Current in vitro and in silico models of blood-brain barrier penetration: A practical view

Current Opinion in Drug Discovery and Development

Volumn 12, Issue 1, 2009, Pages 115-124

  Vastag, M ^a   Keseru, G M ^a  

^a GEDEON RICHTER LTD   (Hungary)

Author keywords

Blood brain barrier; Cell culture models; In silico approaches; Non cell based models

Indexed keywords

ALKALINE PHOSPHATASE; GAMMA GLUTAMYLTRANSFERASE; GLYCOPROTEIN P; HUMAN SERUM ALBUMIN; PHOSPHATIDYLCHOLINE; TRANSFERRIN;

ARTIFICIAL MEMBRANE; ASTROCYTE; BLOOD BRAIN BARRIER; CELL CULTURE; CELL INTERACTION; CELL JUNCTION; CHROMATOGRAPHY; COMPUTER MODEL; DRUG PENETRATION; DRUG PROTEIN BINDING; DRUG TARGETING; DRUG TRANSPORT; ELECTRIC RESISTANCE; ENDOTHELIUM CELL; GENE TARGETING; HIGH THROUGHPUT SCREENING; HUMAN; HYPEROSMOTIC STRESS; IN VITRO STUDY; NONHUMAN; PERICYTE; QUANTITATIVE STRUCTURE ACTIVITY RELATION; REVIEW; TRANSCYTOSIS; VASCULAR ENDOTHELIUM;

ANIMALS; BLOOD-BRAIN BARRIER; CELL LINE; DRUG DESIGN; DRUG EVALUATION, PRECLINICAL; HUMANS; MODELS, BIOLOGICAL; PERMEABILITY; PHARMACOKINETICS;

EID: 58449085210     PISSN: 13676733     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Review

References (60)

