DOE:Layout 1 14/1/10 19:54 Page 42
Assays
anecdotes prevail in the industry. With this in mind
Figure 1: Current level of use of DOE in assay
and as part HTStec’s tracking of emerging life sci-
development ence marketplaces, a survey was undertaken in June
2009. The objectives were to examine: 1) how
Never used DOE and no
Actively using DOE today widely DOE approaches in AD are used; 2) what is
plans to use in future
23%
20%
the current level of understanding of DOE; 3) what
views people hold about DOE and its benefits;
4) what success has been achieved; 5) which aspects
Have previously used DOE,
of DOE are problematic; and 6) what restricts its
but not using it today
12%
wider implementation today. Some of the findings
of this market report
1
form the basis of this article
Occasionally using DOE
and the setting to review the tools that currently
22%
support DOE in AD.
Never used DOE, but
planning to implement it in
the future
23%
Current use of DOE in AD
© HTStec 2009
The survey showed that only around 5% of all
assays developed today were done using DOE,
although the expectation was that significant cost
Figure 2: Main perceived benefits of DOE in assay
savings (3x) would be achieved by applying DOE.
Figure 1 shows the current level of use of DOE in
development
AD among respondents to the HTStec survey.
Some 45% of survey respondents were using DOE
Faster assay optimisation (ie reduce assay development bottlenecks) 77%
in some aspects of AD today, with a further 23%
More thorough evaluation of assay variables 71%
planning to implement it in the future. An addi-
Reveals unexpected interactions between components 60%
tional 12% had tried DOE, but are not currently
More robust (stable) assays 60%
using it today. That left 20% that have never used
Assay cost savings (ie on reagents and/or biology) 45%
DOE and remain to be convinced about its utility
Allows global as well as local maxima to be easily identified 35%
in AD. To date DOE has shown most promise with
Better quality hits 28%
biochemical assays, however it is increasingly being
Results can be standardised, and presented in a language that cuts
22%
across disciplines
applied to cell-based assays, although often limited
Improves the skills set/repertoire of assay biologists 18% here to discrete steps or to fewer variables.
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80%
% Responding
Main benefits if DOE in AD
© HTStec 2009
The majority (77%) of survey respondents per-
ceived the main benefit of DOE in AD to be faster
assay optimisation (ie reduce assay development
Figure 3: Reasons that have most prevented
bottlenecks) (Figure 2). This was followed by more
thorough evaluation of assay variables (71%
respondents using or considering DOE
responding); reveals unexpected interactions
between components (60% responding); and more
Too hard to implement 21%
robust (stable) assays (60% responding).
Lack of integrated solutions 18% Improving the skills set/repertoire of assay biolo-
Too hard to persuade others of the power of DOE 18% gists and enabling results that can be standardised
I don’t know how to do it 13%
and presented in a language that cuts across disci-
Don’t fully understand the benefits 11%
plines, were both perceived as the least important
benefits of DOE in AD.
Very steep learning curve 7%
Too statistical (lack appropriate background) 5%
Why has DOE not been widely
Don’t understand what’s going on –
4%
prefer to change one setting at a time
implemented in AD?
Technique surrounded in mystery and misunderstanding 2%
The reason that had most prevented survey respon-
It doesn’t work 2%
dents from using or considering DOE was too hard
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25%
to implement. This was followed by lack of inte-
© HTStec 2009 % of Respondents
grated solutions; too hard to persuade others of the
power of DOE; I don’t know how to do it; and I
don’t fully understand the benefits (Figure 3).
42 Drug Discovery World Winter 2009/10
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88