Cover Image
市场调查报告书

表观遗传修饰筛检趋势

Epigenetic Modification Screening Trends 2014

出版商 HTStec Ltd 商品编码 304885
出版日期 内容信息 英文
商品交期: 最快1-2个工作天内
价格
Back to Top
表观遗传修饰筛检趋势 Epigenetic Modification Screening Trends 2014
出版日期: 2014年06月03日 内容信息: 英文
简介

本报告以HTStec实施的产业规模之全球性表观遗传筛检相关线上基准调查结果为基础,提供表观遗传修饰化验的现在实践与偏好、对表观遗传学蛋白质的药物筛检的未来用户必要条件等分析,为您概述为以下内容。

  • 摘要整理
  • 目录
  • 调查方法
  • 受访者对主要的群组活动、调查的回答
  • 受访者的出身地区
  • 受访者所属企业及组织
  • 受访者的工作职位
  • 受访者的主要群组活动
  • 受访者的主要调查领域
  • 目前表观遗传学酵素筛检化验利用
  • 表观遗传学标的现状相关意见
  • 使用表观遗传修饰化验的治疗/疾病领域
  • 带给表观遗传修饰研究的优先级层级
  • 现在最受关心的主要表观遗传修饰层级
  • 研究中主要的表观遗传修饰级(1),(2)
  • 采用的表观遗传修饰的主要来源/起点
  • 采用表观遗传修饰测定的药物研发流程的阶段
  • 具恰当的生物化学化验的表观遗传修饰蛋白质
  • 具恰当的细胞分析的表观遗传修饰蛋白质
  • 调查结果的摘要(1)
  • 内部工作用喜欢的生物化学化验格式
  • 试验外包时喜欢的生物化学的化验格式
  • 内部工作用喜欢的细胞分析格式
  • 试验外包时喜欢的细胞分析格式
  • 表观遗传修饰化验用喜欢的生物化学的格式
  • 表观遗传修饰化验用喜欢的细胞分析格式
  • 表观遗传修饰化验用最常采用的基材
  • 表观遗传修饰蛋白质化验开发的最重要课题
  • 表观遗传修饰蛋白质经验的特定化验课题
  • 为了推进表观遗传修饰化验的调查必要的新工具
  • 表观遗传修饰蛋白质筛检的主要抑制因素
  • 过去2年的表观遗传修饰筛检化验的抑制因素的变化
  • 支持公司内部表观遗传修饰研究的FTE数
  • 在公司内部研究的表观遗传修饰标的数量
  • 表观遗传修饰的年度初分筛(HTS)数
  • 每一次表观遗传修饰筛检(容器)数
  • 表观遗传修饰标的初分筛方法
  • 表观遗传学初分筛的生物化学/酵素化验的比例
  • 调查结果的摘要(2)
  • 表观遗传修饰化验试剂预算
  • 零组件的表观遗传修饰试剂预算的明细
  • 表观遗传修饰化验试剂市场估计(1)-(3)
  • 表观遗传修饰化验试剂的主要来源(1)-(2)
  • 每表观遗传修饰筛检化验的每个well的成本
  • 表观遗传修饰研究受访者想要外包的方面
  • 表观遗传修饰初分筛化验的外包比例
  • 表观遗传修饰分析化验的外包比例
  • 外包表观遗传修饰试验的预算
  • 外包表观遗传修饰试验市场估计(1)-(2)
  • 外包表观遗传学分析的爱好供应商(1)-(2)
  • 表观遗传修饰测定的改善必要条件、未满足需求
  • 调查结果的摘要(3)
目录

Executive Summary

This market report summarizes the results of HTStec's 3nd industry-wide global web-based benchmarking survey on epigenetic modification screening carried out in May 2014.

The survey was initiated by HTStec as part of its tracking of this emerging life science marketplace and to update HTStec's previous report (June 2012). The questionnaire was compiled to meet the needs, requirements and interests of the epigenetic modification vendor community. The objective was to comprehensively document current practices and preferences in epigenetic modification assays, and to understand future user requirements for drug screening against epigenetic proteins both internally and at fee-for-service providers.

Equal emphasis was given to soliciting opinion from Pharma, Biotech and Academic Research market segments in both North America and Europe.

