QSAR: A valuable tool in drug design or a computer game? A dialectic view

Pharmakeftiki

Volumn 21, Issue 2, 2008, Pages 45-55

  Tsantili Kakoulidou, Anna ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ATHENS   (Greece)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

DATA MINING; DRUG DESIGN; HIGH THROUGHPUT SCREENING; MOLECULAR MODEL; QUANTITATIVE STRUCTURE ACTIVITY RELATION; REVIEW;

EID: 70450260529     PISSN: 11054999     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Review

References (113)

1. Hansch, C. and Fujita, T., Analysis, A Method for the Correlation of Biological Activity and Chemical Structure. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 86, 1616-1626, 1964.
2. Hammett L.P., Physical Organic Chemistry; Reaction rates, Equlibria and Mechanism, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1970, 2nd Edn.
3. Taft R.W. Separation of Polar, Steric and Resonance Effects in Reactivity, in: Steric Effects in Organic Chemistry (Ed. M.S. Newman), Wiley, N. York, 1973.
4. Halliday, R.G.; Drasco, A.L.; Lumley, C.E.; Walker, S.R. The Allocation of Resources for R&D in the World's Leading Pharmaceutical Companies. Res. Develop. Management, 27, 63-77, 1997.
5. EUFEPS Report, Contribution of academic research to discovery and development of medicines: current status and future opportunities., Eur. J. Pharm. Sci., 24, 245-252, 2004.
6. Martin Y.C. Quantitative Drug Design, Marcel Dekker, N.York, 1978.
7. Kubinyi H. "Lipophilicity and Drug Activity" in Progress in Drug Research Vol.23 (E.Jucker Ed.) Birkhause, Basel pp. 97-198, 1979.
8. Tute M.S. "Principles and practice in Hansch Analysis. Guide to structure-activity correlation for the medicinal chemist In: Advances in Drug Research, Vol 6 (N. J. Harper and A.B. Simmons eds) Academic Press London pp1-77, 1971.
9. S.M., Wilson J.W. J.Med.Chem. 7, 395-399, 1964.
10. Franke R. in: Theoretical Drug Design Methods, Pharmacochemistry Library Vol. 7 (Nauta W.T:H., Rekker R.F. eds) Elsevier, 1984.
11. Hansch C., Leo A., Exploring QSAR: fundamentals and applications in chemistry and biology. American Chemical Society, Washington, 1995.
12. Gao H., Katzenellenbogen J.A., Garg R., Hansch C. Comparative QSAR analysis of estrogen receptor ligands. Chem Rev. 99, 723-44, 1999.
13. Hadjipavlou-Litina D., Garg R., Hansch C. Comparative quantitative structure-activity relationship studies (QSAR) on non-benzodiazepine compounds binding to benzodiazepine receptor (BzR). Chem Rev. 4, 3751-94, 2004.
14. Kurup A. C-QSAR: a database of 18,000 QSARs and associated biological and physical data. J. Comp.-Aid. Mol. Des. 17, 187-196, 2003.
15. Wermuth C., The Impact of QSAR and CCAD methods in Drug Discovery, in: Rational Approaches to Drug Design Holtje H.D., Sippl W., eds Prous Science, 2001.
16. Unger S. Whither QSAR, wither QSAR, in: QSAR in design of bioactive compounds, Kuchar M. ed, Prous Science, 1984.
17. Van de Waterbeemd H., Testa B., The parametrization of lipophilicity and other structural properties in Drug Design, in: Testa B. (Ed), Advances in Drug Research Vol. 16, Academic Press, New York, pp. 85-227, 1987.
18. Sangster J. Ocanol-water Partition Coefficients: Fundamentals and Physical Chemistry, Wiley Series in Solution Chemistry, Vol.2 Wiley, N. York, NY 1997.
19. Giaginis C., Tsantili-Kakoulidou A., Alternative measures of lipophilicity. From octanol-water partitioning to IAM retention, J. Pharm. Sci. in press.
20. oct from Structures. Chem. Rev. 93, 1281-1306, 1993.
21. R.F. Rekker, R. Mannhold (Eds.), Calculation of Drug Lipophilicity, Wiley-VCH, Weinheim, 1992.
22. A.K Ghose, G.M Crippen, Atomic Physicochemical Parameters for three-dimensional structure-directed Quantitative Structure-Activity Relationships I. Partition coefficients as a measure of hydrophobicity J. Comput. Chem., 7, 565-577, 1986.
