Friday, September 03, 2010

Site Search

Archive for the ‘Cell Analysis’ Category

DG-AMMOS: A New tool to generate 3D conformation of small molecules using Distance Geometry and Automated Molecular Mechanics Optimization for in silico Screening.

Discovery of new bioactive molecules that could enter drug discovery programs or that could serve as chemical probes is a very complex and costly endeavor. Structure-based and ligand-based in silico screening approaches are nowadays extensively used to complement experimental screening approaches in order to increase the effectiveness of the process and facilitating the screening of thousands or millions of small molecules against a biomolecular target.

Both in silico screening methods require as input a suitable chemical compound collection and most often the 3D structure of the small molecules has to be generated since compounds are usually delivered in 1D SMILES, CANSMILES or in 2D SDF formats.

Results: Here, we describe the new open source program DG-AMMOS which allows the generation of the 3D conformation of small molecules using Distance Geometry and their optimization via Automated Molecular Mechanics Optimization. The program is validated on the Astex dataset, the ChemBridge Diversity database and on a number of small molecules with known crystal structures extracted from the Cambridge Structural Database.

A comparison with the free program Balloon and the well-known commercial program Omega generating the 3D of small molecules is carried out. The results show that the new free program DG-AMMOS is a very efficient 3D structure generator engine.

Conclusions: DG-AMMOS provides fast, automated and reliable access to the generation of 3D conformation of small molecules and facilitates the preparation of a compound collection prior to high-throughput virtual screening computations.

The validation of DG-AMMOS on several different datasets proves that generated structures are generally of equal quality or sometimes better than structures obtained by other tested methods.

Author: David LagorceTania PenchevaBruno VilloutreixMaria Miteva
Credits/Source: BMC Chemical Biology 2009, 9:6

Lumpy Assay Results

When we screen zillions of compounds from our files against a new drug target, what can we expect? How many hits will we get, and what percentage of those are actually worth looking at in more detail?

These are long-running questions, but over the last twenty years some lessons have been learned. A new paper in J. Med. Chem. emphasizes one of the biggest ones: if at all possible, run your assays with some sort of detergent in them.

Why would you do a thing like that? Compound aggregation. The last few years have seen a rapidly growing appreciation of this problem. Many small molecules will, under some conditions, clump together in solution and make a new species that has little or nothing to do with their individual members. These new aggregates can bind to protein surfaces, mess up fluorescent readouts, cause the target protein to stick to their surfaces instead, and cause all kinds of trouble. Adding detergent to the assay system cuts this down a great deal, and any compound that’s a hit without detergent but loses activity with it should be viewed with strong suspicion.

The authors of this paper (from the NIH’s Chemical Genomics Center and Brian Shoichet’s lab at UCSF) were screening against the cysteine protease cruzain, a target for Chagas disease. They ran their whole library of compounds through under both detergent-free and detergent conditions and compared the results. In an earlier screening effort of this sort against beta-lactamase, nearly 95% of the hits (many of them rather weak) turned out to be aggregator compounds. This campaign showed similar numbers.

There were 15 times as many apparent hits in the detergent-free assay, for one thing. Some of these were apparently activating the enzyme, which is always a bit of an odd thing to explain, since inhibiting enzyme activity is a lot more likely. These activators almost completely disappeared under the detergent conditions, though. And even looking just at the inhibitors, 90% of the hit set in the detergent-free assay went away when detergent was added. (I should note that control cruzain inhibitors performed fine under both sets of assays, so it’s not like the detergent itself was messing with the enzyme to any significant degree).

They point out another benefit to the detergent assay – it seems to improve the data by keeping the enzyme from sticking to the walls of the plastic tubes. That’s a real problem which can kick your data around all over the place – I’ve encountered it myself, and heard a few horror stories over the years. But it’s not something that’s well appreciated outside of the people who set up assays for a living (and not always even among some of them).

So, let’s get rid of those nasty aggegators, right? Not so fast. It turns out that some of the compounds that showed this problem during the earlier beta-lactamase work didn’t cause a problem here, and vice versa. Even using different assays designed to detect aggregation alone gave varying results among sets of compounds. It appears that aggregation is quite sensitive to the specific assay conditions you’re using, so trying to assemble a blacklist of aggregators is probably not going to work. You have to check things every time.

One other interesting point from this paper (and the previous one): curators of large screening collections spend a lot of time weeding out reactive compounds. They don’t want things that will come in and react nonspecifically with labile groups on the target proteins, and that seems like a reasonable thing to do. But in these screens, the compounds with “hot” functional groups didn’t have a particularly high hit rate. You’d expect a cysteine protease to be especially sensitive to this sort of thing, with that reactive thiol right in the active site, but not so. This ties in with the work from Benjamin Cravatt’s group at Scripps, suggesting that even fairly reactive groups have a lot of constraints on them – they have to line up just right to form a covalent bond, and that just doesn’t happen that often.

