Lead optimization quantification

Because the ester hydrolysis leads to a change in acidity, as in hydrolytic lipase-or esterase-catalyzed kinetic resolution, an appropriate pH indicator can be used for quantification [14,15]). In an optimized version (Kazlauskas test) [15], a linear correlation between the amount of acid generated and the degree of protonation of the indicator was ensured by using a buffer (e. g., iV,iV-bis(2-hydroxyethyl)-2-(aminoethanesulfonic acid) (= BES), and a pH indicator (e. g., / -nitrophenol) having the same pKa value. The advantage of this system relates to the fact that p-nitrophenol esters are not necessary, i. e., normal substrates such as methyl esters 10 can be used. 

Lewis, R.A., Good, A.C. and Pickett, S.D. Quantification of Molecular Similarity and Its Application to Combinatorial Chemistry. In Computer-Assisted Lead Finding and Optimization Current Tools for Medicinal Chemistry Eds. vande Waterbeemd, H., Testa, B. and Folkers, G., Wiley-VCH Weinheim, 1997,pp. 135-156. 

We are sure that this book will be of great value for everybody involved in lead discovery and optimization. It will contribute to further progress in this field and will hopefully pave the way for even better understanding and quantification of the effects governing protein-ligand interactions. 

Lewis RA, Good AC. Quantification of molecular similarity and its application to combinatorial chemistry. In van de Waterbeemd H, Testa B, Folkers G, eds. Computer-Assisted Lead Finding and Optimization. Zurich Wiley-YCH, 1997 137-156. 

A central problem in botb cases is the definition of optimal conditions for the quantification of a stimulating cofactor. Generally, conditions must be sought that lead to maximal stimulation of an otherwise... 

The amount of individual internal standard should be optimized to make the relative intensity of the internal standard peak in the range of >20-<5(X)% in comparison to the ion peak corresponding to the most abundant species in the class. When the relative peak intensity of a selected internal standard is lower than 20% in comparison to the base peak, the experimental error is greatly amplified. Addition of too much internal standard could lead to an ion suppression effect, making the endogenous lipid species close to the baseline. Accordingly, the optimal amounts of internal standards necessary for lipid quantification could vary largely for different kinds of samples. 

First, it is always better to optimize the collision energy that can balance the fragment intensities of all the ions of the entire class of interest for quantification of lipid species by tandem MS in shotgun lipidomics even more than one internal standards are employed in the method. Similarly, optimization of the SRM/MRM conditions for individual species in an LC-MS/MS method is not recommended when interest is to quantify all the species of a class, unless a calibration curve for each individual species is established under the identical conditions, since optimization of MRM conditions for individual lipid species leads to an incomparable response factor of the species of interest to that of the selected internal standard. In both cases of shotgun lipidomics and LC-MS/MS analyses, different collision energies applied for different species could lead to substantial errors in quantitative analysis, as discussed previously [22]. Careful attention to CID energy must be exercised if accurate quantification is a goal. 

This chapter presents a disruption risk quantification method and a multiobjective supplier selection model to generate mitigation plans against disruption risks. The proposed risk quantification method considers risk as a function of two components—impact and occurrence. Impact is modeled using GEVD distributions, and occurrence is assumed to be Poisson-distributed. The disruption risk quantification method calculates the estimated value of the loss due to disruptive events at a supplier, which is then used in a multi-objective optimization model. The model minimizes cost, lead time, and risk and then maximizes quality and determines the optimal supplier and order allocation for multiple products. The model is solved using four different GP solution techniques—preemptive, non-preemptive, min-max, and fuzzy GP Optimal solutions are displayed using the VPA, and the performance of the solution techniques is discussed. We observe that, for the data set we have tested, preemptive GP, non-preemptive GP, and min-max GP achieve three out of four objectives. 

---