1. Pardridge WM: Drug and gene targeting to the brain with molecular Trojan horses. Nature Rev Drug Disc (2002) 1(2):131-139.
2. Brightman MW, Reese TS: Junctions between intimately apposed cell membranes in the vertebrate brain. J Cell Biol (1969) 40(3):648-677.
3. Nagy Z, Peters H, Hüttner I: Fracture faces of cell junctions in cerebral endothelium during normal and hyperosmotic conditions. Lab Invest (1984) 50(3):313-322.
4. Descamps L, Dehouck MP, Torpier G, Cecchelli R: Receptor mediated transcytosis of transferrin through blood-brain barrier endothelial cells. Am J Physiol (1996) 270(4 Pt 2):H1149-H1158.
5. Reichel A: The role of blood-brain barrier studies in the pharmaceutical industry. Curr Drug Metab (2006) 7(2):183-203.
6. Fenstermacher J, Gross P, Sposito N, Acuff V, Pettersen S, Gruber K: Structural and functional variations in capillary systems within the brain. Ann NY Acad Sci (1988) 529:21-30.
7. Summerfield SG, Read K, Begley DJ, Obradovic T, Hidalgo IJ, Coggon S, Lewis AV, Porter RA, Jeffrey P: Central nervous system drug disposition: The relationship between in situ brain permeability and brain free fraction. J Pharmacol Exp Ther (2007) 322(1):205-213.
8. Crone C, Olesen SP: Electrical resistance of brain microvascular endothelium. Brain Res (1982) 241(1):49-55.
9. Deli MA, Abrahám CS, Kataoka Y, Niwa M: Permeability studies on in vitro blood-brain barrier models: Physiology, pathology, and pharmacology. Cell Mol Neurobiol (2005) 25(1):59-127. • A excellent guide on the rational interpretation of paracellular permeability measures. In addition, this paper provides an excellent review of cell culture-based models regarding both physiological and pathological conditions.
10. Feng B, Mills JB, Davidson RE, Mireles RJ, Janiszewski JS, Troutman MD, de Morais SM: In vitro P-glycoprotein assays to predict the in vivo interactions of P-glycoprotein with drugs in the central nervous system. Drug Metab Dispos (2008) 36(2):268-275.
11. Garberg P, Ball M, Borg N, Cecchelli R, Fenart L, Hurst RD, Lindmark T, Mabondzo A, Nilsson JE, Raub TJ, Stanimirovic D et al: In vitro models for blood-brain barrier. Toxicol in Vitro (2005) 19(3):299-334. • The study provided informative data on head-to-head comparisons of both paracellular and transcellular permeability for the most frequently used cell based models. In addition it describes correlation studies among in vitro and in vivo data using wide sets of test compounds.
12. Di L, Kerns EH, Fan K, McConnell OJ, Carter GT: High throughput artificial membrane permeability assay for blood-brain barrier. Eur J Med Chem (2003) 38(3):223-232. • The study reported a modification of the original PAMPA assay that is suitable for high-throughput BBB permeability screening.
13. Abbott NJ, Rönnback L, Hansson E: Astrocyte-endothelial interaction at the blood-brain barrier. Nature Rev Drug Disc (2006) 7(1):41-53.
14. The blood-brain barrier and drug delivery to the CNS. Begley DJ, Bradbury MW, Kreuter J (Eds): Marcel Dekker Inc, New York, NY, USA (2000).
15. Cecchelli R, Dehouck B, Descamps L, Fenart L, Buée-Scherrer V, Duhem C, Lundquist S, Rentfel M, Torpier G, Dehouck M-P: In vitro model for evaluating drug transport across the blood-brain barrier. Advanced Drug Delivery Reviews (1999) 36(2-3):165-178.
16. Culot M, Lundquist S, Vanuxeem D, Nion S, Landry C, Delplace Y, Dehouck MP, Berezowski V, Fenart L, Cecchelli R: An in vitro blood-brain barrier model for high throughput (HTS) toxicological screening. Toxicol in Vitro (2008) 22(3):799-811.
17. Nakagawa S, Deli MA, Nakao S, Honda M, Hayahi K, Nakaoke R, Kataoka Y, Niwa M: Pericytes from brain microvessel strengthen the barrier integrity in primary cultures of rat brain endothelial cells. Cellul Mol Neurobiol (2007) 27(6):687-694.
18. Nakagawa S, Deli MA, Kawaguchi H, Shimizudani T, Shimono T, Yamaguchi M, Hourai S, Kataoka Y, Niwa M. A new BBB model testing specific functions. Tenth Blood-Brain Barrier Symposium, Potsdam, Germany (2007). • The first report of a rat primary culture-based, syngeneic, triple co-culture BBB model using brain pericytes and astrocytes.
