↓ Skip to main content

Early identification of hERG liability in drug discovery programs by automated patch clamp

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Pharmacology, September 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (51st percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (73rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
130 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Early identification of hERG liability in drug discovery programs by automated patch clamp
Published in
Frontiers in Pharmacology, September 2014
DOI 10.3389/fphar.2014.00203
Pubmed ID
Authors

Timm Danker, Clemens Möller

Abstract

Blockade of the cardiac ion channel coded by human ether-à-gogo-related gene (hERG) can lead to cardiac arrhythmia, which has become a major concern in drug discovery and development. Automated electrophysiological patch clamp allows assessment of hERG channel effects early in drug development to aid medicinal chemistry programs and has become routine in pharmaceutical companies. However, a number of potential sources of errors in setting up hERG channel assays by automated patch clamp can lead to misinterpretation of data or false effects being reported. This article describes protocols for automated electrophysiology screening of compound effects on the hERG channel current. Protocol details and the translation of criteria known from manual patch clamp experiments to automated patch clamp experiments to achieve good quality data are emphasized. Typical pitfalls and artifacts that may lead to misinterpretation of data are discussed. While this article focuses on hERG channel recordings using the QPatch (Sophion A/S, Copenhagen, Denmark) technology, many of the assay and protocol details given in this article can be transferred for setting up different ion channel assays by automated patch clamp and are similar on other planar patch clamp platforms.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 130 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 130 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 26 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 19 15%
Student > Bachelor 17 13%
Student > Master 12 9%
Other 11 8%
Other 19 15%
Unknown 26 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 21 16%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 20 15%
Chemistry 19 15%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 14 11%
Medicine and Dentistry 6 5%
Other 19 15%
Unknown 31 24%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 04 September 2014.
All research outputs
#13,411,842
of 22,761,738 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Pharmacology
#4,025
of 16,010 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#112,337
of 237,378 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Pharmacology
#14
of 53 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,761,738 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 16,010 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its peers.
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 237,378 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 53 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its contemporaries.