TMCnet News
Label-Free Binding Industry Analysis Trends 2014(M2 PressWIRE Via Acquire Media NewsEdge) RnRMarketResearch.com adds "Label-Free Binding Analysis Trends 2014" report to its research database. This market report summarizes the results of HTStec's 4th global web-based benchmarking survey on label-free (LF) binding analysis carried out in July 2014. The study was initiated by HTStec as part of its regular (every 2 years) tracking of this life science marketplace. The questionnaire was compiled to address the needs and interests of the LF binding analysis vendor community. The main objectives were to comprehensively document current experience of and future interest in investigating biomolecular interactions and binding analysis using LF technologies. The study also examined in detail the changing market landscape, application areas and future purchasing plans. The report is a source of valuable information for vendors developing LF binding analysis systems, and provides the latest market information on this rapidly changing area. Complete report Available @ http://www.rnrmarketresearch.com/label-free-binding-analysis-trends-2014-market-report.html . The survey looked at the following aspects of LF binding analysis as practiced today (2014) and in some cases as predicted for the future (2016): o areas where biomolecular binding analysis is primarily used; o techniques used to assess binding interactions; o how respondent's research objectives are aided by LF technology; o classification that most closely describes an LF binding assay; o vendor's LF technologies currently available in respondent's lab; o most recognizable LF instrument brands; o current perception of different LF instrument suppliers; o the most common limitation experienced using an LF assay approach: o applications that LF binding assays are best suited for; o application areas where LF binding assays are expected to gain most popularity over coming years; o processes which could most benefit from the use or expanded use of LF binding assays; o integration of any LF instruments/devices used for binding analysis into automated robotic systems; o importance given to some application capabilities when purchasing a new LF system for binding analysis; o attributes of a new label-free binding analysis system that impact a purchasing decision; o what influences the timing of a decision to purchase a LF system; o likelihood of purchasing a new LF instruments for binding analysis over the coming years; o the primary use of respondent's next LF instrument purchase; o the top two vendors from which respondents are most likely to purchase a new LF instrument; o annual capex and consumable budgets for LF binding analysis; o resources most relied upon to learn about/gather information on new LF technologies and assays; o conferences attended in the last 12 months; o publications subscribed to, regularly read or visited online; o any unmet needs in LF binding analysis. Order a Purchase copy @ http://www.rnrmarketresearch.com/contacts/purchase?rname=199663 . The main questionnaire consisted of 29 relatively simple multi-choice questions and 2 open-ended questions. The survey collected 97 validated responses, of these 85% provided comprehensive input. Survey responses were geographically split: 61% North America; 25% Europe; 5% Japan; 5% Asia (excluding Japan & China); and 4% Other Geographic Regions. Survey respondents were mainly drawn from persons actively engaged (key end users) in studying biomolecular interactions and binding analysis using LF technologies. Survey respondents came from 25 University/Research Institute/Not-for-Profit facilities; 17 Large Pharma; 14 Biotechs; 11 Medium-Small Pharma; 11 Biopharma; 10 Government Labs; 3 Diagnostics; 3 CROs; 2 Academic Screening Centers; and 1 Other. Most survey respondents had a senior job role or position which was in descending order: 38 research scientists/associates; 27 senior scientists/researchers; 7 lab managers; 6 principal investigators; 6 others; 4 post-docs; 4 section/group leaders; 2 department heads; 2 directors; and 1 professor/assistant professor. 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 7 survey groups: 1) Small Molecule Focus; 2) Protein Focus; 3) Pharma; 4) Biotech; 5) Academic Research; 6) Europe; & 7) North America. 25% of respondents had a small molecule focus and 45% had a protein focus. 89% of respondents were actively using LF detection today for binding analysis. The area where most respondent's primarily used biomolecular binding analysis was basic research. ELISA was still the technique most commonly used to assess binding interactions today. Feedback on how respondents are using LF assays to aid their research activities is listed. No agreement was obtained as to the classification that most closely describes an LF binding assay. The most common LF binding analysis instruments found in respondents labs today were from GE Healthcare/Biacore and Fortebio. The top 5 most recognizable LF instrument brands for binding analysis were GE Healthcare Biacore, ForteBio Octet, Bio-Rad ProteOn, PerkinElmer Enspire and MicroCal Microcalorimetry. The current perception of different LF binding analysis vendors ranked GE Healthcare/Biacore and ForteBio most favourably. The most common limitation experienced using an LF approach was lack of detection sensitivity. LF bindings assays were ranked most suited for kinetic rate constants and affinity determination. The application where LF binding assays are expected to gain most popularity as a valid technological approach within the next few years was affinity screening. Secondary screening (hit confirmation) was the process which might benefit most from expanded use of LF protein assay technologies. Only a small minority of respondents have integrated any LF instruments or devices for binding analysis into an automated robotic system. Real-time monitoring/binding kinetics capability was ranked as the most important aspect when purchasing a new LF system for binding analysis. System reliability and robustness was the most desirable characteristic or attribute of an LF binding analysis system that would impact a purchasing decision. The budget cycle was rated what most influences the timing of a decision to purchase a LF system. The median likelihood that respondents will purchase a new LF instrument for binding analysis over the coming years (up to 2016) was possible (25%-50% probability). The most reported primary use of respondent's next LF instrument purchase will be kinetic characterization for lead selection. The vendors instruments for LF binding analysis respondents expressed greatest interest in future purchasing were from GE Healthcare Biacore, ForteBio, PerkinElmer and Bio-Rad. Colleague referrals were rated as the resource most rely upon to learn about LF technologies. The conferences most attended in the past 12 months were AAPS, SLAS, CHI PEGS and GE's DiPIA. The publications that the majority of respondents subscribe to, regularly read or visit online were Nature and Science. Feedback on some unmet needs in LF binding analysis are listed, these highlighted the inability to adequately measure the kinetics of compound binding to cells. Browse more reports on Biotechnology Market @ http://www.rnrmarketresearch.com/reports/life-sciences/biotechnology . About Us: RnRMarketResearch.com is an online market research reports library of 350,000+ in-depth studies of over 5000 micro markets. Our database includes reports by leading publishers from across the globe. Call +1 888 391 5441 with your research requirements. CONTACT: Ritesh Tiwari [email protected] +1 888 391 5441 http://www.rnrmarketresearch.com/blog/ . (c) 2014 M2 COMMUNICATIONS |