Cited by 49Estrogen and related hormone effectsAnalytical chemistry methods developmentPhytoestrogen effects and research

Development of a Screening Assay for Ligands to the Estrogen Receptor Based on Magnetic Microparticles and LC-MS

Open access
van Breemen, Richard, Choi, Yongsoo·2008·Combinatorial Chemistry & High Throughput Screening

Abstract

A high throughput screening assay for the identification of ligands to pharmacologically significant receptors was developed based on magnetic particles containing immobilized receptors followed by liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry (LC-MS). This assay is suitable for the screening of complex mixtures such as botanical extracts. For proof-of-principle, estrogen receptor-alpha (ER-alpha) and ER-beta were immobilized on magnetic particles functionalized with aldehyde or carboxylic acid groups. Alternatively, biotinylated ER was immobilized onto streptavidin-derivatized magnetic particles. The ER that was immobilized using the streptavidin-biotin chemistry showed higher activity than that immobilized on aldehyde or carboxylic acid functionalized magnetic particles. Immobilized ER was incubated with extracts of Trifolium pratense L. (red clover) or Humulus lupulus L. (hops). As a control for non-specific binding, each botanical extract was incubated with magnetic particles containing no ER. After magnetic separation of the particles containing bound ligands from the unbound components in the extract, the particles were washed, ligands were released using methanol, and then the ligands were identified using LC-MS. The estrogens genistein and daidzein were identified in the red clover extract, and the estrogen 8-prenylnaringenin was identified in the hop extract. These screening results are consistent with those obtained using previous screening approaches.

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 · 10.2174/138620708783398340

Cites

Statistics

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

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Native MS detects ligands directly bound to a protein, whereas affinity MS approaches typically measure ligand binding indirectly as free compounds.

    “An important difference between native MS and affinity MS is that native MS detects ligands directly bound to a protein, whereas affinity MS approaches typically measure ligand binding indirectly as free compounds.”

    From Native metabolomics identifies the rivulariapeptolide family of protease inhibitors (2022) · cites this paper as [22]

    The Introduction and Results and Discussion describe isolating estrogen receptor–ligand complexes, releasing the ligands, and identifying those released compounds by LC-MS. This supports the indirect-detection part for the paper’s assay, but the paper does not discuss native MS or establish that affinity MS approaches typically work this way. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • MagMASS is sterically restricted.

    “However, a key limitation of the MagMASS method is the fact that it is sterically restricted.”

    From Connecting metabolome and phenotype: recent advances in functional metabolomics tools for the identification of bioactive natural products (2024) · cites this paper as [78]

    The Results and Discussion (page unavailable) report that high protein coverage on the magnetic particles caused loss of estrogen-receptor activity, supporting a limitation of the immobilization method. The paper does not identify steric restriction as the cause or describe MagMASS as sterically restricted. (LLM, conf=0.72)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

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

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

Cites

The publisher hasn’t deposited this paper’s reference list.