The survey looked at the following aspects of epigenetic modification screening, as practiced today (2014) and in some cases as predicted for the future (2016): opinion on the current status of epigenetic targets; key diseases/therapeutic area(s) investigating epigenetic modification; level of priority for epigenetic modification research; epigenetic modification classes of greatest interest, and where respondents have investigated assay feasibility or already performed in house or outsourced testing; main source/origin of epigenetic proteins used; stages in the drug discovery process using biochemical assays and/or cellular assays for epigenetic modification; epigenetic modifications proteins with adequate biochemical and cellular assays; preferred biochemical and cellular assay format/detection technologies for internal work and when outsourcing testing against epigenetic modifications proteins; substrates most commonly used for epigenetic assays; the challenges of assay development of epigenetic modification proteins; new tools required to drive the investigation of epigenetic modification assays; what limits epigenetic modification screening; aspects of epigenetic modification drug discovery that are most limiting today; where the situation concerning the main limitations of epigenetic modification screening assays has improved in the past 2 years; number of FTE devoted to epigenetic modification research and different targets supported; number of epigenetic modification primary screens and wells per screen; approach to the primary screening (HTS) of epigenetic targets; proportion of epigenetic primary screens that are biochemical assays; in house epigenetic modification assay reagent budget and breakdown into components purchased; main suppliers of reagents and tools used to assay epigenetic modifications in house; average material cost per well of epigenetic modification screening assays; interest in outsourcing epigenetic modification research; proportion of epigenetic modification testing outsourced and number of wells outsourced; budget for outsourcing epigenetic modification assays and services; preferred fee-for-service providers for outsourced epigenetic modification profiling assays; and unmet needs in epigenetic enzyme assays and screening today.

The main questionnaire consisted of 29 multi-choice questions and 2 open-ended questions. In addition, there were 9 questions related solely to survey demographics.

The survey collected 91 validated responses, of these 65% provided comprehensive input.

Survey responses were geographically split: 65% North America; 25% Europe; 7% Asia (excluding Japan); 2% Japan; and 1% China.

Survey respondents were drawn from persons or groups performing epigenetic modification screening assays or planning future investigation in this area.

Respondents represented 43 University/Research Institute/Government Lab/Not-for-Profit Facilities; 17 Biotech; 12 Large Pharma; 6 Academic Screening Centers; 4 CROs; 4 Others; 3 Medium-Small Pharma; 1 Biopharma and 1 Agrochemical/Agri-Biotech.

Most survey respondents had a senior job role or position which was in descending order: 21 research scientists/associates; 15 senior scientists/researchers; 11 others; 9 principal investigators; 9 professors/ assistant professors; 6 post-docs; 6 department heads; 5 section/group leaders; 5 directors; and 4 lab managers.

Respondents represented the followings labs: 26 basic research; 15 with a combination of drug discovery roles; 12 assay development; 12 primary screening (HTS); 9 therapeutic areas (target ID/validation); 7 hits-to-leads (lead optimization); 6 others; 2 secondary screening; 1 compound profiling; 1 leads-to-candidate (ADME tox/preclinical research).

Survey results were expressed as an average of all survey respondents. In addition, where appropriate the data was reanalyzed after sub-division into the following 5 survey groups: 1) Pharma; 2) Biotech; 3) Academic Research; 4) Europe; and 5) North America.

The main research discipline of survey respondents was biology.

55% of respondents were currently routinely undertaking epigenetic modification screening assays, the reminder were planning future investigation.

The majority opinion of respondents on the current status of epigenetic targets was ‘maybe a major new category for successful new drug research, but more work is needed'.

The majority of respondents were targeting epigenetic assays within the oncology therapeutic area.

Most respondents had a medium level of priority for epigenetic modification research.

The epigenetic modification class rated of most interest/investigated was histone methyltransferases.

The main sources/origins of epigenetic proteins used today (2014) were commercial sources.

Epigenetic modification assays were most used/investigated in basic research.

The epigenetic modification proteins that respondents feel have most adequate biochemical and cellular assays were histone methyltransferases.

The preferred biochemical assay formats for different epigenetic modification proteins was ELISA for internal work and mass-spec (label-free) for outsourced testing.

The preferred cellular assay formats for different epigenetic modification proteins was ELISA for internal work and chromatin immunoprecipitation (ChIP-Seq) for outsourced testing.

Respondents most commonly used peptides as substrates for their epigenetic assays.

Specificity was ranked as the most important challenge of epigenetic modification assay development.

Only a minority had encountered specific assay challenges when working with epigenetic enzymes.

Availability of good antibodies was rated the most limiting (major obstacle) in the exploitation of epigenetic modification targets today.

The aspect of epigenetic modification drug discovery ranked most limiting was getting selectivity.

Some improvement in the limitations of epigenetic modification assays was seen in the past 2 years.

A median of 1-5 FTE's were allocated to support in house epigenetic modification research in 2014.

A median of 1-5 different epigenetic targets/projects/programs were undertaken in house in 2014.

A median of 1-5 epigenetic modification primary screens, each with 1K-5K wells were done in 2014.

The preferred approach to primary screening of epigenetic modification targets was to screen small focused compound sets or decks.

A median of 21-30% of all epigenetic primary screens were enzyme/biochemical assays in 2014.

A median budget of $5K-$25K/lab was allocated for epigenetic enzyme assay reagents in 2014.

A bottom-up model developed around respondent's annual budget for epigenetic modification assay reagents estimated the global market to be around $52M in 2014. The greatest share of this market was allocated to assay specific probes and biochemical assay kits.

The most used commercial sources of reagents and tools for in house epigenetic modification assays were Life Technologies, Abcam and Sigma Aldrich.

