Why are some properties more difficult to predict than others? A study of QSPR models of solubility, melting point, and log P

Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling

Volumn 48, Issue 1, 2008, Pages 220-232

  Hughes, Laura D ^a,b   Palmer, David S ^a   Nigsch, Florian ^a   Mitchell, John B O ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE   (United Kingdom)

^b STANFORD UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

DRUG PRODUCTS; MELTING POINT; MOLECULAR MODELING; SOLUBILITY; SUPPORT VECTOR MACHINES;

MELTING POINT PREDICTION; PREDICTION ERRORS; SUPPORT VECTOR MACHINE MODELS;

MOLECULAR DYNAMICS;

OCTANOL; WATER;

ARTICLE; ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE; CHEMICAL MODEL; CHEMISTRY; QUANTITATIVE STRUCTURE ACTIVITY RELATION; SOLUBILITY; TRANSITION TEMPERATURE;

ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE; MODELS, CHEMICAL; OCTANOLS; QUANTITATIVE STRUCTURE-ACTIVITY RELATIONSHIP; SOLUBILITY; TRANSITION TEMPERATURE; WATER;

EID: 39449138204     PISSN: 15499596     EISSN: 1549960X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1021/ci700307p     Document Type: Article

References (53)

1. Bergstrom, C. A.; Norinder, U.; Luthman, K.; Artursson, P. Molecular descriptors influencing melting point and their role in classification of solid drugs. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 2003, 43, 1177-1185.
2. Karthikeyan, M.; Glen, R. C.; Bender, A. General melting point prediction based on a diverse compound data set and artificial neural networks. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2005, 45, 581-590.
3. Clark, M. Generalized fragment-substructure based property prediction method. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2005, 45, 30-38.
4. Jorgensen, W. L.; Duffy, E. M. Prediction of drug solubility from structure. Adv. Drug Delivery Rev. 2002, 54, 355-366.
5. Dearden, J. C. In silico prediction of aqueous solubility. Expert Opin. Drug Discovery 2006, 1, 31-52.
6. Ran, Y.; He, Y.; Yang, G.; Johnson, J. L.; Yalkowsky, S. H. Estimation of aqueous solubility of organic compounds by using the general solubility equation. Chemosphere 2002, 48, 487-509.
7. Ran, Y.; Jain, N.; Yalkowsky, S. H. Prediction of aqueous solubility of organic compounds by the general solubility equation (GSE). J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 2001, 41, 1208-1217.
8. Ran, Y.; Yalkowsky, S. H. Prediction of drug solubility by the general solubility equation (GSE). J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 2001, 41, 354-357.
9. Yang, G.; Ran, Y.; Yalkowsky, S. H. Prediction of the aqueous solubility: comparison of the general solubility equation and the method using an amended solvation energy relationship. J. Pharm. Sci. 2002, 91, 517-533.
10. Wassvik, C. M.; Holmen, A. G.; Bergstrom, C. A.; Zamora, I.; Artursson, P. Contribution of solid-state properties to the aqueous solubility of drugs. Eur. J. Pharm. Sci. 2006, 29, 294-305.
11. Delaney, J. S. ESOL: estimating aqueous solubility directly from molecular structure. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 2004, 44, 1000-1005.
12. Palmer, D. S.; O'Boyle, N. M.; Glen, R. C.; Mitchell, J. B. O. Random Forest models to predict aqueous solubility. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2007, 47, 150-158.
13. Bergstrom, C. A.; Wassvik, C. M.; Norinder, U.; Luthman, K.; Artursson, P. Global and local computational models for aqueous solubility prediction of druglike molecules. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 2004, 44, 1477-1488.