So perhaps we’ve all been worrying too much about reactive compounds, and not enough about the innocent-looking ones that clump up while we’re not looking. Detergent is your friend!

Source: corante.com

Broad Institute Puts Genedata’s Screener to Work for High-Throughput Screening Data Analysis

Genedata announced today that the Broad Institute is using its Screener software platform to manage and analyze high-throughput screening data as part of its participation in the National Institutes of Health’s Molecular Libraries Roadmap Initiative.

“We’re screening upwards of 50 assays and analyzing more than 20 million wells of screening data” per year, Dave DeCaprio, associate director of the Chemical Biology Platform at the Broad Institute, said. He told BioInform that the Broad has been using the software since May, and that has reduced the time for data analysis from a “few weeks” to hours.

DeCaprio said that he and his colleagues chose Screener because it “is able to analyze a lot of data,” but only needs a “nominally powered-server.” The software sits on the Broad’s local server farm and “the client component gets served out through a web browser.”

Since follow-up biology and chemistry is “extremely expensive” after high-throughput screening, it’s critical to be able to query data from the screens as quickly as possible in order to identify potential problems, he said.

“One of the things we wanted was the ability to have strong analytics on the data, so we could automatically detect problems,” while at the same time offering an interactive feature so he and his team can intervene while looking at the data, he said. “They could quickly jump into the data and see what it really looked like.”

DeCaprio and his team validated the software against “some existing systems we had and existing approaches” from the “top five vendors,” but he declined to offer vendor or software names.

Open source tools he did not wish to name were also part of the evaluation but he said the team didn’t see anything that would support “what we wanted to do in terms of the visualization capabilities.”

“There are great algorithms you can get,” DeCaprio said. “The combination of algorithms, visualization, and manual curation is, I think, incredibly essential to getting high quality data out. That’s not something we saw anywhere else.”

“The key thing for us was the ability to integrate manual curation of the data with the algorithms,” DeCaprio said.

A user can look at all the results from a six-week screen, “visually spot some problems and make corrections, and the algorithms would adjust the data analysis based on that,” he said.

Small Molecule Test Drive

DeCaprio is responsible for the Broad’s infrastructure for small-molecule screening and further development, which includes informatics, compound management, data analysis, and analytical chemistry, as well as the procedural side of the work, he said.

The platform is a “public screening center,” he said. The Broad Institute’s Probe Development Center is one of nine centers funded under the NIH’s Molecular Libraries Probe Production Centers Network, which kicked off last year with $70 million in funding over four years to accelerate the pace at which small molecule probes are developed.

Typical customers for the Broad’s chemical biology platform are scientists who have identified a potential molecule and would like to put it “in front of 350,000 compounds,” he told BioInform.

These scientists can first apply to the NIH, and if accepted, the Broad Institute takes in their assay, runs the screen, and does follow-up chemistry “to basically get them to a chemical probe” DeCaprio said.

In addition to the NIH application process, scientists can apply directly to the Broad and work on a fee-for service basis.

Some of the Broad’s clients include Princeton University’s Bonnie Bassler and Stanford University’s Jerry Crabtree, several research teams at the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, and Massachusetts General Hospital.

Customers for the service are generally academics, DeCaprio said.

“We’re happy to work with anybody, but one of our goals is to make all the data publicly available,” he said. “Everything we do goes into the PubChem database,” which most pharmaceutical firms and biotechs would rather avoid, he said.

Capture It

The intake process at the Broad involves first replicating an outside researcher’s work and then running the screen. Unlike traditional labs, he said, The Broad puts robotics to work on a protocol and all steps and changes are captured in a CambridgeSoft electronic lab notebook system that is made available to the researchers who requested the screen, he said.

“We use that to track all the interactions so that all of the metadata about what’s going on [in] experiments” is captured, DeCaprio said.

Primary data for 325,000 compounds comes off a detection instrument and is processed using Screener to “do QC, correct for controls, [and] normalize the data,” he said. Part of the process is automated but some decisions are manual since it is a “complicated process with a lot of points of failure.”

Some data management steps include a scientist manually marking a screen result as “invalid” or ” what I expected to see,” he said. Screener enables this level of interactivity, which is a feature that DeCaprio appreciates.

After a review of the first set of results with the collaborator, the team can decide which follow-on steps are necessary.

The Broad team is using Screener’s Assay Analyzer module, which visualizes the “raw well-level data.” It captures data from plate readers and processes them according to “predefined business rules.”

A separate module, Condoseo, plots the data on dose-response curves, to give scientists information such as IC50 numbers, which sheds light on the potential effectiveness of a compound.