Research works printed but not linked: 22

  1. [1]Bianchi BR, Moreland RB, Faltynek CR, Chen J. Assay Drug Develop. Technol. 2007;5:417–424. doi: 10.1089/adt.2006.041. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  2. [2]Piersen CE, Booth NL, Sun Y, Liang W, Burdette JE,, van Breemen RB, Geller SE, Gu C, Banuvar S, Shulman LP, Bolton JL, Farnsworth NR. Curr. Med. Chem. 2004;11:1361–1374. doi: 10.2174/0929867043365134. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  3. [3]van Breemen RB, Li Y. Expert Opin. Drug Metab. Toxicol. 2005;1:175–185. doi: 10.1517/17425255.1.2.175. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  4. [4]Henrich CJ, Goncharova EI, Wilson JA, Gardella RS, Johnson TR, Mcmahon JB, Takada K, Bokesch HR, Gustafson KR. Chem. Biol. Drug Des. 2007;69:321–330. doi: 10.1111/j.1747-0285.2007.00508.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  5. [5]Golan DE, Tashjian AH, Armstrong EJ, Galanter JM, A.W., Armstrong RA, Rose HS. Principles of Pharmacology: The Pathophysiologic Basis of Drug Therapy. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2005. pp. 3–26. [Google Scholar]
  6. [6]Moy FJ, Haraki K, Mobilio D, Walker G, Powers R, Tabei K, Tong H, Siegel MM. Anal. Chem. 2001;73:571–581. doi: 10.1021/ac0006270. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  7. [7]Johnson BM, Nikolic D, van Breemen RB. Mass Spectrom. Rev. 2002;21:76–86. doi: 10.1002/mas.10020. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  8. [8]Chu Y, Dunayevskiy YM, Kirby DP, Vouros P, Karger B. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1996;118:7827–7835. [Google Scholar]
  9. [9]Powell KD, Fitzgerald MC. J. Comb. Chem. 2004;6:262–269. doi: 10.1021/cc034051e. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  10. [10]Wigger M, Eyler JR, Benner SA, Li W, Marshall AG. J. Am. Soc. Mass Spectrom. 2002;13:1162–1169. doi: 10.1016/S1044-0305(02)00439-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  11. [11]Sun Y, Gu C, Liu X, Liang W, Yao P, Bolton JL, van Breemen RB. J. Am. Soc. Mass Spectrom. 2005;16:271–279. doi: 10.1016/j.jasms.2004.11.002. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  12. [12]Nikolic D, Habibi-Goudarzi S, Corley DG, Gafner S, Pezzuto JM, van Breemen RB. Anal. Chem. 2000;72:3853–3859. doi: 10.1021/ac0000980. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  13. [13]Gu C, Nikolic D, Lai J, Xu X, van Breemen RB. Comb. Chem. High Throughput Screen. 1999;2:353–359. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. [14]Franzreb M, Siemann-Herzberg M, Hobley T, Thomas OR. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2006;70:505–516. doi: 10.1007/s00253-006-0344-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  15. [15]Curat CA, Miranville A, Sengenés C, Diehl M, Tonus C, Busse R, Bouloumié A. Diabetes. 2004;53:1285–1292. doi: 10.2337/diabetes.53.5.1285. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI · Paper page
  16. [16]Nam J, Park S, Mirkin CA. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2002;124:3820–3821. doi: 10.1021/ja0178766. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  17. [17]Eastman PS, Ruan W, Doctolero M, Nuttall R, de Feo G, Park JS, Chu JS, Cooke P, Gray JW, Li S, Chen FF. Nano Letters. 2006;6:1059–1064. doi: 10.1021/nl060795t. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  18. [18]Overk CR, Yao P, Chadwick LR, Nikolic D, Sun Y, Cuendet MA, Deng Y, Hedayat AS, Pauli GF, Farnsworth NR, van Breemen RB, Bolton JL. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2005;53:6246–6253. doi: 10.1021/jf050448p. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  19. [19]Peelen D, Kodoyianni V, Lee J, Zheng T, Shortreed MR, Smith LM. J. Proteome Res. 2006;5:1580–1585. doi: 10.1021/pr050467e. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  20. [20]Peelen D, Smith LM. Langmuir. 2005;21:266–271. doi: 10.1021/la048166r. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  21. [21]Lahiri J, Isaacs L, Tien J, Whitesides GM. Anal. Chem. 1999;71:777–790. doi: 10.1021/ac980959t. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  22. [22]van Breemen RB, Huang C, Nikolic D, Woodbury CP, Zhao Y, Venton DL. Anal. Chem. 1997;69:2159–2164. doi: 10.1021/ac970132j. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI · Paper page

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
van Breemen, R., & Choi, Y.
Affiliations
University of Illinois Chicago (US)
Venue
Combinatorial Chemistry & High Throughput Screening
Published
2008-01-01
Volume
11
Issue
1
Pages
1-6
ISSN
1386-2073 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2028396792
Cited by
49
References
0
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 1
FWCI
1.71
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Combinatorial Chemistry & High Throughput Screening (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • Office of Dietary Supplements
  • National Institutes of Health
  • National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine
  • National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health (P50-AT00155, P50AT000155)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Estrogen and related hormone effects
  • Physical Sciences › Chemistry › Analytical Chemistry › Analytical chemistry methods development
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pathology and Forensic Medicine › Phytoestrogen effects and research
Keywords
estrogen receptor, estrogen receptor alpha, estrogen receptor beta, magnetic microparticles, immobilized receptors, high-throughput screening, ligand screening, plant extracts, red clover, Humulus lupulus, genistein, daidzein, 8-prenylnaringenin, streptavidin-biotin immobilization, magnetic separation
MeSH terms
Methanol, Binding Sites, Biological Assay, Chromatography, Liquid, Isoflavones, Ligands, Magnetics, Plant Extracts, Receptors, Estrogen, Mass Spectrometry, Time Factors, Genistein, Humulus, Trifolium, Flavanones, Estrogen Receptor alpha, Estrogen Receptor beta, Nanoparticles

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