2016
DOI: 10.1038/srep37741
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

mQC: A Heuristic Quality-Control Metric for High-Throughput Drug Combination Screening

Abstract: Quality control (QC) metrics are critical in high throughput screening (HTS) platforms to ensure reliability and confidence in assay data and downstream analyses. Most reported HTS QC metrics are designed for plate level or single well level analysis. With the advent of high throughput combination screening there is a need for QC metrics that quantify the quality of combination response matrices. We introduce a predictive, interpretable, matrix-level QC metric, mQC, based on a mix of data-derived and heuristic… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1

Citation Types

1
6
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
5
1

Relationship

1
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 8 publications
(7 citation statements)
references
References 30 publications
1
6
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In collaboration with the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences, we previously performed a viability matrix combination screen of their MIPE library of ∼1900 oncology-focused compounds [42] to identify anti-NBL, synergistic combinations with two BETi (JQ1 and IBET151) in two MYCN -amplified, TP53 mutant NBL cell lines (Lan-1 and SK-N-BE(2)C [hereafter referred to as BE(2)C]) [40] . In general, an interpretable, matrix-level quality control measure mQC (described in reference 43 ), confirmed confidence in the results, with the vast majority of drug combinations in both cell lines rating “good,” (>95% of BE(2)C combinations and 80% of Lan-1 combinations). Over half of all drugs in the MIPE library demonstrated some degree of synergy with the BETi, as demonstrated by a delta Bliss Sum Negative (DBSumNeg) value that was < 0 based on the Bliss Independence model of synergy determination [44] .…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 56%
“…In collaboration with the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences, we previously performed a viability matrix combination screen of their MIPE library of ∼1900 oncology-focused compounds [42] to identify anti-NBL, synergistic combinations with two BETi (JQ1 and IBET151) in two MYCN -amplified, TP53 mutant NBL cell lines (Lan-1 and SK-N-BE(2)C [hereafter referred to as BE(2)C]) [40] . In general, an interpretable, matrix-level quality control measure mQC (described in reference 43 ), confirmed confidence in the results, with the vast majority of drug combinations in both cell lines rating “good,” (>95% of BE(2)C combinations and 80% of Lan-1 combinations). Over half of all drugs in the MIPE library demonstrated some degree of synergy with the BETi, as demonstrated by a delta Bliss Sum Negative (DBSumNeg) value that was < 0 based on the Bliss Independence model of synergy determination [44] .…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 56%
“…Many measures have been proposed to evaluate assay quality. These can be related to plate level controls and sample level controls (Chen et al, 2016). Z factor is the most commonly used measure of screening assay quality indicating the ''assay window'', which refers to the space between positive and negative control where screening factors should exhibit their activity.…”
Section: Secretome Analysis and Target Identificationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Recently, strict standard mean difference (SSMD) has been proposed for assessing data quality in screening assays (Zhang, 2007(Zhang, , 2008. Similar to Z -factor, SSMD characterizes the performance of the controls on an individual plate (Chen et al, 2016). However, the advantage of SSMD lies in probabilistic interpretation and statistical estimation and inference (Zhang, 2008).…”
Section: Secretome Analysis and Target Identificationmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Newly developed drug sensitivity assays should first be optimized to establish signal dynamic range using quality control metrics (QCM; e.g. Analysis of Variance (ANOVA), Z-factor (Z), Signal window (SW) and coefficient of variation (CV)) in single wells or on a plate level, followed by implementation of the optimized experimental parameters using a well-established drug and cell line [19][20][21] . Thereafter, the optimized assay should be validated and the results reported using suitable drug response metrics (e.g.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%