All of the data stays at the Broad Institute in an “open data-sharing environment.” Participating scientists contribute their biology and findings and sign a data-sharing agreement. “They get access to everybody else’s data,” he said.

“Eventually it all goes public, after a year,” he said. In the first year, it is an environment “where people can access it privately.”

While high-throughput screening data sets are “not huge” — especially compared to ” the next-generation sequencing problems we have,” DeCaprio said that HTS data has its own challenges.

For example, results are “heavily dependent” on the conditions and the context of an assay, DeCaprio said, so he and his colleagues focus on the metadata, the “richness of the data,” associated with the results.

“In the small-molecule space you absolutely have to have” metadata, or the results can end up being “useless.” In a separate project with CambridgeSoft he is working on metadata management “to really try and open up that metadata and make it far more searchable,” he said.

The metadata is captured in the ELN, which is integrated with Screener, he explained, adding that the Broad team used Screener’s APIs to build the integration.

Source: Genomeweb

Novel two-step chemical process makes cancer cells glow quickly, safely

WASHINGTON – Researchers at Massachusetts General Hospital have developed a two-step process that uses a chemical reaction to make live cancer cells light up quickly and safely.

This attains significance because scientists generally label cells with coloured or glowing chemicals to observe how basic cellular activities differ between healthy and cancerous cells, but existing techniques are either too slow or too toxic to perform on live cells.

Under the novel process, chemically modified antibodies first home in on cancer cells, and then a chemical reaction called cycloaddition transfers a dye onto the antibody making the cancer cells glow when viewed through a microscope.

Philip Dawson, a member of Faculty of 1000 Biology and leading authority in chemistry and cell biology, reviewed a study and observed that the novel cycloaddition reaction is fast, very specific, and requires minimal manipulation of the cells.

He comments that, in combining antibody binding with the cycloaddition, “low signal-to-noise ratios are achieved”.

He points out that the new labelling technique could be used to track the location and activity of anti-cancer drugs, the location of cancer-specific proteins within the cell, or to visualize cancer cells inside a living organism.

Dawson concludes that cycloaddition will allow scientists to observe live cancer cells in the body, leading to a better understanding of cancer’s basic processes. (ANI)

Source: http://blog.taragana.com

Sirona Biochem Says SGLT Test Results Confirm Key ‘Breakthrough’

Sirona Biochem Corp. (TSX-V: SBM), an emerging biotech company focused on diabetes and obesity, says results of testing its unique SGLT inhibitor molecules demonstrate a key breakthrough milestone for Sirona Biochem.

Sirona Biochem CEO, Dr. Howard Verrico, said, “There are two vital steps in the early stage of drug testing: validation of concept i.e. a molecule is able to hit the desired target and secondly its in vivo effectiveness. This first round of testing has shown a key breakthrough milestone in the process of validating this concept.”

“The test results now mean we can proceed to find out whether the molecules are selective, safe and robust enough to have potential to be effective when they reach the parts of the body where the re-uptake of glucose needs to be limited.”

Dr. Bertrand Plouvier, Chief Scientist, said, “The results from the first round of screening are indeed very encouraging and Sirona Biochem will use the next following months to further study the molecules through specific assays to demonstrate their effectiveness and drug likeness.”

Dr. Verrico said management of sugar metabolism is a primary medical challenge associated with treating diabetes and obesity and that is why SGLT inhibitors show such promise in this regard. “At present SGLT2 inhibitors have demonstrated their ability to limit the re-uptake of glucose back into the blood stream from urine. However, they have been notoriously lacking in ability to resist being rapidly metabolized by the body, thus rendering them largely ineffective.

“What we have now done is show that our molecules, with their unique GlycoMim® technology, can inhibit the glucose transporter SGLT2. The next challenge, and an exciting one, is to show that our molecules are selective, safe and have the potential to have an increased efficacy compared to the current molecules undergoing clinical development.”

Sirona Biochem owns the worldwide product rights to a library of unique sodium glucose transporter (SGLT) inhibitors to treat diabetes and obesity. SGLT inhibitors, as previously stated, block the re-uptake of excess sugars from urine, which can then reduce high blood sugar towards normal levels.

Sirona Biochem has entered into a strategic partnership with TFChem, a drug discovery company based in Rouen, France. TFChem licenses its technology of fluorinated carbohydrate mimics: GlycoMim®, and products in development to biotech companies. This strategic partnership was completed by a detailed research and licence agreement signed on September 29, 2008.

23.6 million people, or 7.8% of the population of the United States, have diabetes. (February 2009 DACG.ORG)

Market Trends

In 2007, the prevention and treatment of diabetes and its complications was estimated to cost US$ 232 billion according to the International Diabetes Federation. By 2025, this is likely to increase to more than US$ 302.5 billion.

