Determining appropriate substrate conversion for enzymatic assays in high-throughput screening

65Citations
Citations of this article
84Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

It is generally accepted that the conversion of substrate should be kept at less than 10% of the total substrate used when studying enzyme kinetics. However, 10% or less substrate conversion often will not produce sufficient signal changes required for robust high-throughput screening (HTS). To increase the signal-to-background ratio, HTS is often performed at higher than 10% substrate conversion. Because the consequences of high substrate conversion are poorly understood, the screening results are sometimes questioned by enzymologists. The quality of an assay is judged by the ability to detect an inhibitor under HTS conditions, which depends on the robustness of the primary detection signal (Z factor) and the sensitivity to an inhibitor. The assay sensitivity to an inhibitor is reflected in the observed IC50 value or percent inhibition at a fixed compound concentration when single-point data are collected. The major concern for an enzymatic assay under high substrate conversion is that the sensitivity of the screen may be compromised. Here we derive the relationship between the IC50 value for a given inhibitor and the percentage of substrate conversion using a first-order kinetic model under conditions that obey Henri-Michaelis-Menten kinetics. The derived theory was further verified experimentally with a cAMP-dependent protein kinase. This model provides guidance for assay developers to choose an appropriate substrate conversion in designing an enzymatic assay, balancing the needs for robust signal and sensitivity to inhibitors. © 2003 The Society for Biomolecular Screening.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Wu, G., Yuan, Y., & Hodge, C. N. (2003). Determining appropriate substrate conversion for enzymatic assays in high-throughput screening. Journal of Biomolecular Screening, 8(6), 694–700. https://doi.org/10.1177/1087057103260050

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free