Predicting MDCK cell permeation coefficients of organic molecules using membrane-interaction QSAR analysis

Acta Pharmacologica Sinica

Volumn 26, Issue 11, 2005, Pages 1322-1333

  Chen, Li Li ^a   Yao, Jia ^a   Yang, Jian Bo ^a   Yang, Jie ^a  

^a NANJING UNIVERSITY   (China)

Author keywords

Artificial membranes; Cell membrane permeability; MDCK cells; Molecular models; Organic chemicals; Quantitative structure activity relationship

Indexed keywords

ACETYLSALICYLIC ACID; ACICLOVIR; ALPRENOLOL; AMFEBUTAMONE; AMOXICILLIN; ATENOLOL; CEFATRIZINE; CORTICOSTERONE; DEXAMETHASONE; DIMYRISTOYLPHOSPHATIDYLCHOLINE; GUANABENZ; LAMOTRIGINE; METHYLPREDNISOLONE; NADOLOL; OCTANOL; ONDANSETRON; ORGANIC COMPOUND; PARACETAMOL; PENICILLIN V; PHENAZONE; PHENYTOIN; PINDOLOL; PRACTOLOL; PROGESTERONE; PROPRANOLOL; SALICYLIC ACID; TESTOSTERONE; TRIMETHOPRIM; UNINDEXED DRUG; WATER;

ANIMAL CELL; ARTICLE; CALCULATION; CELL MEMBRANE PERMEABILITY; CELL STRAIN; CONTROLLED STUDY; CULTURE MEDIUM; DRUG ABSORPTION; DRUG PENETRATION; ENERGY; GASTROINTESTINAL ABSORPTION; INTESTINE MUCOSA PERMEABILITY; LINEAR REGRESSION ANALYSIS; MEMBRANE INTERACTION QUANTITATIVE STRUCTURE ACTIVITY RELATION; MEMBRANE MODEL; MOLECULAR DYNAMICS; MOLECULAR INTERACTION; MOLECULAR WEIGHT; MONOLAYER CULTURE; NONHUMAN; PARAMETER; PARTITION COEFFICIENT; PERMEABILITY COEFFICIENT; PREDICTION; QUANTITATIVE STRUCTURE ACTIVITY RELATION; SIMULATION; SOLUTE; STEREOCHEMISTRY; TECHNIQUE; THERMODYNAMICS; TRANSPORT KINETICS; VALIDATION PROCESS;

ANIMALS; BIOLOGICAL TRANSPORT; CELL LINE; CELL MEMBRANE; CELL MEMBRANE PERMEABILITY; DOGS; INTESTINAL ABSORPTION; KIDNEY; MEMBRANES, ARTIFICIAL; MODELS, BIOLOGICAL; MODELS, MOLECULAR; MOLECULAR STRUCTURE; ORGANIC CHEMICALS; QUANTITATIVE STRUCTURE-ACTIVITY RELATIONSHIP;