The diabetes drug market reached US$18 billion in 2005, and is expected to increase to $21-25 billion in 2011. With many new products yet to realise their full potential and the high incidence of T2DM expected in emerging markets, prospects for the sector look strong. Some of the fastest growing markets for diabetes are in emerging economies. India, China and Indonesia are in the top 5 for disease prevalence. The impact for both branded and generic drugs is considerable.

Furthermore, in recent years, obesity has become a major health problem for many post-industrial societies, so much so that in 2004, the United States Health and Human Services declared obesity to be a disease. The World Health Organization (WHO) projects that globally in 2005, 1.6 billion adults were overweight with at least 400 million adults obese. By 2015, approximately 2.3 billion adults will be overweight and 700 million will be obese. Obesity poses a major health risk because it greatly increases the risk of co-morbidities such as diabetes, cardiovascular diseases, arthritis, and cancer. Recognizing the potential for a new blockbuster market, major pharmaceutical companies have increasingly focused on obesity and its causes and, in the process, seeking to identify many potential targets and pathways that could be exploited to create novel therapies.

Sirona Biochem’s website is at: www.sironabiochem.com where we feature the most recent information about the company and its activities. Alternatively, investors are able to e-mail all questions and correspondence to info@sironabiochem.com where they can also request to be added to the investor e-mail list to receive all future press releases and updates or call John Dougherty, Corporate Development at 604-641-4466.

About Sirona Biochem

Sirona Biochem Corp. (TSX-V: SBM) is an emerging biotech company dedicated to the discovery and development of novel drug compounds. The current focus is on treatments for Type II diabetes and obesity. Sirona has entered into a license agreement with TFChem S.A.R.L., a drug discovery company based in Rouen, France. TFChem licenses its technology of fluorinated carbohydrate mimics: GlycoMim®, and products in development to biotech companies. The license agreement with TFChem provides for research and development of new compounds known as SGLT Inhibitors. SGLT inhibitors are a new and exciting class of compounds that have great promise and potential to treat both diabetes and obesity.

Mark Senner
President and Director

Neither the TSX Venture Exchange nor its Regulation Services Provider (as that term is defined in the policies of the TSX Venture Exchange) accepts responsibility for the adequacy or accuracy of this release.

Sirona Biochem Corp.
950-789 west pender street
vancouver, b.c., v6c 1h2
Direct: 604-641-4466
Fax: 604-608-5471
info@sironabiochem.com

Source: Marketwire

BioFocus DPI Extends Drug Discovery Collaboration with Lilly Drug Discovery & Development

BioFocus DPI has extended its drug discovery agreement with Eli Lilly and Company until end 2009. Under the terms of the agreement, BioFocus DPI will identify active compounds by screening of Lilly’s library compounds.

The agreement extension announced today builds on the successful collaboration begun in March 2005. BioFocus DPI has been working with Lilly on discovering new compounds that target specific cellular signal transduction pathways. With this agreement, Lilly secures continued access to BioFocus DPI’s screening and biology expertise to identify new potential target compounds.

‘We are pleased to extend this collaboration with Lilly into its fourth year,’ said Dr. Chris Newton, Senior VP, BioFocus DPI. ‘It is satisfying to know that BioFocus DPI’s drug discovery research consistently meets the standards of large pharma companies such as Lilly and that we are successful in these long term collaborative relationships.’

International Symposium Stem Cell Transplantation in Multiple Sclerosis: Sharing the Experience in Moscow, Russia on the 5th of October, 2009

The Symposium is focused on the new modality of multiple sclerosis treatment– immunosuppressive therapy followed by autologous stem cell transplantation. Centers in Europe, North and South America, Russia, China, Israel and Australia have successfully performed this procedure, and, to date, more than 600 stem cell transplantations in multiple sclerosis have been performed worldwide.

Along with promising results there are a number of unclear and challenging issues that are worth studying.

The Symposium intends to share the newly acquired knowledge in the field, to discuss the challenges and perspectives of the method, and to develop collaborative projects. The topics to be covered within the symposium include:

  • Regimens of conditioning: Immunoablation or immunosupression?
  • Types of transplantation: autologous or allogenic?
  • Posttransplant immunological reconstitution
  • Side effects
  • Outcome measures: clinical, imaging, patient-reported outcomes
  • Posttransplant neurorehabilitation
  • Long-term follow-up results
  • Proposal for cooperative studies

We invite the submission of abstracts on the above aspects of stem cell transplantation in multiple sclerosis. All abstracts will be reviewed by an international committee and a number of abstracts will be selected for oral presentation within the Symposium.

www.stemcellms.ru