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.
References
1.
1. Korenburg JR, Chen XN, Adams MD, Venter JC: Toward a cDNA map of the human genome. Genomics1995;29:364-370.
2.
2. Fasman KH, Letovsky SI, Li P, Cottingham RW, Kingsburg DT: The GDP human genome database anno. Nucleic Acids Research1997;25:72-81.
3.
3. Gordon EM, Barrett RW, Dower WJ, Fodor SPA, Gallop MA: Application of combinatorial technologies to drug discovery. Expert Opinion on Investigational Drugs1994;7:1201-1207.
4.
4. Gordon EM, Gallop MA, Campbell D, Holmes C, Bermak J, Look G, et al: Combinatorial organic synthesis: application to drug discovery. Eur J Med Chem1995;30:S337-S248.
5.
5. Burbaum JJ, Sigal NH: New technologies for high throughput screening. Curr Opin Chem Biol1997;1:72-78.
6.
6. Sills MA: Future considerations in HTS: the acute effect of chronic dilemmas. Drug Disc Today1998;3(7):304-312.
7.
7. Burbaum JJ: Miniaturization technologies in HTS: how fast, how small, how soon? Drug Disc Today1998;3(7):313-322.
8.
8. Stahl W: What is the future of high throughput screening? J Biomol Screen1999;4(3):117-118.
9.
9. Major J: What is the future of high throughput screening? J Biomol Screen1999;4(3):119.
10.
10. Burbaum JJ: The evolution of miniaturized well plates. J Biomol Screen2000;5(1):5-8.
12. Hertzberg RP, Pope AJ: High throughput screening: new technology for the 21st century. Curr Opini Chemi Biol2000;4:445-451.
13.
13. Janzen B, Domanico P: The 384-well plate: pros and cons. J Biomol Screen1996;1(2):63-64.
14.
14. Kolb AJ, Neumann K: Beyond the 96-well microplate: instruments and assay methods for the 384-well format. J Biomol Screen1997;2(2):103-109.
15.
15. Rogers MV: High throughput screening: liquid handling systems for 384-well applications. Drug Disc Today1997;2(9):395-396.
16.
16. Bateman TA, Ayers RA, Greenway RB: An engineering evaluation of four fluid transfer devices for automated 384-well high throughput screening. Laboratory Robotics and Automation1999;11:277-286.
17.
17. Comley JCW, Binnie A, Bonk C, Houston JG: A 384-HTS for human factor VIIa: a comparison with 96- and 864-well formats. J Biomol Screen1997;2:171-178.
18.
18. Oldenburg KR, Zhang J-H, Chen T, Maffia A, Blom KF, Combs AP, et al: Assay miniaturization for ultra-high throughput screening of combinatorial and discrete compound libraries: a 9600-well (0.2 microliter) assay system. J Biomol Screen1998;3(1):55-62.
19.
19. Comley JCW, Reeves T, Robinson P: A 1536 colorimetric SPAP reporter assay: comparison with 96- and 384-well formats. J Biomol Screen1998; 3(3):217-225.
20.
20. Maffia MM III, Kariv I, Oldenburg KR: Miniaturization of a mammalian cell-based assay: luciferase reporter gene readout in a 3 microliter 1536-well plate. J Biomol Screen1999;4(3):137-142.
21.
21. Berg M, Undisz K, Thiericke R, Moore T, Posten C: Miniaturization of a functional transcription assay in yeast (human progesterone receptor) in the 384-and 1536-well plate format. J Biomol Screen2000;5(2):71-76.
22.
22. Baddeley S, Clark L, Flack C: The use of the Cartesian SynQUAD™ for yttrium oxide bead dispensing for conducting automated 1536 LEADseeker™ scintillation proximity assay. Paper presented at the 6th Annual SBS Conference, Vancouver, BC, September 2000.
23.
23. Berg M, Undisz K, Thiericke R, Zimmermann P, Moore T, Posten C: Evaluation of liquid handling conditions in microplates. J Biomol Screen2001;6(1):47-56.
24.
24. Dreessen J, Ingenhoven N, Troesch M, Gentsch J, Gubler H, Bruttger O, et al: Nanopipetting in miniaturized assay development and drug screening: a statistical analysis of Tecan’s Genesis NPS using DMSO and compounds. Paper presented at the 6th Annual SBS Conference, Vancouver, BC, September 2000.
26. Astle TW, Akowitz A: Accuracy and tip carryover contamination in 96-well pipetting. J Biomol Screen1996;1(4):211-216.
27.
27. Lewis L: Liquid handling equipment evolves to suit large scale applications. Scientist1997;11(1):18-19.
28.
28. Stevens ME, Bouchard PJ, Kariv I, Chung TDY, Oldenburg KR: Comparison of automation equipment in high throughput screening. J Biomol Screen1998;3(4):305-311.
29.
29. Rose SD: Application of a novel microarraying system in genomics research and drug discovery. Journal of the Association for Laboratory Automation1998;3(3):53-56.
30.
30. Arnold BA, Hepler RW, Keller PM: Adapting the Biomek 2000 Laboratory Automation Workstation for printing DNA microarrays. Biotechniques1997;25(1):106-110.
31.
31. Stimpson DI, Cooley PW, Knepper SM, Wallace DB: Parallel production of oligonucleotide arrays using membranes and reagent jet printing. Biotechniques1998;25(5):886-890.
32.
32. Lemmo AV, Fisher JT, Geysen HM, Rose DJ: Characterization of an inkjet chemical microdispenser for combinatorial library synthesis. Anal Chem1997;69:543-551.
33.
33. Rose D, Lemmo T: Challenges in implementing high-density formats for high throughput screening. Laboratory Automation News1997;2(4):12-19.
34.
34. Rose D: Microdispensing technologies in drug discovery. Drug Disc Today1999;4(9):411-419.
35.
35. Schober A, Gunther R, Schwienhorst A, Doring M, Lindemann BF: Accurate high-speed liquid handling of very small biological samples. Biotechniques1993;15(2):324-329.
36.
36. James P, Papen R: Nanolitre dispensing: a new innovation in robotic liquid handling. Drug Disc Today1998;3(9):429-430.
38. Taylor PB, Ashman S, Bond BC, Hertzberg RP, Kubala SM, Macarron R, Mostacero JA, et al: A standard operating procedure for assessing liquid handler performance in HTS. Paper presented at the 6th Annual SBS Conference, Vancouver, BC, September 2000.
39.
39. Haaland PD: Experimental Design in Biotechnology. New York: Marcel Dekker, 1989.
40.
40. Box GEP, Hunter WG, Hunter JS: Statistics for Experimenters. New York: John Wiley, 1978.
