ArticleSLAS discovery : advancing life sciences R & D2021
The Use of Informer Sets in Screening: Perspectives on an Efficient Strategy to Identify New Probes.
Article in SLAS discovery : advancing life sciences R & D, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- High-Throughput Screens of Repurposing Hub and DOS Chemical Libraries Reveal Compounds with Novel and Potent Inhibitory Activity Against the Essential Non-Neuronal Acetylcholinesterase ofInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2025Article
- Discovery of antibiotics that selectively kill metabolically dormant bacteria.Cell chemical biology · 2024Article
- Bayes optimal informer sets for early-stage drug discovery.Biometrics · 2023Article
- Phenotypic Screening for Small Molecules that Protect β-Cells from Glucolipotoxicity.ACS chemical biology · 2022Article
- Use of AD Informer Set compounds to explore validity of novel targets in Alzheimer's disease pathology.Alzheimer's & dementia (New York, N. Y.) · 2022Article
- AD Informer Set: Chemical tools to facilitate Alzheimer's disease drug discovery.Alzheimer's & dementia (New York, N. Y.) · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Small-molecule discovery typically involves large-scale screening campaigns, spanning multiple compound collections. However, such activities can be cost- or time-prohibitive, especially when using complex assay systems, limiting the number of compounds tested. Further, low hit rates can make the process inefficient. Sparse coverage of chemical structure or biological activity space can lead to limited success in a primary screen and represents a missed opportunity by virtue of selecting the "wrong" compounds to test. Thus, the choice of screening collections becomes of paramount importance. In this perspective, we discuss the utility of generating "informer sets" for small-molecule discovery, and how this strategy can be leveraged to prioritize probe candidates. While many researchers may assume that informer sets are focused on particular targets (e.g., kinases) or processes (e.g., autophagy), efforts to assemble informer sets based on historical bioactivity or successful human exposure (e.g., repurposing collections) have shown promise as well. Another method for generating informer sets is based on chemical structure, particularly when the compounds have unknown activities and targets. We describe our efforts to screen an informer set representing a collection of 100,000 small molecules synthesized through diversity-oriented synthesis (DOS). This process enables researchers to identify activity early and more extensively screen only a few chemical scaffolds, rather than the entire collection. This elegant and economic outcome is a goal of the informer set approach. Here, we aim not only to shed light on this process, but also to promote the use of informer sets more widely in small-molecule discovery projects.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.