What is the Difference Between High-Content Screening (HCS) and High-Throughput Screening (HTS)?
High-Content Screening (HCS) and High-Throughput Screening (HTS) are indispensable methods during the early stages of Drug Discovery and Development for identifying novel compounds with the potential to become effective therapies.
HCS and HTS allow for scrutinizing through vast libraries of compounds to identify promising candidates, each with distinct methodologies and advantages. Integrating both techniques not only accelerates this identification process but also provides valuable insights into their mechanisms of action and potential side effects.
This article delves into the differences between HTS and HCS, highlighting their importance and complementary roles in the Drug Discovery and Development process and illustrating how each method contributes to the early stages of drug discovery.
What are HTS and HCS?
High-Throughput Screening
High-Throughput Screening (HTS) is a method designed to rapidly evaluate the biological or biochemical activity of a large number of compounds. This method involves using automated systems and large-scale data analysis to test thousands to millions of chemical, genetic, or pharmacological samples against specific biological targets in a relatively short period. The primary objective of HTS is to identify active compounds, known as "hits", which show potential therapeutic effects.
These initial hits are then subjected to further validation through secondary and tertiary screening assays, which often involve more complex and physiologically relevant systems, like HCS, to confirm the activity and specificity of the hits. HTS is also used in target identification and validation, discovering new proteins or pathways involved in disease mechanisms.
High-Content Screening
HCS, also known as High-Content Analysis (HCA), is an advanced technique used in Drug Discovery and biological research to analyze the effects of chemical compounds, genetic materials, or other molecules with biological activity on cells. Unlike HTS, which primarily focuses on identifying active compounds through single-parameter assays, HCS provides a more detailed, multi-parameter analysis of cellular responses.
This technique integrates the following phases:
-
Cell-Based Assays: the HCS process begins with cell-based assays, where cells are cultured in microtiter plates and exposed to different compounds. Following treatment, cells are stained with fluorescent dyes highlighting specific cellular components or processes.
Cells are commonly used in HCS, although more complex organisms, such as Zebrafish embryos, can also be used as we'll see below.
-
Image Acquisition: HCS uses automated fluorescence microscopy to capture high-resolution images of treated cells, capturing detailed visual information from each well.
-
Image Processing: advanced image processing algorithms then analyze these images to measure various cellular parameters to extract quantitative data on multiple parameters such as cell size and morphology, viability, proliferation, and the localization and intensity of specific molecular markers.
-
Data Integration: qualitative visual data are converted into quantitative information to provide a comprehensive view of complex cellular responses to the compounds, gaining insights into the mechanisms of action of potential drugs.
HCS is particularly valuable for studying complex biological processes such as cell differentiation, apoptosis, signal transduction pathways, and cytoskeletal dynamics. It enables the detection of subtle changes in cellular behavior and identifies off-target effects and toxicities that might not be detected with other assays.
Understanding the Difference Betweeen HCS and HTS
The fundamental difference between HCS and HTS lies in the depth and extensiveness of the analysis. HTS is designed for speed and throughput, enabling the testing of large compound libraries against a single target with a straightforward readout. This approach is particularly useful for the early stages of the Drug Discovery and Drug Development process when the primary objective is to identify as many potential hits as possible. However, HTS provides limited information on the mechanism of action or cellular context of the hits, requiring further downstream assays for detailed analysis.
In contrast, HCS provides an affluence of information by analyzing multiple cellular parameters simultaneously. By providing a rounded view of cellular responses, HCS helps in understanding the broader impact of compounds on cellular functions and identifying the most promising drug candidates with favorable safety profiles. HTS is highly efficient for initial target-based screening. At the same time, HCS is more suitable for secondary and tertiary screening phases, especially during the leading optimization process, and is also preferred when the objective is to research complex diseases such as cancer or neurodegenerative disorders. Moreover, HCS is invaluable for phenotypic screening, focusing on observational alterations in cellular phenotypes rather than targeting a specific biomolecule.
Zebrafish as New Alternative Models are extensively used in High-Content Screening (HCS) due to their genetic similarity to humans, transparent embryos, rapid development, and ease of genetic manipulation. Their embryos develop hastily, enabling quick assessments of compound effects on developmental processes. Zebrafish also produce numerous offspring, providing ample material for High-Content Screening experiments. Their small size and feasible maintenance simplify screening in multi-well plates, similar to cell-based assays.
They provide in vivo insights into the biological effects of compounds, especially for toxicity assessment and phenotypic screening. The transparency of Zebrafish embryos allows for the direct observation of internal processes and organ development without invasive procedures. Phenotypic assays focus on observing changes in cellular and organ phenotypes in response to treatments by using fluorescent markers to visualize the effects of compounds directly, like in specific organs or specific pathways.
Moreover, the use of Zebrafish in toxicity assessments is supported by the OECD (Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development) and the EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) guidelines. Biobide has developed the Acutetox Assay, a simplified version of the OECD TG 236 Guideline to facilitate the compound progression “from hit to lead” in a High-Content Screening platform, using a cost-effective and time-saving alternative assay.
Despite the notable differences between HCS and HTS, the synergistic use of HCS and HTS using Zebrafish as an alternative model to classical cell cultures is the best approach to ensure the progression of the most promising compounds towards subsequent phases of the Drug Development and Drug Discovery process.
Sources
Inglese J, Auld DS, Jadhav A, Johnson RL, Simeonov A, Yasgar A, et al. Quantitative high-throughput screening: a titration-based approach that efficiently identifies biological activities in large chemical libraries. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2006;103(31):11473-8.
Bray MA, Carpenter A, Imaging Platform, Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard. Advanced Assay Development Guidelines for Image-Based High Content Screening and Analysis. En: Markossian S, Grossman A, Arkin M, Auld D, Austin C, Baell J, et al. Assay Guidance Manual [Internet]. Bethesda (MD): Eli Lilly & Company and the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences; 2004 [cited 15 May 2024]. Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK126174/
Moffat JG, Vincent F, Lee JA, Eder J, Prunotto M. Opportunities and challenges in phenotypic drug discovery: an industry perspective. Nat Rev Drug Discov. 2017;16(8):531-43.
MacRae CA, Peterson RT. Zebrafish as tools for drug discovery. Nat Rev Drug Discov. 2015;14(10):721-31.
