Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
The ability to rapidly and consistently measure aqueous solubility in a preclinical environment is critical to the successful identification of promising discovery compounds. The advantage of an early solubility screen is timely attrition of compounds likely to fail due to poor absorption or low bioavailability before more costly screens are performed. However, due to the large number of compounds and limited sample amounts, thermodynamic solubility measurements are not feasible at this stage. A kinetic solubility measurement is an alternative to thermodynamic measurements at the discovery stage that provides a rank listing of solubility values with minimal sample requirements. A kinetic solubility measurement is attractive from an automation vantage because it features rapid data acquisition and is amenable to multi-well formats. We describe the use of a robotic liquid/plate handler coupled to nephelometry detection for the measurement of kinetic solubility. We highlight the liquid handling validation, serial dilution parameters, and a comparison to the previous method. Experiments to further enhance throughput, or increase confidence in the automation steps, are described and the effects of these experiments are presented. In our integrated nephelometry method, we observe rapid liquid handling with an error of less than 10%, after a series of validation studies, and a sample throughput up to 1800 compounds per week. We compare the nephelometry method with our semi-thermodynamic flow-injection analysis (FIA) method, and find a 75% bin agreement between the methods.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jpba.2004.07.022 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!