Current methodology for the assessment of ADME-Tox properties on drug candidate molecules

Biotecnologia Aplicada

Volumn 25, Issue 2, 2008, Pages 97-110

  De La Nuez, Ania ^a   Rodríguez, Rolando ^a  

^a CENTER FOR GENETIC ENGINEERING AND BIOTECHNOLOGY   (Cuba)

Author keywords

Absorption; ADME; Distribution; Drug design; Excretion; Metabolism; Molecular descriptors; Pharmacokinetic; QSAR; Toxicity

Indexed keywords

BLOOD BRAIN BARRIER; COMPUTER MODEL; DRUG ABSORPTION; DRUG BIOAVAILABILITY; DRUG DIFFUSION; DRUG DISTRIBUTION; DRUG EXCRETION; DRUG FORMULATION; DRUG HALF LIFE; DRUG METABOLISM; DRUG PENETRATION; DRUG SOLUBILITY; DRUG STABILITY; DRUG TOXICITY; LIPOPHILICITY; METHODOLOGY; PHARMACOKINETICS; PKA; PREDICTION AND FORECASTING; REVIEW; STRUCTURE ACTIVITY RELATION;

EID: 61449194160     PISSN: 08644551     EISSN: 10272852     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Review

References (179)

1. Lipper RA. How can we optimize selection of drug development candidates from many compounds at the discovery stage?. Mod Drug Discovery 1999,2:55.
2. Thompson TN. Optimization of metabolic stability as a goal of modern drug design. Med Res Rev 2001 ;21:41 2-49.
3. Smith DA, van de Waterbeemd H. Pharmacokinetics and metabolism in early drug discovery. Curr Opin Chem Biol 1999;3:373-8.
4. Kerns EH. High throughput physico- chemical proOling for drug discovery. J Pharm Sci 2001,90:1 838.
5. Adachi Y, Suzuki H, Sugiyama Y. Comparative studies on in vitro methods for evaluating in vivo function of MDR1 P-glycoprotein. Pharm Res 2001;18:1660-8.
6. Andrews J, Abd-Ellah MF, Randolph NL, Kenworthy KE, Carlile DJ, Friedberg T, Houston JB. Comparative study of the metabolism of drug substrates by human cytochrome P450 3A4 expressed in bacterial, yeast and human lymphoblastoid cells. Xenobiotica 2002;32:937-47.
7. Thompson TN. Optimization of metabolic stability as a goal of modern drug design. Med Res Rev 2001 ;21 :412-49.
8. Kakkar T, Boxenbaum H, Mayersohn M. Estimation of Ki in a competitive enzyme- inhibition model: comparisons among three methods of data analysis. Drug Metab Dispos 1999;27:756-62.
9. Lipinski CA, Lombardo F, Dominy BW, Feeney PJ. Experimental and computational approaches to estimate solubility and permeability in drug discovery and development settings. Adv Drug Del Revs 1997;23:3-25.
10. Bevan CD, Lloyd RS. A high-throughput screening method for the determination of aqueous drug solubility using laser nephelometry in microtiter plates. Anal Chem 2000;72:1781-7.
11. Delie F, Rubas W. A human colonic cell line sharing similarities with enterocytes as a model to examine oral absorption: advantages and limitations of the Caco-2 model. Crit Rev Ther Drug Carrier Syst 1997;14:221-86.
12. Yamashita S, Furubayashi T, Kataoka M, Sakane T, Sezaki H, Tokuda H. Optimized conditions for prediction of intestinal drug permeability using Caco-2 cells. Eur J Pharm Sci 2000;10:195-204.
13. Irvine JD, Takahashi L, Lockhart K, Cheong J, Tolan JW, Selick HE, Grove JR. MDCK Madin-Darby canine kidney) cells: A tool for membrane permeability screening. J Pharm Sci 1999;88:28-33.
14. Kansy M, Senner F, Gubernator K. Phy- sicochemical high throughput screening: parallel artificial membrane permeation assay in the description of passive absorption processes. J Med Chem 1998;41 : 1007-10.
15. Sugano K, Nabuchi Y, Machida M, Aso Y. Prediction of human intestinal permeability using artrfical membrane permeability. Int J Pharm 2003;257:245-51.
16. Hengstler JG, Utesch D, Steinberg P, Platt KL, Diener B, Ringer M, et al. Cryo-preserved primary hepatocytes as a constantly availble in vitro model for the evolution of human and animal drug metabolism and enzyme induction. Drug Metab Rev 2000,32:81-1 18.
17. Hakura A, Suzuki S, Satoh T. Advantage of the use of human liver S9 in the Ames test. Mutat Res 1 999;438:26-36.
18. Miller VP, Stresser DM, Blanchard AP, Tuner S, Crespi CL. Fluorometric high- throughput screening for inhibitors of cytochrome P450. Ann NY Acad Sci 2000; 919:26-32.