The median cost per single well for epigenetic modification assays undertaken in house was $0.75-$1.0 for biochemical assays versus $1-$2 for cellular assays.

Profiling against panels of epigenetic targets using biochemical or cellular assays were the aspects of epigenetic modification research most respondents were interested to outsource.

The median % of epigenetic modification primary screening outsourced in 2014 was ‘none'.

The median % of epigenetic modification profiling outsourced in 2014 was <10%.

The median total number of single wells outsourced to a fee-for-service provider for epigenetic primary screening and profiling was <100 wells in 2014.

The median budget allocated for outsourced epigenetic testing was $5K-$25K/lab in 2014.

A bottom-up model developed around respondent's annual budget for outsourced epigenetic modification testing and services estimated the global market to be around $4M in 2014.

The preferred fee-for-service providers of epigenetic modification profiling assay services were Life Technologies, Cisbio and Eurofins.

The full report provides the data, details of the breakdown of the responses for each question, its segmentation and the estimates for the future (2016). It also highlights some interesting differences, particularly between Pharma versus the other survey groups.

Table of Contents

  • Executive Summary
  • Table Of Contents
  • Respondent?fs Main Group Activity And Response To Survey
  • Respondent?fs Geographic Origin
  • Respondent?fs Company Or Organisational Origin
  • Respondent?fs Job Role
  • Respondent?fs Main Group Activity
  • Respondent?fs Main Research Discipline
  • Current Use Of Epigenetic Enzyme Screening Assays
  • Opinion On Current Status Of Epigenetic Targets
  • Therapeutic/Disease Areas Using Epigenetic Modification Assays
  • Level Of Priority Given To Epigenetic Modification Research
  • Key Epigenetic Modification Classes Of Most Interest Today
  • Key Epigenetic Modification Classes Under Investigation (1)
  • Key Epigenetic Modification Classes Under Investigation (2)
  • Main Sources/Origin Of Epigenetic Proteins Used
  • Stages In Drug Discovery Process Using Epigenetic Modification Assays
  • Epigenetic Modification Proteins That Have Adequate Biochemical Assays
  • Epigenetic Modification Proteins That Have Adequate Cellular Assays
  • Summary Of Survey Findings (1)
  • Preferred Biochemical Assay Format For Internal Work
  • Preferred Biochemical Assay Format When Outsourcing Testing
  • Preferred Cellular Assay Format For Internal Work
  • Preferred Cellular Assay Format When Outsourcing Testing
  • Preferred Biochemical Formats For Epigenetic Modification Assays
  • Preferred Cellular Formats For Epigenetic Modification Assays
  • Substrates Most Commonly Used For Epigenetic Enzyme Assays
  • Most Important Challenges In Epigenetic Modification Protein Assay Development
  • Specific Assay Challenges Encountered With Epigenetic Modification Proteins
  • New Tools Required to Drive Investigation Of Epigenetic Modification Assays
  • Major Limitations Of Screening Epigenetic Modification Proteins
  • Aspects Of Epigenetic Modification Drug Discovery Most Limiting Today
  • Changes In Limitations Of Epigenetic Modification Screening Assays Over Past Years
  • Number Of FTE?fs That Support In House Epigenetic Modification Research
  • Number Of Epigenetic Modification Targets Investigated In House
  • Number Of Epigenetic Modification Primary Screens (HTS) Per Year
  • Number Of Wells Per Primary Epigenetic Modification Screen
  • Approach To Primary Screening Of Epigenetic Modification Targets
  • % of Epigenetic Primary Screens That Are Biochemical/Enzyme Assays
  • Summary Of Survey Findings (2)
  • Epigenetic Modification Assay Reagent Budget
  • Breakdown Of Epigenetic Modification Reagent Budget Into Components
  • Epigenetic Modification Assay Reagents Market Estimate (1)
  • Epigenetic Modification Assay Reagents Market Estimate (2)
  • Epigenetic Modification Assay Reagents Market Estimate (3)
  • Main Sources Of Epigenetic Modification Assay Reagents (1)
  • Main Sources Of Epigenetic Modification Assay Reagents (2)
  • Cost Per Single Well For Epigenetic Modification Screening Assays
  • Aspects Of Epigenetic Modification Research Respondents Want To Outsource
  • Proportion Of Epigenetic Modification Primary Screening Assays Outsourced
  • Proportion Of Epigenetic Modification Profiling Assays Outsourced
  • Number Of Single Wells Outsourced For Epigenetic Modification Primary Screening
  • Number Of Single Wells Outsourced For Epigenetic Profiling
  • Outsourced Epigenetic Modification Testing Budget
  • Outsourced Epigenetic Modification Testing Market Estimate (1)
  • Outsourced Epigenetic Modification Testing Market Estimate (2)
  • Preferred Providers For Outsourced Epigenetic Profiling (1)
  • Preferred Providers For Outsourced Epigenetic Profiling (2)
  • Improvements Required And Unmet Needs In Epigenetic Modification Assays
  • Summary Of Survey Findings (3)
Back to Top