19. Terasaki T, Ohtsuki S, Hori S, Takanaga H, Nakashima E, Hosoya K: New approaches to in vitro models of blood-brain barrier drug transport. Drug Discov Today (2003) 8(20):944-954.
20. Roux F, Durieu-Trautmann O, Chaverot N, Claire M, Mailly P, Bourre JM, Strosberg AD, Couraud PO: Regulation of γ-glutamyl transpeptidase and alkaline phosphatase activities in immortalized rat brain microvessel endothelial cells. J Cell Physiol (1994) 159(1):101-113.
21. Salminen T, Pulli A, Taskinen J: Relationship between immobilized artificial membrane chromatographic retention and the brain penetration of structurally diverse drugs. J Pharm Biomed Anal (1997) 15(4):469-477.
22. Lázaro E, Ràfols C, Abraham MH, Rosés M: Chromatographic estimation of drug disposition properties by means of immobilized artificial membranes (IAM) and C18 columns. J Med Chem (2006) 49(16):4861-4870.
23. Yoon CH, Kim SJ, Shin BS, Lee KC, Yoo SD: Rapid screening of blood-brain barrier penetration of drugs using the immobilized artificial membrane phosphatidylcholine column chromatography. J Biomol Screen (2006) 11(1):13-20.
24. Kansy M, Senner F, Gubernator K: Physicochemical high throughput screening: Parallel artificial membrane permeation assay in the description of passive absorption processes. J Med Chem (1996) 41(7):1007- 1010. • This study described the original PAMPA assay, which has since been modified for modeling BBB penetration.
25. Carrara S, Reali V, Misiano P, Dondio G, Bigogno C: Evaluation of in vitro brain penetration: Optimized PAMPA and MDCKII-MDR1 assay comparison. Int J Pharm (2007) 345(1-2):125-133.
26. TRANSIL membrane permeability kits: Sovicell, Dresden, Germany (2008) http://www.sovicel.com/products.asp
27. Loidl-Stahlhofen A, Eckert A, Hartmann T, Schöttner M: Solid supported lipid membranes as a tool for determination of membrane affinity: High throughput screening of a physicochemical parameter. J Pharm Sci (2001) 90(5):599-606.
28. Boriss H: TRANSIL brain absorption: A novel in vitro model for passive transport across the blood brain barrier. SMI ADMET 3rd Annual Conference, London, UK (2008).
29. Konovalov DA, Coomans D, Deconinck E, Heyden YV: Benchmarking of QSAR models for blood-brain barrier permeation. J Chem Inf Model (2007) 47(4):1648-1656. • This study reported extensive benchmarking of several quantitative logBB models using the largest experimental dataset available.
30. Bendels S, Kansy M, Wagner B, Huwyler J: In silico prediction of brain and CSF permeation of small molecules using PLS regression models. Eur J Med Chem (2008) 43(8):1581-1592. • The latest in silico model of CSF-blood penetration is reported in this study.
31. Liu X, Tu M, Kelly RS, Chen C, Smith BJ: Development of a computational approach to predict blood-brain barrier permeability. Drug Metab Dispos (2004) 32(1):132-139.
32. Abraham MH: The factors that influence permeation across the blood-brain barrier. Eur J Med Chem (2004) 39(3):235-240.
33. Mahar Doan KM, Humphreys JE, Webster LO, Wring SA, Shampine LJ, Serabjit-Singh CJ, Adkison KK, Polli JW: Passive permeability and P-glycoprotein-mediated efflux differentiate central nervous system (CNS) and non-CNS marketed drugs. J Pharm Exp Ther (2002) 303(3):1029- 1037.
34. Lipinski CA: Filtering in drug discovery. Annu Report Comput Chem (2005) 1:155-168.
35. Luco MJ, Marchevsky E: QSAR studies on blood-brain barrier permeation. Curr Comput Aided Drug Des (2006) 2(1):31-55. • This paper represents one of the most comprehensive reviews on quantitative in silico BBB models.
36. Houa T, Wang J, Zhang W, Wang W, Xu X: Recent advances in computational prediction of drug absorption and permeability in drug discovery. Curr Med Chem (2006) 13(22):2653-2667.
37. Platts JA, Butina D, Abraham MH, Hersey A: Estimation of molecular linear free energy relation descriptors using a group contribution approach. J Chem Inf Comput Sci (1999) 39(5):835-845.
38. Crivori P, Cruciani G, Carrupt PA, Testa B: Predicting bloodbrain barrier permeation from three-dimensional molecular structure. J Med Chem (2000) 43(11):2204-2216.
39. Sjöberg P: Molsurf - a generation of chemical descriptors for QSAR. In: Computer-assisted Lead Finding and Optimization: Current Tools For Medicinal Chemistry. van de Waterbeemd H, Testa B, Folkers G (Eds), VHCA, Basel, Switzerland (1997):83-92.