19. Yu H, Adedoyin A. ADME-Tox drug discovery: integration of experimental and computational technologies. Drug Discov Today 2003;8:852-61.
20. Chou JT, jurs PC Computer-assisted computation of partition coefficients from molecular structures using fragment constants. J Chem Inf Comput Sci 1979; 19:172-8.
21. Leo AJ, Hoekman D. Calculating log Poet) with no missing fragments the problem of estimating new interaction parameter. Perspect Drug Discov Des 2000;18:19-38.
22. Agoram B, Woltosz WS, Bolger MB. Predicting the impact of physiological and biochemical processes on oral drug bioavailability. Adv Drug Deliv Rev 2001 ; 50:S41-S67.
23. Stouch TR, Kenyon JR, Johnson SR, Chen XQ, Doweyko A, Li Y. In silico ADME/ Tox: why models fail. J Comput Aided Mol Des 2003;17:83-92.
24. Van de Waterbeemd H, Rose S. In: Wermuth LG, editors. The Practice of Medicinal Chemistry 2nd; 2003. p. 1367-85.
25. Buchwald P, Bodor N. Computer- aided drug design: the role of quantitative structure-property, structure-activity and structure-metabolism relationships (QSPR, QSAR, QSMR). Drug Future 2002; 15:577-88.
26. Liu R, So SS. Development of quantitative structure-property relationship models for early ADME evaluation in drug discovery. 1. Aqueous solubility. J Chem Inf Comput Sci 2001, -41:1633-9.
27. Liu R, Sun H, So SS. Development of Quantitative Structure-Property Relationship Models for Early ADME Evaluation in Drug Discovery. 2. Blood-Brain Barrier Penetration. J Chem Inf Comput Sci 2001 ; 41 :1623-32.
28. Clark DE. Rapid calculation of polar molecular surface area and its application to the prediction of transport phenomena. 2. Prediction of blood-brain barrier penetration. J Pharm Sci 1999;88:815-21.
29. Zhao YH, Le J, Abraham MH, Hersey A, Eddershaw PJ, Luscombe CN, et al. Evaluation of human intestinal absorption data and subsequent derivation of a quantitative structure-activity relationship (QSAR) with the Abraham descriptors. J Pharm Sci 2001;90:749-784.
30. Yamashita F, Hashida M. In silico approaches for predicting ADME properties of drugs. Drug Metab Pharmacokin 2004;19:327-38.
31. Fu XC, Chen CX, Wang Gf, Liang WQ, Yu QS. Prediction of human intestinal absorption using an artificial neural network. Pharmazie 2005;60:674-6.
32. Balakin KV, IvanenkovYA, Savchuk NR Ivashchenko AA, Ekins S. Comprehensive computational assessment of ADME properties using mapping techniques. Curr Drug Discov Technol 2005;2:99-113.
33. Mente SR, Lombardo F. A recursive-partitioning model for blood-brain barrier permeation. J Comput Aided Mol Des 2005;19:465-81.
34. Zmuidinavicius D, Didziapetris R, Japertas P Avdeef A, Petrauskas A. Classification structure-activity relations (C-SAR) in prediction of human intestinal absorption. J Pharm Sci 2003;92:621-33.
35. Zheng M, Liu Z, Xue C, Zhu W, Chen K, Luo X, Jiang H. Mutagenic probability estimation of chemical compounds by a novel molecular electrophilicity vector and support vector machine. Bioinformatics 2006;22:2099-106.
36. Kriegl JM, Arnhold T, Beck B, Fox T. A support vector machine approach to classify human cytochrome P450 3A4 inhibitors. J Com put Aided Mol Des 2005;19: 189-201.
37. Shen M, Xiao Y, Golbraikh A, Gombar VK, Tropsha A. Development and validation of k-nearest-neighbor QSPR models of metabolic stability of drugs candidate. J Med Chem 2003;46:3013-20.
38. Niwa T. Using general regression and probabilistic neural network to predict human intestinal absorption with topological descriptors derived from two-dimensional chemical structures. J Chem Inf Comput Sci 2003;43:113-9.
39. Jones JP, Mysinger M, Korzekwa KR. Computational models for cytochrome P450: a predictive electronic model for aromatic oxidation and hydrogen atom abstraction. Drug Metab Dispos 2002; 30:7-12.
40. Segall MD, Payne MC, Ellis SW, Tucker GT, Boyes RN. Ab InitioMolecular Modeling in the Study of Drug Metabolism. Eur J Drug Metab Pharmacokinet 1997;22:283-8.
41. Jones JP, He M, Trager WF, Rettie AE. Three-dimensional quantitative structure- activity relationship for inhibitors of cytochrome P4502C9. Drug Metab Dispos 1996;24:1-6.