14. Bergstrom, C. A.; Norinder, U.; Luthman, K.; Artursson, P. Experimental and computational screening models for prediction of aqueous drug solubility. Pharm. Res. 2002, 19, 182-188.
15. Huuskonen, J. Estimation of aqueous solubility for a diverse set of organic compounds based on molecular topology. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 2000, 40, 773-777.
16. Huuskonen, J.; Rantanen, J.; Livingstone, D. Prediction of aqueous solubility for a diverse set of organic compounds based on atom-type electrotopological state indices. Eur. J. Med. Chem. 2000, 35, 1081-1088.
17. Catana, C.; Gao, H.; Orrenius, C.; Stouten, P. F. Linear and nonlinear methods in modeling the aqueous solubility of organic compounds. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2005, 45, 170-176.
18. Katritzky, A. R.; Wang, Y.; Sild, S.; Tamm, T.; Karelson, M. QSPR studies on vapor pressure, aqueous solubility, and the prediction of water-air partition coefficients. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 1998, 38, 720-725.
19. Walters, A. E.; Myrdal, P. B.; Yalkowsky, S. H. A method for estimating the boiling points of organic compounds from their melting points. Chemosphere 1995, 31, 3001-3008.
20. Law, D.; Wang, W.; Schmitt, E. A.; Long, M. A. Prediction of polyethylene) glycol-drug eutectic compositions using an index based on the van't Hoff equation. Pharm. Res. 2002, 19, 315-321.
21. Katritzky, A. R.; Jain, R.; Lomaka, A.; Petrukhin, R.; Maran, U.; Karelson, M. Perspective on the relationship between melting points and chemical structure. Cryst. Growth Des. 2001, 1, 261-265.
22. Nigsch, F.; Bender, A.; van Buuren, B.; Tissen, J.; Nigsch, E.; Mitchell, J. B. O. Melting point prediction employing k-nearest neighbor algorithms and genetic parameter optimization. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2006, 46, 2412-2422.
23. Hansch, C.; Quinlan, J. E.; Lawrence, G. L. Linear free-energy relationship between partition coefficients and the aqueous solubility of organic liquids. J. Org. Chem. 1968, 33, 347-350.
24. van de Waterbeemd, H.; Gifford, E. ADMET in silico modelling: towards prediction paradise? Nat. Rev. Drug Discovery 2003, 2, 192-204.
25. Silverman, R. B. The Organic Chemistry of Drug Design and Drug Action, 2nd ed.; 2004.
26. Lipinski, C. A.; Lombardo, F.; Dominy, B. W.; Feeney, P. J. Experimental and computational approaches to estimate solubility and permeability in drug discovery and development settings. Adv. Drug Delivery Rev. 1997, 23, 3-25.
27. Faller, B.; Grimm, H. P.; Loeuillet-Ritzler, F.; Arnold, S.; Briand, X. High-throughput lipophilicity measurement with immobilized artificial membranes. J. Med. Chem. 2005, 48, 2571-2576.
28. Chou, J. T.; Jurs, P. C. Computer-assisted computation of partition coefficients from molecular structures using fragment constants. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 1979, 19, 172-178.
29. Machatha, S. G.; Yalkowsky, S. H. Comparison of the octanol/water partition coefficients calculated by ClogP, ACDlogP and KowWin to experimentally determined values. Int. J. Pharm. 2005, 294, 185-192.
30. Mannhold, R.; Petrauskas, A. Substructure versus whole-molecule approaches for calculating Log P. QSAR Comb. Sci. 2003, 22, 466-475.
31. Eros, D.; Kövesdi, I.; Orfi, L.; Takács-Novák, K.; Acsády, G.; Kéri, G. Reliability of logP predictions based on calculated molecular descriptors: a critical review. Curr. Med. Chem. 2002, 9, 1819-1829.
32. Tetko, I. V.; Braneau, P. Application of ALOGPS to predict 1-octanol/ water distribution coefficients, logP, and logD, of AstraZeneca in-house database. J. Pharm. Sci. 2004, 93, 3103-3110.