23. Meylan, W. M., Howard, P.H., Atom/fragment contribution method for estimating octanol-water partition coefficients J. Pharm. Sci. 84, 83-92, 1995.
24. Tetko I.V., Tanchuk V.Y., Application of Associative Neural Networks for Prediction of Lipophilicity in ALOGPS 2.1. Program J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci., 42, 1136-1145, 2002.
25. P. Japertas, R. Didziapetris, A. A. Petrauskas, Quant. Struct.-Act.-Relat., 21, 23-37, 2002.
26. T. Cheng, Y. Zhao, X. Li, F. Lin, Y. Xu, X. Zhang, Y. Li, R. Wang, L. Lai, J Chem Inf Model., 47, 2140-2148, 2007.
27. Mannhold R. Calculation of Lipophilicity: A classification of Methods, In: Pharmacokinetic Profiling in Drug Research, Testa B, Kramer S.D., Wunderli-Allenspach H. Folkers G., (Eds) Wiley, VCH, Zurich, 333-352, 2006.
28. Vrakas D., Tsantili-Kakoulidou A., Lipophilicity in Drug Design: The state of the art 40 years after the introduction of the hydrophobic substituent constant, 17, 83-88, 2004.
29. Hansch C., Bjorkroth J.P., Leo A., J. Pharm. Sci., 76, 663-687, 1987.
30. 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. 23, 3-25, 1997.
31. Oprea TI: Property distribution of drug-related chemical databases. J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des.14:251-264, 2000.
32. Borchardt R.T., Kerns E.H., Hageman M.J., Thakker, D.R. Stevens, J.L. (Eds.) Optimizing the "Drug-Like" Properties of Leads in Drug Discovery Biotechnology: Pharmaceutical Aspects IV, Springer, 2006.
33. Marshall, G.R, Molecular modeling in drug design. Psychopharmacology series 3, 3-11, 1987.
34. Ooms F., Molecular Modeling and computer aided drug design. Examples of their applications in medicinal chemistry, Curr. Med. Chem. 7, 141-158, 2000.
35. Sippl W., Contreras, J.M., Rival Y., Wermuth C.G., Structure-based 3 D QSAR studies...
36. Babine R.E., Bleckman T.M., Kissinger C.R., Showalter R., Pelletier L.A., Lewis C., Tucker K., Moomaw E., Parge H.E., Villafranca J.E., Design, synthesis and X-ray crystallographic studies of novel FKBP-12 ligands. Biorg. Med. Chem. Lett, 5, 1719-1724, 1995.
37. Ojima I, Chakrawarthy S, Inoue T., Lin S., He L., Horwitz, S.B., Kuduk S.D., Danishefski S., A common pharmacophore for cytotoxic natural products that stabilize microtubules. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci., 96, 4256-4261, 1999.
38. Kubinyi H., 3D QSAR in Drug Design, Theory Methods and Applications, ESCOM, Leiden, 1993.
39. Cramer III R.D., Patterson D.E., Bunce J.D., Comparative molecular field analysis (CoMFA). 1. Effect of shape on binding of steroids to carrier proteins J. Am. Chem. Soc. 110 5959-5967, 1988.
40. Herve F., Caron G., JDuche.-C.,.Gaillard P,. Rahman N.A, Tsantili-Kakoulidou A., Carrupt P.-A., D'Athis P., Tilleman J.-P., Testa B., "Ligand specificity of the genetic variants of human alpha-1-acid glycoprotein. Generation of a 3D-QSAR model for drug binding to the A variant". Mol. Pharm. 54, 129-138, 1998.
41. Klebe G., Comparative Molecular Similarity Indices Analysis: CoMSIA Persp. Drug Discov. Design, 12-14, 87-104, 1998.
42. Vedani A., Descloux A.-V., Spreafico M., Ernst B., Predicting the toxic potential of drugs and chemicals in silico: A model for the peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor γ (PPAR γ). Toxicol. Lett., 173, 17-23, 2007.
43. Vedani A., Dobler M., Lill M.A. In silico prediction of harmful effects triggered by drugs and chemicals. Toxicol. Appl. Pharm., 207, S398-S407, 2005.
44. Taylor P.J., Hydrophobic properties of drugs. In: Hansch C., Sammes P.G., Taylor J.B. (Eds.) Comprehensive Medicinal Chemistry, Vol. 4, Pergamon: Oxford, p.241-294, 1990.