42. Tsantili-Kakoulidou A, Panderi I, Csizmadia F, Darvas F. Prediction of distribution coefficient from structure. 2. Validation of Prolog D, an expert system. J Pharm Sci 1997;86:1173-9.
43. da Silva CO, da Silva EC, Nascimerrto MAC. Ab Initio Calculations of Absolute pKa Values in Aqueous Solution I. Carbo- xylic Acids. J Phys Chem A 1999;103: 11194-9.
44. Citra MJ. Estimating the pKa of phenols, carboxylic acids and alcohols from semiempirical quantum chemical methods. Chemosphere 1999;38:191-206.
45. Xing L, Glen RC. Novel methods for the prediction of logR pKa, and log D. J Chem Inf Comput Sci 2002;42:796-805.
46. Meylan WM, Howard, PH. Atom/fragment contribution method for estimating octanol-water partition coefOcients. J Pharm Sci 1995;84:83-92.
47. Spessard GO ACD Labs/LogP dB 3.5 and ChemSketch 3.5. J Chem Inf Comput Sci 1998;38:1250-3.
48. Klopman G, Li J-Y, Wang S, Dimayuga M. Computer automated log P calculations based on an extended group contribution approach. J Chem Inf Comput Sci 1994; 34:752-81.
49. Ghose AK, Viswanadhan VN, Wen- doloski JJ. Prediction of hydrophobic (lipophilic) properties of small organic molecules using fragmental methods: an analysis of ALOGP and CLOGP methods. J Phys Chem A 1998;102:3762-3772.
50. Moriguchi I, Hirono S, Liu Q Naka- gome I, Matsushita Y. Simple method of calculating octanol/water partition coefficient. Chem Pharm Bull 1992;40: 127-30.
51. Gombar VK, Enslein K. Assessment of n-octanol/water partition coefficient: when is the assessment reliable?. J Chem Inf Comput Sci 1996;36:1127-34.
52. Huuskonen J J, Livingstone DJ, Tetko IV Neural network modeling for estimation of partition coefûcierrt based on atom-type electrotopological state indices. J Chem Inf Comput Sci 2000;40:947-55.
53. Reynolds CH Estimating lipophilicity using the GB/SA continuum solvation model: A direct method for computing partition coefficients. J Chem Inf Comput Sci 1995;35:738-42.
54. Ruelle R Universal model based on the mobile order and disorder theory for predicting Mphphilicity and partition coefficients in all mutually immiscible two-phase liquid systems. J Chem Inf Comput Sci 2000;40:681-700.
55. Mälkiä A, Murtomäki L, Urtti A, Kontturi K. Drug permeation in biomembranes in viiro and in siiico prediction and influence of physicochemical properties. Eur J Pharm Sci 2004;23:13-47.
56. Palm K, Luthman K, UngellA-L, Strand- lund G, Artursson R Correlation of drug absorption with molecular surface properties. J Pharm Sci 1996;85:32-9.
57. van de Waterbeemd H, Kansy M. Hydrogen-bonding capacity and brain penetration. Chimia 1992;46:299-303.
58. Palm K, Stenberg R Luthman K, Artursson P. Polar molecular surface proer-ties predict the intestinal absorption of drugs in human. Pharm Res 1997;1 4: 568-71.
59. Kelder J, Grootenhuis PDJ, Bayada DM, Delbressine LPC, Ploemen JR Polar molecular surface as a dominating determinant for oral absorption and brain penetration of drugs. Pharm Res 1999,16: 1514-9.
60. Veber DF, Johnson SR, Cheng H-Y, Smith BR, Ward KW, Kopple KD. Molecular properties that influence the oral bioavailability of drug candidates. J Med Chem 2002;45:2615-23.
61. Van de Waterbeemd H, Camenisch G Folkers G, Chretien JR, Raevsky OA. Estimation of blood-brain barrier crossing of drugs using molecular size and shape, and H-bonding descriptors. J Drug Target 1998;6:151-65.
62. Kaliszan R Quantitative structure- retention relationships. Anal Chem 1992: 619A-631A.
63. Sanghvi T, Jain N, Yang G, Yalkowsky SH. Estimation of aqueous solubility by the general solubility equation (GSE) the easy way. QSAR & Combinatorial Science 2003;22:258-62.
64. Butina D, Gola JMR. Modeling aqueous solubility. J Chem InfComput Sci 2003;43: 837-41.
65. Cheng A, Merz KM. Prediction of aqueous solubility of a diverse set of compounds using quantitative structure- property relationship. J Med Chem 2003; 46:3572-80.
66. Delaney JS. ESOL: Estimating aqueous solubility directly from molecular structure. J Chem Inf Comput Sci 2004;44: 1000-5.
