1998
DOI: 10.1016/s0040-4020(98)00135-5
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Rapid deconvolution of combinatorial libraries using HPLC fractionation

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
14
0
1

Year Published

1999
1999
2008
2008

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 21 publications
(15 citation statements)
references
References 17 publications
0
14
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…A number of deconvolution approaches have been presented, the most commonly used being iterative, , positional scanning, and the sequencing of resin-bound peptides or tags from one-bead−one-compound libraries. ,, While straightforward, the iterative approach is an inherently time-consuming deconvolution method due to the repetitive rounds of synthesis and testing, requiring the same number of syntheses as the original number of nondefined diversity positions in the library. Other deconvolution methods include orthogonal pooling, subtractive pooling, bogus coin pooling, , indexed pooling, libraries of libraries, affinity separation, and mass spectrometry based strategies. The theoretical and comparative evaluations of these methods have been reported. ,, …”
Section: Deconvolution Strategies Of Mixture-based Librariesmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…A number of deconvolution approaches have been presented, the most commonly used being iterative, , positional scanning, and the sequencing of resin-bound peptides or tags from one-bead−one-compound libraries. ,, While straightforward, the iterative approach is an inherently time-consuming deconvolution method due to the repetitive rounds of synthesis and testing, requiring the same number of syntheses as the original number of nondefined diversity positions in the library. Other deconvolution methods include orthogonal pooling, subtractive pooling, bogus coin pooling, , indexed pooling, libraries of libraries, affinity separation, and mass spectrometry based strategies. The theoretical and comparative evaluations of these methods have been reported. ,, …”
Section: Deconvolution Strategies Of Mixture-based Librariesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Using this technique, ligand−receptor complexes in solution following ultrafiltration can be determined by electrospray mass spectrometry. Similar deconvolution approaches involve the separation of ligand−receptor complex from unbound compounds by size exclusion chromatography followed by identification of bound ligand by electrospray mass spectrometry 75,76 or successive fractionations by HPLC followed by mass spectrometry analysis of the library and active fractions . These different analytical-based deconvolution approaches to date have been used only for relatively small libraries (i.e., containing up to 4 000 individual compounds).…”
Section: Deconvolution Strategies Of Mixture-based Librariesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Auch wenn zwei stereogene Elemente miteinander verbundenen sind oder bei einer Verknüpfung entstehen, sollte es vorteilhaft sein, zunächst die Racemate von zwei oder drei Diastereomeren am biologischen Target zu testen 22. Mit der schneller werdenden Entwicklung verbesserter Analysenmethoden und Trenntechniken zur Dekonvolution komplexer Mischungen23 können die stereochemischen Anforderungen an Aufbaureaktionen künftig sogar noch weiter gesenkt werden.…”
Section: Das Problem Aus Der Sicht Der Verfahrensentwicklungunclassified
“…[24] One of the problems associated with the SPSAF procedure is the lack of rapid and reliable analysis methods for verifying the presence of all the predicted diversomers and the formation of undistorted libraries. Although several techniques have been proposed for the validation of medium arrays of mixed compounds, most of them are time-consuming [25] and need to be supported by high-technology instrumentation. [26,27] We report herein that it is possible to apply the SPSAF procedure to a symmetric diketopiperazine scaffold for the preparation of libraries of mixed amides using the isobutyl chloroformate (IBC) protocol and that the correct formation of the desired product can be monitored by quantitative GC analysis of the isobutyl alcohol (iBuOH) formed as a co-product in the coupling reaction.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%