45. Conradi R.A., Burton P.S., Borchard R.T., Physicochemical and Biological Factors that influence a drug's Cellular Permeability by Passive Diffusion, in Lipophilicity in Drug Action and Toxicology Pliska V., Testa B.van de Waterbeend H., eds, VCH, Weinheim, 233-252, 1996.
46. Halliday R.G., Drasco A.L., Lumley C.E., Walker S.R., The Allocation of Resources for R&D in the World's Leading Pharmaceutical Companies. Res. Develop. Management, 27, 63-77, 1997.
47. Gaviraghi G., Barnaby,R.J., Pellegatti M., Pharmacokinetic challenges in lead optimization. In: Testa B., van de Waterbeemd H., Folkers G., Guy R. (Eds.). Pharmacokinetic Optimization in Drug Research, Verlag Helvetica Chimica Acta: Zürich and Wiley - VCH: Weinheim, pp. 3-14, 2001.
48. E. Lien Drug Design, Vol 5, Ariens ed., Academic Press, pp 81-132, 1975.
49. Greek source.
50. Raevsky O.A., Fetisov V.I., Trepalina E.P., McFarland J.W., Schaper K.-J. Quantitative estimation of drug absorption in humans for passively transported compounds on the basis of their physico-chemical parameters. Quant. Struct.-Act. Relat.,19, 366-374, 2000.
51. K. Palm, K. Luthman, A.-L. Ungell, G. StrandlundF. Beigi, P. Lundhal, P. Artursson, J. Med. Chem. 41, 5382, 1998.
52. D.E.Clark, J. Pharm. Sci., 88, 807, 1999.
53. D. F. Veber, S.R. Johnson, H.-Y. Cheng, B.R.Smith, K.W. Ward, K. D. Kopple, Molecular Properties that influence the oral bioavailability of drug candidates, J. Med.Chem. 45, 2615-2623, 2002.
54. V. Karalis, A. Tsantili-Kakoulidou, P. Macheras, Multivariate Statistics of Disposition Pharmacokinetic Parameters for structurally unrelated drugs used in Therapeutics, Pharm. Research, 12, 1827-1834, 2002.
55. V. Karalis., A. Tsantili-Kakoulidou, P. Macheras, Quantitative Structure-Pharmakokinetic Relationships for disposition parameters of cephalosporins, Eur. J. Pharm. Sci. 20, 115-23, 2003.
56. Testa B.. Modulation on Drug Metabolism and Disposition by structural variation, in: Trends in Medicinal Chemistry, Mutscler E, Winterfeldt E. (eds) VCH, p.p. 611-626, 1987.
57. Ecker, G.F., Stockner, T., Chiba, PComputational models for prediction of interactions with ABC-transporters Drug Discovery Today 13, 311-317, 2008.
58. G.N.Wernly-Chung, J.M. Mayer, A. Tsantili-Kakoulidou, B.Testa, "Structure-reactivity relation- ships in the chemical hydrolysis of prodrug esters of nicotinic acid" Int. J. Pharm. 63, 129-134, 1990.
59. Chohan K.K., Paine S.W., Waters N.J., Quantitative structure activity relationships in drug metabolism Cur.Top. Med. Chem. 6, 1569-1578, 2006.
60. Arimoto R. Computational models for predicting interactions with cytochrome p450 enzyme Cur.Top. Med. Chem. 6, 1609-1618, 2006.
61. Metabolexpert, Pallas 3.3.2-4 CompuDrug Chemistry ltd, 2006.
62. Iley J., Constantino L., The microsomal dealkylation of N,N-dialkylbenzamides, Biochem. Pharmacol., 47, 275-280, 1994.
63. K.L. Audus, R.L.. Bartel, I..J.U. Hidalgo, R.T. Borchardt, The use of cultured epithelial and endothelial-cells for drug transport and metabolism sttudies Pharm. Res. 7, 435-451, 1990.
64. C. Butor, J. Davoust, Apical to Basolateral Surface-Area Ratio and Polarity of MDCK Cells Grown on Different Supports. Exp. Cell Res. 203, 115-127, 1992.
65. Kansy M., Senner F., Gubernator K., Physicochemical High Throughput Screening: Parallel Artificial Membrane Permeability Assay in the Description of Passive Absorption Processes. J. Med. Chem., 41, 1007-1010, 1998.