67. Jorgensen WL, Duffy EM. Prediction of drug solubility from Monte Carlo simulations. Bioorg Med Chem Lett 2000; 10:1 155-8.
68. Cramer CJ, Truhlar DG Continuum solvation models: Classical and quantum mechanical implementations. In: Lipkowitz KB, Boyd DB, editors. Reviews in Computational Chemistry; 1995. p.1-72.
69. Klamt A. Prediction of aqueous solubility of drugs and pesticides with COSMO-RS. J Comput Chem 2002;23:275-81.
70. Camenisch G, Folkers G, van de Waterbeemd H. Review of theoretical passive drug absorption models: historical background, recent developments and limitations. Pharm Acta Helv 1996; 71 :309-27.
71. Testa B, Corrupt P-A, Gaillard P Billois F, Weber R Lipophilicity in molecular modelling. Pharm Res 1996;13:335-43.
72. Gobas FA, Lahittette JM, Garofolo G, Shiu W, MacKay D. A novel method for measuring membrane-water partition coefficients of hydrophobic organic chemicals: comparison with 1 -octanol- water partitioning. J Pharm Sci 1 988;77: 265-72.
73. Kararli TT. Gastrointestinal absorption of drugs. Cri. Rev Ther Drug Carrier Syst 1989;6:39-86.
74. Hanscn C, Clayton JM. Lipophilic character and biological activity of drugs. II. Parabolic case. J Pharm Sci 1973;62: 1-21.
75. Martin YC. A practitioner's perspective of the role of quantitative structure-activity analysis in medicinal chemistry. J Med Chem 1981;24:229-237.
76. Sinko PJ, Leesman GD, Amidon GL. Predicting fraction dose absorbed in humans using a macroscopic mass balance approach. Pharm Res 1991;8:979-88.
77. Oh DM, Curl RL, Amidon GL. Estimating the fraction dose absorbed from suspensions of poorly soluble compounds in humans: a mathematical model. Pharm Res 1993,10:264-70.
78. Egan WJ, Lauri G. Prediction of intestinal permeability. Adv Drug Deliv Rev 2002;54:273-89.
79. Keller TH, Pichota A, Yin Z. A practical view of 'druggability'. Curr Opin Chem Biol 2006;10:357-61.
80. Van de Waterbeemd H, Camenisch G Folkers G, Raevsky OA. Estimation of Caco-2 Cell Permeability Using Calculated Molecular Descriptors. Quant Struct- Act Relat 1996;15:480-90.
81. Wessel MD, Jurs PC, Tolan JW, Muskal SM. Prediction of Human Intestinal Absorption of Drug Compounds from Molecular Structure. J Chem Inf Comput Sci 1998;38:726-35.
82. Fujiwara S, Yamashita F, Hashida M. Prediction of Caco-2 cell permeability using a combination of MO-calculation and neural network. Int J Pharm 2002; 237:95-105.
83. Di Fenza A, Alagona G, Ghio C, Leonardi R, Giolitti A, Madami A. Caco-2 cell permeability modelling: a neural network coupled genetic algorithm approach. J Comput Aided Mo! Des 2007;21:207-21.
84. Castillo-Garit JA, Marrero-Ponce Y, Torrens F, Garcia-Domenech R. Estimation of ADME Properties in Drug Discovery: Predicting Caco-2 Cell Permeability Using Atom-Based Stochastic and Non-stochastic Linear Indices. J Pharm Sci 2008; 97:1946-76.
85. Yamashita F, Wanchana S, Hashida M. Quantitative structure / property relationship analysis of Caco-2 permeability using genetic algorithm-based partial least squares method. J Med Chem 2002 ;91 :2230-9.
86. Hou T, Wang J, Zhang W, Xu X. ADME evaluation in drug discovery. 7. Prediction of oral absorption by correlation and classification. J Chem Inf Model 2007; 47:208-18.
87. Hou T, Wang J, Li Y. ADME evaluation in drug discovery. 8. The prediction of human intestinal absorption by a support vector machine. J Chem Inf Model 2007; 47:2408-15.
88. Ito K, Kusuhara H, Sugiyama Y. Effects of intestinal CYP3A4 and P-glycopro-tein on oral drug absorption-theoretical approach. Pharm Res 1999;16:225-31.
89. Seelig A. A general pattern for substrate recognition by P-glycoprotein. Eur J Biochem 1998;251:252-61.
90. Seelig A, Landwojtowicz E. Structure- activity relationship of P-g!ycoprotein substrates and modifiers. Eur J Pharm Sci 2000;12:31-40.
91. Seelig A, Blatter XL, Wohnsland F. Substrate recognition by p-grycoprotein and the multidrug resistance-associated protein MRP1 : a comparison. Int J Clin Pharmacol Ther 2000,38:111-21.