33. Raevsky, O. A.; Trepalin, S. V.; Trepalina, H. P.; Gerasimenko, V. A.; Raevskaja, O. E. SLIPPER-2001 - Software for predicting molecular properties on the basis of physicochemical descriptors and structural similarity. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2002, 42, 540-549.
34. Sun, H. A universal molecular descriptor system for prediction of LogP, LogS, LogBB, and absorption. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2004, 44, 748-757.
35. Wegner, J. K.; Zell, A. Prediction of aqueous solubility and partition coefficient optimized by a genetic algorithm based descriptor selection method. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 2003, 43, 1077-1084.
36. Shen, Q.; Jiang, J. H.; Tao, J. C.; Shen, G. L.; Yu, R. Q. Modified ant colony optimization algorithm for variable selection in QSAR modeling: QSAR studies of cyclooxygenase inhibitors. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2005, 45, 1024-1029.
37. Rytting, E.; Lentz, K. A.; Chen, X. Q.; Qian, F.; Vakatesh, S. Aqueous and cosolvent solubility data for drug-like organic compounds. AAPS J. 2005, 7, E78-E105.
38. Lide, D. R. CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics, 84th ed.; CRC Press: 2003.
39. O'Neil, M. J.; Hechelman, P. E.; Koch, C. B. The Merck Index, 14th ed.; Merck: Whitehouse Station, NJ, 2006.
40. SciFinder Scholar, Chemical Abstracts Service, P.O. Box 3012, Columbus, OH 43210, U.S.A. http://www.cas.org/SCIFINDER/ (accessed August 16, 2007).
41. EPI Suite; EPA: 2005. http://www.syrres.com/esc/epi.htm (accessed April 19, 2007).
42. Salminen, T.; Pulli, A.; Taskinen, J. Relationship between immobilised artificial membrane chromatographic retention and the brain penetration of structurally diverse drugs. J. Pharm. Biomed. Anal. 1997, 15, 469-477.
43. Zissimos, A. M.; Abraham, M. H.; Du, C. M.; Valko, K.; Bevan, C.; Reynolds, D.; Wood, J.; Tam, K. Y. Calculation of Abraham descriptors from experimental data from seven HPLC systems; evaluation of five different methods of calculation. J. Chem. Soc., Perkin Trans. 2 2002, 2001-2010.
44. MOE; Chemical Computing Group, Inc.: Montreal, Quebec, Canada, 2007.
45. Gasteiger, J.; Marsili, M. Iterative partial equalization of orbital electronegativity - a rapid access to atomic charges. Tetrahedron 1980, 36, 3219-3228.
46. Todeschini, R.; Consonni, V.; Mauri, A.; Pavan, M. Dragon Professional, 5; Milano, Italy, 2004.
47. R Development Core Team. In R: A language and environment for statistical computing; R Foundation for Statistical Computing: Vienna, Austria, 2006.
48. Wehrens, R.; Mevik, B.-H. pls: Partial Least Squares Regression (PLSR) and Principal Component Regression (PCR), R version 2.0-0; 2006.
49. Liaw, A.; Wiener, M. Classification and regression by Random Forest. R News 2002, 2, 18-22.
50. Svetnik, V.; Liaw, A.; Tong, C.; Culberson, J. C.; Sheridan, R. P.; Feuston, B. P. Random Forest: a classification and regression tool for compound classification and QSAR modeling. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 2003, 43, 1947-1958.
51. Cannon, E. O.; Bender, A.; Palmer, D. S.; Mitchell, J. B. O. Chemoinformatics-based classification of prohibited substances employed for doping in sport. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2006, 46, 2369-2380.
52. Dimitriadou, E.; Hornik, K.; Leisch, F.; Meyer, D.; Weingessel, A. e1071: Misc Functions of the Department of Statistics (e1071), R package version 1.5-16; 2006.
53. Iwasa, J.; Fujita, T.; Hansch, C. Substituent constants for aliphatic functions obtained from partition coefficients. J. Med. Chem. 1965, 8, 150-153.