66. Taillardat-Bertschinger A., Galland A., Carrupt P.A., Testa B. Immobilized artificial membrane (IAM)-HPLC: proposed guidelines for technical optimization of retention measurements. J. Chromatogr. A, 953, 39-53, 2002.
67. D. Vrakas, C. Giaginis, A. Tsantili-Kakoulidou, "Different retention behavior of Structurally Diverse Basic and Neutral Drugs in Immobilized Artificial Membrane (IAM) and Reversed-Phase HPLC. Comparison with octanol- water partitioning. J. Chromatogr. A 1116, 158-164, 2006.
68. D. Vrakas, C. Giaginis, A. Tsantili-Kakoulidou, Electrostatic interactions and ionization effect in IAM retention. A comparative study with octanol- water partitioning. J. Chromatogr. A.
69. Barbato F., di Martino G., Grumetto L., La Rotonda M.I. Retention of quinolones on human serum albumin and α1-acid glycoprotein HPLC columns: Relationships with different scales of lipophilicity. Eur. J. Pharm. Sci. 30, 211-219, 2007.
70. Ertl P., Rohde B., Selzer P. Fast calculation of molecular polar surface area as a sum of fragment based contributions and its application to the prediction of drug transport properties. J. Med. Chem. 43, 3714-3717, 2000.
71. Congreve M., Carr R., Murray C., Jhoti H. A "rule of three" for fragment-based lead discovery? Drug Discov. Today. 8, 876-7, 2003.
72. Maehr H. Combinatorial chemistry in drug research from a new vantage pointBioorg. Med. Chem. 5, 473-491, 1997.
73. Sanchez-Martin R.M., Mittoo S., Bradley M. The impact of combinatorial methodologies on medicinal chemistry. Curr. Top. Med. Chem. 4, 653-669, 2004.
74. Kubinyi H., The design of combinatorial libraries Drug Discovery Today 7, 503-504, 2002.
75. Bleicher K.H., Bohm H.-J., Muller K., Alanine A.I. Hit and lead generation: Beyond high-throughput screening, Nature Rev. Drug Discov. 2, 369-378, 2003.
76. Leo A., Hansch C., Elkins D., Chem. Rev. 71, 525-616, 1971.
77. Hansch C., Leo A., Substituents Constants for Correlation Analysis in Chemistry and Biology, Wiley-Interscience, New York, 1979.
78. Jurs P.C., Dixon L., Egolf L.M. Representation of Molecules in: Chemometric Methods in Molecular Design (Mannhold R., Krogsgaard-Larsen, Timmerman. H., eds), pp 15-38, VCH, 1995.
79. Miller K.J. Additivity methods in molecular polarizability J. Amer. Chem. Soc. 112, 8533-8542, 1990.
80. R.Todeschini, V.Consonni Handbook of Molecular Descriptors, WILEY-VCH 2000.
81. Randié M., Pompe M. The variable molecular descriptors based on distance related matrices. J Chem Inf Comput Sci. 41, 575-81, 2001.
82. Hall L.H., Kier L.B. Issues in representation of molecular structure the development of molecular connectivity. J. Mol Graph Model. 20, 4-18, 2001.
83. A.Tsantili-Kakoulidou, L.B.Kier, N.Joshi, "The use of electrotopological state indices in QSAR studies", J. Chim. Phys. 89: 1729-1733, 1992.
84. Consonni V., Todeschini R., Pavan M. Structure/response correlations and similarity/diversity analysis by GETAWAY descriptors. 1. Theory of the novel 3D molecular descriptors, J. Chem. Inf. Comp. Sci. 42, 682-692, 2002.
85. Ertl P., Muhlbacher J., Rohde B., Selzer P. Web-based cheminformatics and molecular property prediction tools supporting drug design and development at Novartis. SAR QSAR Environ. Res. 14 321-328, 2003.
86. Tetko I.V. Computing Chemistry in the Web, Drug Discovery Today, 10, 1497-1500, 2005.
87. Estrada E. How the parts organize in the whole? A top-down view of molecular descriptors and properties for QSAR and drug design Mini-Rev. Med. Chem. 8, 213-221, 2008.
88. D. Vrakas, A.Tsantili-Kakoulidou, D. Hadjipavlou-Litina "Exploring the consistency of logP estimation for substituted coumarins", Quant.Struct. - Act. Relat. 22, 622-629, 2003.