92. Li AP Screening for human ADME/Tox drug properties in drug discovery. Drug Discov Today 2001;6:357-66.
93. Österberg Th, Norinder U. Theoretical calculation and prediction of Pglycoprotein-interacting drugs using Mol- Surf parametrrzation and PLS statistics. Eur J Pharm Sci 2000;10:295-303.
94. Swaan PW, Koops BC, Moret EE, Tukker JJ. Mapping the binding site of the small intestinal peptide carrier (PepTl) using comparative molecular field analysis. Receptors Channels 1998;6:189-200.
95. Swaan PW, Szoka FC Jr, Oie S. Molecular modeling of the intestinal bile acid carrier: a comparative molecular field analysis study. J Comput Aided Mol Des 1997;11:581-8.
96. Pajeva I, Wiese M. Molecular modeling of phenothiazines and related drugs as multidrug resistance modifiers: a comparative molecular field analysis study. J Med Chem 1998;41:1815-26.
97. Yates CR, Chang C, Kearbey JD, Yasuda K, Schuetz EG, Miller DD, Dalton JT, Swaan PW. Structural determinants of P-g!ycoprotein-mediated transport of glucocorticoids. Pharm Res 2003;20: 1794-803.
98. Pajeva IK, Wiese M. Pharmacophore model of drugs involved in P-glycoprotein multidrug resistance: Explanation of structural variety (Hypothesis). J Med Chem 2002;45:5671-86.
99. Ekins S, Kim RB, Leake BF, Dantzig AH, Schuetz EG Lan L-B, et al. Three-dimensional quantitative structure-activity relationships of inhibitors of P-glycoprotein. Mol Pharmacol 2002;61:964-73.
100. Crivori P, Reinach B, Pezzetta D, Poggesi I. Computational models for identifying potential P-glycoprotein substrates and inhibitors. Mol Pharm 2006;3:33-44.
101. Li WX, Li L, Eksterowicz J, Ling XB, Cardozo M. Significance analysis and multiple pharmacophore models for differentiating P-glycoprotein substrates. J Chem Inf Model 2007;47:2429-38.
102. Yu LX, Amidon GL. A compartamental absorption and transit model for estimating oral drug absorption. Int J Pharm 1 999,1 86:1 1 9-25.
103. Grass GM. Simulation models to predict oral drug absorption from in vitro data. Adv Drug Deliv Rev 1997;23: 251 2- 572.
104. Norris DA, Leesman GD, Sinko PJ, Grass GM. Development of predictive pharmacokinetic simulation models for drug discovery. J Controlled Release 2000;65:55-62.
105. Kratochwil HA, Huber W, Muller F, Kansy M, Gerber PR. Predicting plasma protein binding of drugs: a new approach. Biochem Pharmacol 2002;64:1355-74.
106. Bjorkman S. Prediction of the volume of distribution of a drug: which tissue-plasma partition coefficients are needed?. J Pharm Pharmacol 2002;54:1237-45.
107. Poulin P, Krishnan K. A biologically- based algorithm for predicting human tissue: blood partition coefficients of organic chemicals. Hum Exp Toxicol 1995;14:273-80.
108. Poulin P, Theil FR Prediction of pha- ramcokinetics prior to in vivo studies. 1. Mechanism-based prediction of volume of distribution. J Pharm Sci 2002;91: 129-56.
109. Poulin P, Theil FR Prediction of pharamcokinetics prior to in vivo studies. II. Generic physiologically based pharmacokinetic models of drug disposition. J Pharm Sci 2002;91:1358-70.
110. Lombardo F, Obach RS, Shalaeva MY, Gao F. Prediction of volume of distribution values in humans for neutral and basic drugs using physicochemical measurements and plasma protein binding data. J Med Chem 2002;45:2867-76.
111. Oie S, Tozer TN Effect of altered plasma protein binding on apparent volume of distribution. J Pharm Sci 1979;68:1203-5.
112. Wichmann K, Diedenhofen M, Klamt A. Prediction of blood-brain partitioning and human serum albumin binding based on COSMO-RS sigma-moments. J Chem Inf Model 2007;47:228-33.
113. Gleeson MP, Waters NJ, Paine SW, Davis AM. In silico human and rat Vss quantitative structure-activity relationship models. J Med Chem 2006;49:1 953-63.
114. Ghafourian T, Barzegar-Jalali M, Dastmalchi S, Khavari-Khorasani T, Hakimiha N, Nokhodchi A. QSPR models for the prediction of apparent volume of distribution. Int J Pharm 2006;319: 82-97.
115. Beg ley D J. The blood-brain barrier: Principles for targeting peptide and drugs to the central nervous system. J Pharm Pharmacol 1996;48:136-40.