40. Dragon software: Talete SRL, Milano, Italy (2007). http://www.talete.mi.it/contact/contact.htm
41. Molecular operating environment (MOE) software: Chemical Computing Group, Montreal Canada (2008). http://www.chemcomp.com/
42. MolConnZ software: EduSoft, Ashland, VA, USA (2004). http://www.edusoft-lc.com/molconn/
43. Hitchcock SA, Pennington LD: Structure-brain exposure relationships. J Med Chem (2006) 49(26):7559-7583. • This excellent review summarizes the knowledge and expertise accumulated on optimizing BBB penetration from a medicinal chemist point of view.
44. Adenot M, Lahana R: Blood-brain barrier permeation models: Discriminating between potential CNS and non-CNS drugs including P-glycoprotein substrates. J Chem Inf Comput Sci (2004) 44(1):239-248.
45. Gerebtzoff G, Seelig A: In silico prediction of blood-brain barrier permeation using the calculated molecular cross-sectional area as main parameter. J Chem Inf Mod (2006) 46(6):2638-2650
46. Li H, Yap CW, Ung CY, Xue Y, Cao ZW, Chen YZ: Effect of selection of molecular descriptors on the prediction of blood-brain barrier penetrating and nonpenetrating agents by statistical learning methods. J Chem Inf Model (2005) 45(5):1376-1384.
47. Zhao YH, Abraham MH, Ibrahim A, Fish PV, Cole S, Lewis ML, De Groot MJ, Reynolds DP: Predicting penetration across the blood-brain barrier from simple descriptors and fragmentation schemes. J Chem Inf Model (2007) 47(1):170-175.
48. Zhang L, Zhu H, Oprea TI, Golbraikh A, Tropsha A: QSAR modeling of the blood-brain barrier permeability for diverse organic compounds. Pharm Res (2008) 25(8):1902-1914.
49. Kortagere S, Chekmarev D, Welsh WJ, Ekins S: New predictive models for blood-brain barrier permeability of drug-like molecules. Pharm Res (2008) 25(8):1836-1845.
50. Abraham MH, Ibrahim A, Zhao Y, Acree WE: A data base for partition of volatile organic compounds and drugs from blood/plasma/serum to brain, and an LFER analysis of the data. J Pharm Sci (2006) 95(10):2091- 2100. • This paper contains the largest experimental logBB dataset with in depth analysis on performance and limitations of in silico approaches. In silico logBB models developed from this dataset have been reported.
51. Garg P, Verma J: In silico prediction of blood brain barrier permeability: An artificial neural network model. J Chem Inf Model (2006) 46(1):289-297.
52. Al-Fahemi JH, Cooper DL, Allan NL: Investigating the utility of momentum-space descriptors for predicting blood-brain barrier penetration. J Mol Graph Model (2007) 26(3):607-612.
53. Wichmann K, Diedenhofen M, Klamt A: Prediction of blood-brain partitioning and human serum albumin binding based on COSMO-RS σ-moments. J Chem Inf Model (2007) 47(1):228-233.
54. Van Damme S, Langenaeker W, Bultinck P: Prediction of blood-brain partitioning: A model based on ab initio calculated quantum chemical descriptors. J Mol Graph Model (2008) 26(8):1223-1236.
55. Deconinck E, Zhang MH, Petitet F, Dubus E, Ijjaali I, Coomans D, Van der Heyden Y: Boosted regression trees, multivariate adaptive regression splines and their two-step combinations with multiple linear regression or partial least squares to predict blood-brain barrier passage: A case study. Anal Chim Acta (2008) 609(1):13-23.
56. Di L, Kerns EH, Carter GT: Strategies to assess blood-brain barrier penetration. Exp Opin Drug Disc (2008) 3(6):677-687. • This excellent paper reviews recent approaches useful for evaluating BBB penetration.
57. Liu X, Chen C, Smith BJ: Progress in brain penetration evaluation in drug discovery and development. J Pharmacol Exp Ther (2008) 325(2):349-356.
58. Didziapetris R, Japertas P, Avdeef A, Petrauskas A: Classification analysis of P-glycoprotein substrate specificity. J Drug Target (2003) 11(7):391-406.
59. Beaudry F, Coutu M, Brown NK: Determination of drug-plasma protein binding using human serum albumin chromatographic column and multiple linear regression model. Biomed Chromatogr (1999) 13(6):401-406.
60. Liu X, Chen C: Strategies to optimize brain penetration in drug discovery. Curr Opin Drug Discov Devel (2005) 8(4):505-512.