EID: 27744440270     PISSN: 16714083     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1745-7254.2005.00166.x     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. Moo JC, David PT, Clay TC, Thomas JV, Jeffrey FS. The Madin Darby Canine Kidney (MDCK) epithelial cell monolayer as a model cellular transport barrier. Pharm Res 1989; 6: 71-7.
2. Magali T, Peter R, Daniel HS. Pharmacology. Churehill Livingstone: Harcourt Asia; 1998.
3. Irvine JD, Takahashi L, Lockhart K, Cheong J, Tolan JW, Selick HE, et al. MDCK (Madin-Darby Canine Kidney) cells: a tool for membrane permeability screening. J Pharm Sci 1999; 88: 28-33.
4. Kulkarni A, Hopfinger AJ, Osbrone R, Bruner LH, Thompson ED. Prediction of eye irritation from organic chemicals using membrane-interaction QSAR analysis. Toxicol Sci 2001; 59: 335-45.
5. Kulkarni A, Hopfinger AJ. Membrane-interaction QSAR analysis: application to the estimation of eye irritation by organic compounds. Pharm Res 1999; 16: 1244-52.
6. Rothen-Rutishauser B, Kraemer SD, Braun A, Guenthert M, Wunderli-Allenspach H. MDCK cell cultures as an epithelial in vitro model: cytoskeleton and tight junctions as indicators for the definition of age-related stages by confocal microscopy. Pharm Res 1998; 15: 964-71.
7. Alka K. C-QSAR: a database of 18000 QSARs and associated biological and physical data. J Comput Aided Mol Des 2003; 17: 187-96.
8. Hugo K. QSAR and 3D-QSAR in drug design. Part 1: methodology. Drug Discov Today 1997; 2: 457-67.
9. Hugo K. QSAR and 3D-QSAR in drug design. Part 2: applications and problems. Drug Discov Today 1997; 2: 538-46.
10. Lennart E, Erik J. Multivariate design and modeling in QSAR. Chemometrics Intell Lab Syst 1996; 34: 1-19.
11. Kulkarni A, Han Y, Hopfinger AJ. Predicting Caco-2 cell permeation coefficients of organic molecules using membrane-interaction QSAR analysis. J Chem Inf Comput Sci 2002; 42: 331-42.
12. Braun A, Hammerle S, Suda K, Rothen-Rutishauser B, Gunthert M, Kramer SD, et al. Cell cultures as tools in biopharmacy. Eur J Pharm Sci 2000; 11 Suppl 2: S51-60.
13. HyperChem. HyperChem, Release 6.0 for MS Windows. Waterloo (Ontario, Canada): Hypercube; 2001.
14. Hauser H, Pascher I, Pearson RH, Sundell S. Preferred conformation and molecular packing of phosphatidylethanolamine and phosphatidylcholine. Biochim Biophys Acta 1981; 650: 21-51.
15. van der Ploeg P, Berendsen HJC. Molecular dynamic simulation of a bilayer membrane. J Chem Phys 1982; 76: 3271-6.
16. Stouch TR. Lipid membrane structure and dynamics studied by all atom molecular dynamics simulations of hydrated phosphatidylcholine vesicles. Mol Simulation 1993; 1: 335-62.
17. Gurtovenko AA, Patra M, Karttunen M, Vattulainen I. Cationic DMPC/DMTAP lipid bilayers: molecular dynamics study. Biophys J 2004; 86: 3461-72.
18. Accelrys: Materials Studios. San Diego (USA): Accelrys; 2001.
19. SPSS. SPSS for Windows. Chicago (USA): SPSS Inc; 2001.
20. Butina D, Segall MD, Frankcombe K. Predicting ADME properties in silico: methods and models. Drug Discov Today 2002; 7 Suppl 11: S83-8.
21. Albert PL. Screening for human ADME/Tox drug properties in drug discovery. Drug Discov Today 2001; 6: 357-66.
22. Honorio KM, Da Siliva ABF. An AMI study on the electron-donating and electron-accepting character of biomolecules. Int J Quant Chem 2003; 95: 126-32.
23. Kier LB, Hall LH. Molecular connectivity in chemistry and drug research. New York: Academic Press; 1976.
24. Kier LB, Hall LH. Molecular connectivity in structure-activity analysis. London: John Wiley; 1986.
25. Iyer M, Mishra R, Han Y, Hopfinger AJ. Predicting blood-brain barrier partitioning of organic molecules using membrane-interaction QSAR analysis. Pharm Res 2002; 19: 1611-21.
26. Deretey E, Feher M, Schmidt JM. Rapid prediction of human intestinal absorption. Quant Struct-Act Relat 2002; 21: 493-506.
27. Levet-Trafit B, Gruyer MS, Marjanovic M, Chou RC. Estimation of oral drug absorption in man based on intestine permeability in rats. Life Sci 1996; 58: 359-63.
28. Zhao YH, Abraham MH, Hersey A, Luscombe CN. Quantitative relationship between rat intestinal absorption and Abraham descriptors. Eur J Med Chem 2003; 38: 939-47.
29. Peter B. Modeling liquid properties, solvation, and hydrophobicity: A molecular size-based perspective. Perspect Drug Discov Des 2000; 19: 19-45.