116. Hansch C, Bjorkroth JP, Leo A. Hydrophobicity and centralnervous system agents: On the principle of minimal hy- drophobicityin drug design. J Pharm Sci 1987;76:663-87.
117. van Bree JBMM, De Boer AG, Danhof M, Ginsel LA, Breimer DD. Characterization of an in vitro blood-brain barrien ;Effects:of molecular size and Iipophilicity on cerebrovascular endothelial transport rates of drugs. J Pharmacol Exp Ther 1988;247:1233-9.
118. Kaliszan R, Markuszewski M. Brain/ blood distribution described by a combination of partition coefficients and molecular mass. Int J Pharm 1 996;45: 9-16.
119. Abraham MH, Chadha HS, Mitchel RC. Hydrogen bonding.33. Factors that influence the distribution of solutes between blood and brain. J Pharm Sci 1994;83:1257-68.
120. Abraham MH, Chadha HS, Mitchel RC. Hydrogen bonding. 36. Determination of blood brain distribution using octanol- water partition coefficients. Drug Des Discuss 1995,1 3:123-31.
121. Norinder U, Sjoberg P, Ostenberg T. Theoretical calculation and prediction of brain-blood partitioning of organic solutes using Molsurf parametrization and PLS statistics. J Pharm Sci 1998;87:952-9.
122. Luco JM Prediction of the brain- blood distribution of a large set of drugs from structurally derived descriptors using partial least-squares(PLS) modeling. J Chem Inf Comput Sci 1 999;39:396-404.
123. Lombardo F, Blake JF, Curatolo WJ. Computation of brain-blood partitioning of organic solutes via free energy calculations. J Med Chem 1996;39:4750-5.
124. Ajay Bemis GW, Murcko MA. Designing libraries with CNS activity. J Med Chem 1999;42:4942-5.
125. Crivori R Cruciani G, Carrupt P-A, Testa B. Predicting blood-brain barrier permeation from three-dimensional molecular structure. J Med Chem 2000; 43:2204-16.
126. Young RC, Mitchell RC, Brown TH, Ganellin CR, Griffiths R, Jones M, et a/. Development of new physicochemical model for brain penetration and application to the design of centrally acting H2 receptor histamine antagonists. J Med Chem 1988;31 :656-71.
127. Ter Loak AM, Tsai RS, Donne-Op den Kelder GM, Carrupt P-A, Testa B, Timmerann h. Lipophilicity and hydrogen- bonding capacity of HI -antihistaminic agents in relation to their central sedative side-effect. Eur J Pharm Sci 1994;2: 373-84.
128. 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; In Press, Corrected Proof:.
129. Zhang H, Hu S, Zhang Y. Prediction of distribution of neutral, acidic and basic structurally diverse compounds between blood and brain by the nonlinear methodology. Med Chem 2008;4:170-89.
130. Keseru GM, Molnar L. High-throughput prediction of blood-brain partitioning: A thermodynamic approach. J Chem Inf Comput Sci 2001;41:120-8.
131. Kumar GN, Surapaneni S. Role of drug metabolism in drug discovery and development. Med Res Rev 2001 ;21: 397- 411.
132. Williams JA, Hyland R, Jones BC, Smith DA, Hurst S, Goosen TC, Peterkin V, Koup JR, Ball SE. Drug-drug interactions for UDP-glucuronosyltransferase substrates: a pharmacokinetic explanation for typically observed low exposure (AUCi/ AUC) ratios. Drug Metab Dispos 2004;32: 1201-8.
133. Ekins S, Waler CL, Swaan PW, Cruciani G, Wrighton SA, Wikel JH Progress in predicting human ADME parameters in silico. J Pharmacol Toxicol Methods 2000;44:251-72.
134. Ekins S, Wrighton SA. Application of in silico approaches to predicting drug- drug interactions. J Pharmacol Toxicol Methods 2001 ;45:65-9.
135. De Rienzo F, Fanelli F, Menziani MC, De Benedetti PG. Theoretical investigation of substrate specificity for cytochromes P450 IA2, P450 IID6 and P450 IIIA4. J Comput Aided Mol Des 2000;14: 93-116.
136. Ekins S, Stresser DM, Williams JA. In vitro and pharmacophore insights into CYP3A enzymes. Trends Pharmacol Sci 2003;24:161-6.
137. Burton J, Ijjaali I, Barberan O, Petitet F, Vercauteren DP, Michel A. Recursive partitioning for the prediction of cytochromes P450 2D6 and 1A2 inhibition: importance of the quality of the dataset. J Med Chem 2006;49:6231-40.
138. Jensen BF, Vind C, Padkjaer SB, Brockhoff PB, Refsgaard HH. In silico prediction of cytochrome P450 2D6 and 3A4 inhibition using Gaussian kernel weighted k-nearest neighbor and extended connectivity fingerprints, including structural fragment analysis of inhibitors versus noninhibitors. J Med Chem 2007; 50:501-11.
