| Title |
Critical assessment of different methods for quantitative measurement of metallodrug-protein associations
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Analytical & Bioanalytical Chemistry, August 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00216-018-1328-8 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Luis Galvez, Sarah Theiner, Márkó Grabarics, Christian R. Kowol, Bernhard K. Keppler, Stephan Hann, Gunda Koellensperger |
| Abstract |
Quantitative screening for potential drug-protein binding is an essential step in developing novel metal-based anticancer drugs. ICP-MS approaches are at the core of this task; however, many applications lack in the capability of large-scale high-throughput screenings and proper validation. In this work, we critically discuss the analytical figures of merit and the potential method-based quantitative differences applying four different ICP-MS strategies to ex vivo drug-serum incubations. Two candidate drugs, more specifically, two Pt(IV) complexes with known differences of binding affinity towards serum proteins were selected. The study integrated centrifugal ultrafiltration followed by flow injection analysis, turbulent flow chromatography (TFC), and size exclusion chromatography (SEC), all combined with inductively coupled plasma-mass spectrometry (ICP-MS). As a novelty, for the first time, UHPLC SEC-ICP-MS was implemented to enable rapid protein separation to be performed within a few minutes at > 90% column recovery for protein adducts and small molecules. Graphical abstract Quantitative screening for potential drug-protein binding is an essential step in developingnovel metal-based anticancer drugs. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 2 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 2 | 67% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 25 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 25 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 24% |
| Student > Master | 5 | 20% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 20% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 8% |
| Researcher | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 5 | 20% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Chemistry | 12 | 48% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 12% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 2 | 8% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 4% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 6 | 24% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 22 October 2018.
All research outputs
#20,167,676
of 25,655,374 outputs
Outputs from Analytical & Bioanalytical Chemistry
#6,140
of 9,702 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#253,187
of 345,351 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Analytical & Bioanalytical Chemistry
#84
of 168 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,655,374 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 9,702 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.1. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 345,351 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 168 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.