Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 358

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

A High-Throughput Screen for Aggregation-Based Inhibition in a Large Compound Library

Open access
Feng, Brian Y., Simeonov, Anton, Jadhav, Ajit, Babaoglu, Kerim, Inglese, James, Shoichet, Brian K., Austin, Christopher P.·2007·Journal of Medicinal Chemistry

Abstract

High-throughput screening (HTS) is the primary technique for new lead identification in drug discovery and chemical biology. Unfortunately, it is susceptible to false-positive hits. One common mechanism for such false-positives is the congregation of organic molecules into colloidal aggregates, which nonspecifically inhibit enzymes. To both evaluate the feasibility of large-scale identification of aggregate-based inhibition and quantify its prevalence among screening hits, we tested 70,563 molecules from the National Institutes of Health Chemical Genomics Center (NCGC) library for detergent-sensitive inhibition. Each molecule was screened in at least seven concentrations, such that dose-response curves were obtained for all molecules in the library. There were 1274 inhibitors identified in total, of which 1204 were unambiguously detergent-sensitive. We identified these as aggregate-based inhibitors. Thirty-one library molecules were independently purchased and retested in secondary low-throughput experiments; 29 of these were confirmed as either aggregators or nonaggregators, as appropriate. Finally, with the dose-response information collected for every compound, we could examine the correlation between aggregate-based inhibition and steep dose-response curves. Three key results emerge from this study: first, detergent-dependent identification of aggregate-based inhibition is feasible on the large scale. Second, 95% of the actives obtained in this screen are aggregate-based inhibitors. Third, aggregate-based inhibition is correlated with steep dose-response curves, although not absolutely. The results of this screen are being released publicly via the PubChem database.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1021/jm061317y

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Cited by

See all 358

Metadata

Authors
Feng, B. Y., Simeonov, A., Jadhav, A., Babaoglu, K., Inglese, J., Shoichet, B. K., & Austin, C. P.
Venue
Journal of Medicinal Chemistry
Published
2007-04-21
Volume
50
Issue
10
Pages
2385-2390
ISSN
  • 0022-2623 (ISSN-L)
  • 1520-4804
OpenAlex
W2159266419
Cited by
358
References
4
FWCI
31.59
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.