89. Eros D., Kovesdi I., Orfi L., Takàcs-Novàk, K., Acsàdy, Gy., Kéri, Gy. Reliability of logP predictions based on calculated molecular descriptors: A critical review Curr. Med. Chem. 9, 1819-1829, 2002.
90. F. Lombardo, M.Y. Shalaeva, K.A. Tupper, F. Gao, A tool for Lipophilicity Determination in Drug Discovery.2. Basic and neutral compounds, J. Med. Chem. 44, 2490, 2001.
91. C. Giaginis, S. Theocharis, A. Tsantili-Kakoulidou, "Contribution to the standardization of the chromatographic conditions for the lipophilicity assessment of neutral and basic drugs" Anal. Chim. Acta 573: 311-318, 2006.
92. C. Giaginis, S. Theocharis, A. Tsantili-Kakoulidou, Octanol/water partitioning simulation by reversed phase HPLC for structurally diverse acidic drugs: Effect of octanol as mobile phase additive, J. Chromatogr. A, 1166, 116-125, 2007.
93. C. Giaginis, S. Theocharis and A.Tsantili-Kakoulidou, A consideration of PPAR-γ ligands in respect to lipophilicity: Current trends and perspectives. Expert Opin. Investig. Drugs 16, 413-417, 2007.
94. C. Giaginis, S. Theocharis A. Tsantili-Kakoulidou, Investigation of the lipophilic behaviour of some Thiazolidinediones. Relationships with PPARγ activity. J.Chromatogr. B, 857, 181-187, 2007.
95. Renner R., The Kow controversy, Environ. Sci. Technol. 36, 410A-413A, 2002.
96. T.S. Eliot, The Rock (Faber & Faber 1934).
97. Frank Zappa, "Packard Goose" in album Joe's Garage: Act II & III (Tower Records, 1979).
98. Gasteiger J., Funatsu K., Chemoinformatics - An Important Scientific Discipline J. Comput. Chem. Jpn. 5, 53-58, 2006.
99. Goldberg, David E., Genetic Algorithms in Search, Optimization and Machine Learning, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston, MA, 1989.
100. Eriksson L., Johansson E. Multivariate Design and Modeling in QSAR. Chemometr. Intell. Lab. Syst. 34, 1-19, 1996.
101. S. Wold, PLS for multivariate ninear modeling. In H. van de Waterbeemd, Chemometric methods in molecular design, VCH, Weinheim, pp.195-218, 1995.
102. L. Eriksson, E. Johansson, N. Kettaneh-Wold, S. Wold, Multi- and Megavariate Data Analysis, Umetrics Academy, 2001.
103. Nello Cristianini and John Shawe-Taylor. An Introduction to Support Vector Machines and other kernel-based learning methods. Cambridge University Press, 2000.
104. Huang T.-M., Kecman V., Kopriva I. Kernel Based Algorithms for Mining Huge Data Sets, Supervised, Semi-supervised, and Unsupervised Learning, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2006.
105. Aoyama T., Suzuki Y., Ichikawa H. Neural Networks Applied to Quantitative Structure-Activity Relationship Analysis. J. Med. Chem., 33, 2583-2590, 1990.
106. Tropsha A., Gramatica P., Gombar V.K. The importance of being earnest: Validation is the absolute essential for successful application and interpretation of QSPR models QSAR and Combinatorial Science 22, 69-77, 2003.
107. Darvas F., Kappe O., Kubinyi H., Schneider G., Wiese M. QSAR/QSPR modelling - Finding rules in noisy data? QCS, QSAR. Combin. Sci. 25 811-812, 2006.
108. Wold S., Eriksson L. Statistical Validation of QSAR Results in: Chemometric Methods in Molecular Design (Mannhold R., Krogsgaard-Larsen P., Timmerman H./eds) VCH p.p.309-319, 1995.
109. Rücker C., Rücker G., Meringer M. y-Randomiza- tion and its variants in QSPR/QSAR. J. Chem. Inf. Model 47, 2345-2357, 2007.
110. G. Jolles and K. R. H. Wooldrige (eds) Drug Design: Fact or Fantasy? Academic Press, 1984.
111. Kubinyi, H., Drug research: Myths, hype and reality, Nature Reviews Drug Discovery 2, 665-668, 2003.
112. Doweyko A.M. QSAR: dead or alive? J. Comp.-Aid. Mol. Des., 22, 81-89, 2008.
113. Innovative Medicines Initiative http://imi.europa.eu/index_en.html