139. Ekins S, Bravi G, Ring BJ, Gillespie TA, Gillespie JS, Vandenbranden M, et al. Three-dimensional quantitative structure activity relationship analyses of substrates for CYP2B6. J Pharmacol Exp Ther 1999; 288:21-9.
140. Ekins S, Bravi G, Binkley S, Gillespie JS, Ring BJ, Wikel JH, Wrighton SA. Three- and four-dimensional-quantitatrve structure activity relationship (3D/4D-QSAR) analyses of CYP2C9 inhibitors. Drug Metab Dispos 2000;28:994-1002.
141. Ekins S, Bravi G, Binkley S, Gillespie JS, Ring BJ, Wikel JH, Wrighton SA. Three and four dimensional-quantitative structure activity relationship (3D/4D-QSAR) analyses of CYP2D6 inhibitors. Pharmacogenetics 1999;9:477-89.
142. Ekins S, Bravi G, Wikel JH, Wrighton SA. Three-dimensional-quantitative structure activity relationship analysis of cytochrome P-450 3A4 substrates. J Pharmacol Exp Ther 1999;291:424-33.
143. Ekins S, Kim RB, Leake BF, Dantzig AH, Schuetz EG, Lan LB, et al. Application of three-dimensional quantitative structure-activity relationships of P-glycoprotein inhibitors and substrates. Mol Pharmacol 2002;61:974-81.
144. Bednarczyk D, Ekins S, Wikel JH, Wright SH. Influence of molecular structure on substrate binding to the human organic cation transporter, hOCTl. Mol Pharmacol 2003;63:489-98.
145. Fuhr U, Strobl G, Manaut F, Anders EM, Sorgel F, Lopez-de-Brinas E, Chu DT, et al. Abstract Quinolone antibacterial agents: relationship between structure and in vitro inhibition of the human cytochrome P450 isoform CYP1A2. Mol Pharmacol 1993;43:191-9.
146. Poso A, Gynther J, Juvonen R. A comparative molecular field analysis of cytochrome P450 2A5 and 2A6 inhibitors. J Comput Aided Mol Des 2001 ;15:195-202.
147. Asikainen A, Tarhanen J, Poso A, Pasanen M, Alhava E, Juvonen RO. Predictive value of comparative molecular field analysis modelling of naphthalene inhibition of human CYP2A6 and mouse CYP2A5 enzymes. Toxicol In Vitro 2003; 17:449-55.
148. Rao S, Aoyama R, Schrag M, Trager WF, Rettie A, Jones JR A refined 3-dimen- sional QSAR of cytochrome P450 2C9: computational predictions of drug interactions. J Med Chem 2000;43: 2789-99.
149. Haji-Momenian S, Rieger JM, Mac donald TL, Brown ML. Comparative molecular field analysis and QSAR on substrates binding to cytochrome p450 2D6. Bioorg Med Chem 2003;11:5545-54.
150. Medvedev AE, Veselovsky AV, Shvedov VI, Tikhonova OV, Moskvitina TA, Fedotova OA, et al. Inhibition of monoamine oxidase by pirlindole analogues: 3D-QSAR and CoMFA analysis. J Chem Inf Comput Sci 1998;38:1137-44.
151. Moron JA, Campillo M, Perez V, Unzeta M, Pardo L. Molecular determinants of MAO selectivity in a series of indo- lylmethylamine derivatives: biological activities, 3D-QSAR/CoMFA analysis, and computational simulation of ligand recognition. J Med Chem 2000;43:1684-91.
152. Shao H, He X, Achnine L, Blount JW, Dixon RA, Wang X. Crystal Structures of a Multifunctional Triterpene/Flavonoid Gly- cosyltransferase from Medicago trun- catula. Plant Cell 2005,17:3141-54.
153. Sorich MJ, Smith PA, McKinnon RA, Miners JO. Pharmacophore and quantitative structure activity relationship modelling of UDP- glucuronosyltransferase 1A1 (UGT1A1) substrates. Pharmacogenetics 2002;12:635-45.
154. Smith PA, Sorich MJ, McKinnon RA, Miners JO. Pharmacophore and quantitative structure activity relationship (QSAR) modelling: complemetary approaches to the rationalization and prediction of UDP- gluconosyltransferase 1 A4 (UGT1A4) substrate selectivity. J Med Chem 2002; 46:1617-26.
155. Miners JO, Smith PA, Sorich MJ, Me Kinnon RA, Mackenzie PI. Predicting human drug glucuronrdation parameters: Application of in vitro and in silico modelling approaches. Annu Rev Pharmacol Toxicol 2004;44:1-25.
