Skip to main content

Costs of Assays



I'm giving some talks over the summer, and am getting bored with some of the stuff I have, so I'm thinking of some new stuff to put in to add a bit of variety and interest. I'm getting interested in thinking about assay level attrition, and trying to put more of a taxonomy and inter-relationship mapping between assays used in drug discovery. As part of this, there is a cost component for each type of assay, going from very cheap to really really expensive. Here's a little picture from the presentation I've put together - I used educated guesses for the costs, so please, please critique them !


So, what do people think of the guesstimates of costs per compound per assay point on the picture above. I know it is really variable, there are startup costs to set something up, etc, etc. But what do you think about the orders of magnitude, are they about right? One of the key features of the numbers I've put there, are that there are big transitions at the switch between in silico and in vitro, and then on entering clinical trials.

The picture at the top of this post (about unicorns) is from the very funny http://www.depressedcopywriter.com/.

Comments

Bin said…
Hi, John, this picture is very interesting. Do you know how they got this data? It would be great to have another one illustrating the time line of each assay.
Lo Sauer said…
I applaud you for the daring attempt, but it is a difficult subject and biased (except for the unicorns which of course do exist ;) ). 'In silico' too requires scientist writing the software in the first place, and the models need to be verified and improved in co-existence with empirical experiments - thus raising costs.

One could easily envision 'selling' in-silico results based on obsolete software-models (I've seen such papers), yet performing an kinase assay past its expiration date is often unthinkable.

The cost of clinical trials are incredibly varied depending on the type of drug and drug target in question, whereas those of in-silico are typically not.

In-silico models are of course primarily optmized to computing only what is needed, and constrained by the underlying model, whereas empirical data generation is limited by other constraints, and often much more data is generated than ever published (especially when we are talking about corporate science)
jpo said…
Yes, of course, each problem is different, and the costs can be very low, or very high. Across each level of the assay hierarchy there will be cheaper assays and more expensive ones, but I made an estimate.

The costs of development are not factored in to my numbers either, since it is difficult to know when to stop..... A scientist writes the software, and they have a salary that pays them during this time, but do you count the cost of their education, etc.

It's a difficult problem!
Dear John,
I am interesting in the source of this prices. Does any reference exist supporting them?
Thank's!
jpo said…
Hi Vladmir.

The costs are just my personal estimates for this. So they are just that estimates. There could be some better ways of getting estimates - for example going to a CRO and asking for quotes for a series of defined and typical assays. The issue there is that there are many factors that would complicate things - they would have a profit margin to include, and also want to recoup cost of capital, etc. Secondly, they would not be interested in running a single biochemical assay for a few dollars, and then there would be a 'volume discount' to handle.

Another interesting number, alongside timeline as suggest by Bin, would be number of assays run per year, my guess it would be many billions for the virtual screening end of the spectrum through to maybe a few thousand at the clinical trials end.

Popular posts from this blog

UniChem 2.0

UniChem new beta interface and web services We are excited to announce that our UniChem beta site will become the default one on the 11th of May. The new system will allow us to better maintain UniChem and to bring new functionality in a more sustainable way. The current interface and web services will still be reachable for a period of time at https://www.ebi.ac.uk/unichem/legacy . In addition to it, the most popular legacy REST endpoints will also remain implemented in the new web services: https://www.ebi.ac.uk/unichem/api/docs#/Legacy Some downtime is expected during the swap.  What's new? UniChem’s current API and web application is implemented with a framework version that’s not maintained and the cost of updating it surpasses the cost of rebuilding it. In order to improve stability, security, and support the implementation and fast delivery of new features, we have decided to revamp our user-facing systems using the latest version of widely used and maintained frameworks, i

A python client for accessing ChEMBL web services

Motivation The CheMBL Web Services provide simple reliable programmatic access to the data stored in ChEMBL database. RESTful API approaches are quite easy to master in most languages but still require writing a few lines of code. Additionally, it can be a challenging task to write a nontrivial application using REST without any examples. These factors were the motivation for us to write a small client library for accessing web services from Python. Why Python? We choose this language because Python has become extremely popular (and still growing in use) in scientific applications; there are several Open Source chemical toolkits available in this language, and so the wealth of ChEMBL resources and functionality of those toolkits can be easily combined. Moreover, Python is a very web-friendly language and we wanted to show how easy complex resource acquisition can be expressed in Python. Reinventing the wheel? There are already some libraries providing access to ChEMBL d

ChEMBL 30 released

  We are pleased to announce the release of ChEMBL 30. This version of the database, prepared on 22/02/2022 contains: 2,786,911 compound records 2,157,379 compounds (of which 2,136,187 have mol files) 19,286,751 activities 1,458,215 assays 14,855 targets 84,092 documents Data can be downloaded from the ChEMBL FTP site: https://ftp.ebi.ac.uk/pub/databases/chembl/ChEMBLdb/releases/chembl_30/ Please see ChEMBL_30 release notes for full details of all changes in this release:  https://ftp.ebi.ac.uk/pub/databases/chembl/ChEMBLdb/releases/chembl_30/chembl_30_release_notes.txt New Deposited Datasets EUbOPEN Chemogenomic Library (src_id = 55, ChEMBL Document ID CHEMBL4689842):   The EUbOPEN consortium is an Innovative Medicines Initiative (IMI) funded project to enable and unlock biology in the open. The aims of the project are to assemble an open access chemogenomic library comprising about 5,000 well annotated compounds covering roughly 1,000 different proteins, to synthesize at least

LSH-based similarity search in MongoDB is faster than postgres cartridge.

TL;DR: In his excellent blog post , Matt Swain described the implementation of compound similarity searches in MongoDB . Unfortunately, Matt's approach had suboptimal ( polynomial ) time complexity with respect to decreasing similarity thresholds, which renders unsuitable for production environments. In this article, we improve on the method by enhancing it with Locality Sensitive Hashing algorithm, which significantly reduces query time and outperforms RDKit PostgreSQL cartridge . myChEMBL 21 - NoSQL edition    Given that NoSQL technologies applied to computational chemistry and cheminformatics are gaining traction and popularity, we decided to include a taster in future myChEMBL releases. Two especially appealing technologies are Neo4j and MongoDB . The former is a graph database and the latter is a BSON document storage. We would like to provide IPython notebook -based tutorials explaining how to use this software to deal with common cheminformatics p

Multi-task neural network on ChEMBL with PyTorch 1.0 and RDKit

  Update: KNIME protocol with the model available thanks to Greg Landrum. Update: New code to train the model and ONNX exported trained models available in github . The use and application of multi-task neural networks is growing rapidly in cheminformatics and drug discovery. Examples can be found in the following publications: - Deep Learning as an Opportunity in VirtualScreening - Massively Multitask Networks for Drug Discovery - Beyond the hype: deep neural networks outperform established methods using a ChEMBL bioactivity benchmark set But what is a multi-task neural network? In short, it's a kind of neural network architecture that can optimise multiple classification/regression problems at the same time while taking advantage of their shared description. This blogpost gives a great overview of their architecture. All networks in references above implement the hard parameter sharing approach. So, having a set of activities relating targets and molecules we can tra