Copyright © 2006 Elsevier Ltd All rights reserved.
How good is your screening library?
Available online 21 June 2006.
References and further reading may be available for this article. To view references and further reading you must purchase this article.
Efficient library design is an ongoing challenge for investigators seeking novel ligands for proteins, whether for drug discovery or chemical biology. Strategies that add neglected chemistry or exclude unproductive compounds are two dominant recent themes, as is a growing awareness of molecular complexity and its implications. The choice of how complex molecules in screening libraries should be often amounts to how big they should be. Small, simple molecules have lower affinities and must be screened at high concentration, but they will also have higher hit rates. Larger compounds, on the other hand, will often more closely resemble final drugs, but because they are more highly functionalized and specific, they will have much lower hit rates. The best general-purpose screening libraries may well be those of intermediate complexity that are free of artifact-causing nuisance compounds.
Article Outline
- Introduction
- What do we want?
- Chemical space: breaking it down
- Artifacts are a real nuisance
- Anticipate follow up
- Fragment-based screening
- Inspired by nature?
- Should screening libraries contain drugs and drug candidates?
- Clustering
- Compound acquisition
- Conclusions and outlook
- Update
- References and recommended reading
- Acknowledgements
- References







E-mail Article
Add to my Quick Links

Cited By in Scopus (5)






