of performing rapid random access tasks has made it possible to design optimization experiments that would be either very difficult or impossible for a person to carry out. Our approach to reducing the assay optimization bottleneck has been to unify the highly specific fields of statistics, biochemistry, and robotics. The product of these endeavors is a process we have named automated assay optimization (AAO). This has enabled us to determine final optimized assay conditions, which are often a composite of variables that we would not have arrived at by examining each variable independently. We have applied this approach to both radioligand binding and enzymatic assays and have realized benefits in both time and performance that we would not have predicted a priori. The fully developed AAO process encompasses the ability to download information to a robot and have liquid handling methods automatically created. This evolution in smart robotics has proven to be an invaluable tool for maintaining high-quality data in the context of increasing HTS demands.

The role of the anionic groups in the receptor binding of interleukin-8 antagonists

In an effort to determine the role of the acidic group in the receptor binding ofN-(2-hydroxy-4-nitrophenyl)-N′-(phenyl) urea, an interleukin-8B receptor antagonist, its binding and that of several analogs was measured as a function of pH. These titrations indicate that these ureas bind most strongly in their anionic form. Studies of antagonists, with different acidities, demonstrated that the greatest change in binding of each urea occurred around the pK a of the compound being examined. The studies suggest that the increase in binding of the antagonists at higher pH is a result of the increased negative charge on the compounds rather than the effects of pH on the receptor or radioligand.

Glossary of terms used in biomolecular screening (IUPAC Recommendations 2011)

Biomolecular screening is now a crucial component of the drug discovery process, and this glossary will be of use to practitioners in the field of screening and to those who interact with the screening community. The glossary contains definitions related to various aspects of the screening process such as assay types, data handling, and relevant technologies. Many of the terms used in this discipline are not covered by existing glossaries, and where they are, the definitions are often not appropriate for this field. Where appropriate, this document provides new or modified definitions to better reflect the new context. The field of biomolecular screening is multidisciplinary in nature, and this glossary, containing authoritative definitions, will be useful not only for regular practitioners, but also for those who make use of data generated during the screening process.