Comparison of Assay Technologies for a Nuclear Receptor Assay Screen Reveals Differences in the Sets of Identified Functional Antagonists

Abstract

Many assay technologies currently exist to develop high-throughput screening assays, and the number of choices continues to increase. Results from a previous study comparing assay technologies in our laboratory do not support the common assumption that the same hits would be found regardless of which assay technology is used. To extend this investigation, a nuclear receptor antagonist assay was developed using 3 assay formats: AlphaScreen, time-resolved fluorescence (TRF), and time-resolved fluorescence resonance energy transfer (TR-FRET). Compounds (∼42,000) from the Novartis library were evaluated in all 3 assay formats. A total of 128 compounds were evaluated in dose-response experiments, and 109 compounds were confirmed active from all 3 formats. The AlphaScreen, TRF, and TR-FRET assay technologies identified 104, 23, and 57 active compounds, respectively, with only 18 compounds active in all 3 assay formats. A total of 128 compounds were evaluated in a cell-based functional assay, and 35 compounds demonstrated activity in this cellular assay. Furthermore, 34, 11, and 16 hits that were originally identified in the dose-response experiment by AlphaScreen, TRF, and TR-FRET assay technologies, respectively, were functionally active. The results of the study indicated that AlphaScreen identified the greatest number of functional antagonists.

References

1. Hertzberg RP, Pope AJ: High-throughput screening: new technology for the 21st century . Curr Opin Chem Bio 2000;4: 445-451 .

2. Sills MA, Weiss D, Pham Q, Schweitzer R, Wu X, Wu JJ: Comparison of assay technologies for a tyrosine kinase assay generates different results in high throughput screening . J Biomol Screen 2002;7: 191-214 .

3. Mere L, Bennett T, Coassin P, England P, Hamman B, Rink T, et al: Miniaturized FRET assays and microfluidics: key components for ultra-high-throughput screening . Drug Discov Today 1999;4: 363-369 .

4. Glickman JF, Wu X, Mercuri R, Illy C, Bowen BR, He Y, et al: A comparison of ALPHAScreen, TR-FRET, and TRF as assay methods for FXR nuclear receptors . J Biomol Screen 2002;7: 3-10 .

5. Parks DJ, Blanchard SG, Bledsoe RK, Chandra G, Consler TG, Kliewer SA, et al: Bile acids: natural ligands for an orphan nuclear receptor . Science 1999;284: 1365-1368 .

6. Wang H, Chen J, Hollister K, Sowers LC, Forman BM: Endogenous bile acids are ligands for the nuclear receptor FXR/BAR . Mol Cell 1999;3: 543-553 .

7. Zhang J-H, Chung TDY, Oldenburg KR: A simple statistical parameter for use in evaluation and validation of high throughput screening assays . J Biomol Screen 1999;4: 67-73 .