156. Lewis CVF, loannides C, Parke DV. An improved and updated version of the compact procedure for the evaluation of P450-mediated activation. Drug Metab Rev 1998;30:709-37.
157. Lewis DVF. COMPACT: a structural approach to the modelling of cytochromes P450 and their interactions with xenobiotcs. J Chem Technol Biotechnol 2001;76:237-44.
158. Lewis DVF, loannides C, Parke DV. Further evaluation of COMPACT, the molecular orbital approach for the prospective safety evaluation of chemicals. Mutat Res 1998; 412:41-54.
159. Klopman G, Dimayuga M, Talafous J. META 1. A program for the evaluation of me-tabolic transformation of chemicals. 1994; 34:1320-5.
160. Talafous J, Sayre LM, Mieyal JJ, Klopman G META 2. A dictionary mode! of mammalian xenobiotic metabolism. J Chem Inf Comput Sci 1994;34:1326-33.
161. Langowski J, Long A. Computer systems for the prediction of xenobiotic metabolism. Adv Drug Deliv Rev 2002; 54407-415.
162. Greene N, Judson PN, Langowski JJ, Marchant CA. Knowledge-based expert systems for toxicity and metabolism prediction: DEREK, StAR and METEOR. SAR QSAR Environ Res 1999;10:299-314.
163. TonnelierCAG, Fox J, Judson PN, Krause PJ, Pappas M, Patel N. Representation of chemica! structures in knowledge-based systems: the StAR system. J Chem inf Comput Sci 1997; 37:117-23.
164. Boobis A, Gundert-Remy U, Kremers P, Macheras P, Pelkonen O. In silico prediction of ADME and pharmacokinetics. Report of an expert meeting organised by COST Bl 5. Eur J Pharm Sci 2002;17:183-93.
165. Lee W, Kim RB. Transporters and renal drug elimination. Ann Rev Pharmacol Toxicol 2004;44:137-66.
166. Launay-Vacher V, Izzedine H, Karie S, Hulot JS, Baumebu A, Deray G. Renal tubular drug transporters. Nephron Physio! 2006; 103:97-106.
167. Nassar AEF, Kamel AM, Clarimont C. Improving the decision-making process in structural modification of drug candidates: reducing toxicity. Drug Discov Today 2004; 9:1055-64.
168. Kramer C, Beck B, Kriegl JM, Clark T. A Composite Model for hERG Blockade. Chem Med Chem 2008;3:254-65.
169. Li Q. Jorgensen FS, Oprea T, Brunak S, Taboureau O hERG classification model based on a combination of support vector machine method and GRIND descriptors. Mol Pharm 2008;5:117-27.
170. Vedani A, Dobler M, Lill MA. The challenge of predicting drug toxicity in silica. Basic Clin Pharmacol Toxicol 2006;99:195-208.
171. Vedani A, Dobler M, Spreafico M, Peristera O, Smiesko M. VirtualToxLab - in si/fco prediction of the toxic potential of drugs and environmental chemicals: evaluation status and internet access protocol. ALTEX 2007; 24:153-61.
172. Klopman G. MULTI-CASE. 1. A hierarchical computer automated structure evaluation program. Quant Struct Act Relatsh 1 992; 11:176-84.
173. Rosenkranz HS, Cunningham AR, Zhang YP Claycamp HG, Macina OT, Sussman MB, et al. Development, characterization and application of predictive toxicology models. SAR QSAR Environ Res 1 999,1 0:277-98.
174. Klopman G, Chakravarti SK, Harris N, Ivanov J, Saiakhov RD. In silico screening of high production volume chemicals for mutagenicity using the MCASE QSAR expert system. SAR QSAR Environ Res 2003; 14: 165-80.
175. Prival MJ. Evaluation of the TOPKAT system for predicting the carcinogenicity of chemicals. Environ Mol Mutagen 2001 ; 37:55-69.
176. Enslein K, GombarVK, Blake BW. Inter- nation Commission for Protection Against Environmental Mutagens and Carcinogens. Use of SAR in computer-assisted prediction of carcinogenicity and mutagenicity of chemicals by the TOPKAT program. Mutat Res 1994;305:47-61.
177. Sanderson DM, Earnshaw CG. Computer prediction of possible toxic action from chemical structure the DEREK system. Hum Exp Toxicol 1991;10:261-73.
178. Ridings JE, Barratt MD, Cary R, Earnshaw CG, Eggington CE, Ellis M, et a/. Computer prediction of possible toxic action from chemical structure: an update of the DEREK system. Toxicology 1996;8:267-79.
179. Lewis DF, loannides C, Parke DV. A combined COMPACT and Hazard Expert study of 40 chemicals for which information on mutagenicity and carcinogenicity is known, including the results of human epidemiological studies. I 1998;17:577-86.