Estimation of drug solubility in water, PEG 400 and their binary mixtures using the molecular structures of solutes

European Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences

Volumn 40, Issue 5, 2010, Pages 430-440

  Ghafourian, Taravat ^a,b   Bozorgi, Atefeh Haji Agha ^b,c  

^a MEDWAY SCHOOL OF PHARMACY   (United Kingdom)

^b TABRIZ UNIVERSITY OF MEDICAL SCIENCES   (Iran)

^c SHAHID BEHESHTI UNIVERSITY OF MEDICAL SCIENCES   (Iran)

Author keywords

ADME; Cosolvent; PEG; Polyethylene glycol; QSAR; QSPR; Solubility

Indexed keywords

ALLOPURINOL; AZATHIOPRINE; CAFFEINE; GUANINE; MACROGOL 400; SOLVENT; STRYCHNINE; URIC ACID; WATER; XANTHINE; DRUG; MACROGOL DERIVATIVE; SOLUTION AND SOLUBILITY;

ACCURACY; ANALYTICAL ERROR; AQUEOUS SOLUTION; ARTICLE; CHEMICAL STRUCTURE; CRYSTAL STRUCTURE; DRUG SOLUBILITY; MOLECULAR INTERACTION; MOLECULAR SIZE; PREDICTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUANTITATIVE STRUCTURE PROPERTY RELATION; SOLUTE; STATISTICAL MODEL; VALIDATION STUDY; CHEMISTRY; QUANTITATIVE STRUCTURE ACTIVITY RELATION; REGRESSION ANALYSIS; SOLUBILITY; SOLUTION AND SOLUBILITY;

MOLECULAR STRUCTURE; PHARMACEUTICAL PREPARATIONS; POLYETHYLENE GLYCOLS; QUANTITATIVE STRUCTURE-ACTIVITY RELATIONSHIP; REGRESSION ANALYSIS; SOLUBILITY; SOLUTIONS; SOLVENTS; WATER;

EID: 77953911489     PISSN: 09280987     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejps.2010.04.016     Document Type: Article

References (50)

1. Abraham M.H., Le J. The correlation and prediction of the solubility of compounds in water using an amended solvation energy relationship. J. Pharm. Sci. 1999, 88:868-880.
2. Asikainen A.H., Ruuskanen J., Tuppurainen K.A. Consensus kNN QSAR: a versatile method for predicting the estrogenic activity of organic compounds in silico. A comparative study with five estrogen receptors and a large, diverse set of ligands. J. Environ. Sci. Tech. 2004, 38:6724-6729.
3. Banerjee S. Calculation of water solubility of organic compounds with UNIFAC-derived parameters. Environ. Sci. Technol. 1985, 19:369-370.
4. Bergström C.A.S. In silico predictions of drug solubility and permeability: two rate-limiting barriers to oral drug absorption. Basic Clin. Pharmacol. Toxicol. 2005, 96:156-161.
5. Bergström C.A.S., Norinder U., Luthman K., Artursson P. Experimental and computational screening models for prediction of aqueous drug solubility. Pharm. Res. 2002, 19:182-188.
6. Bergström C.A.S., 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.
7. Blower P., Fligner M., Verducci J., Bjoraker J. On combining recursive partitioning and simulated annealing to detect groups of biologically active compounds. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 2002, 42:393-404.
8. Butina D., Gola J.M.R. Modeling aqueous solubility. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 2003, 43:837-841.
9. Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, 2000. Guidance for Industry. Rockville, MD, CDER/FDA.
10. Cheng A., Merz K.M. Prediction of aqueous solubility of a diverse set of compounds using quantitative structure-property relationships. J. Med. Chem. 2003, 46:3572-3580.
11. Devillers J., Balaban A.T. Topological Indices and Related Descriptors in QSAR and QSPR 2000, Gordon and Breach, Amsterdam, pp. 117-119.
12. EMEA, 2007. Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use, Concept Paper on BCS-Based Biowaiver. EMEA, London, EMEA/CHMP/EWP/213035/2007.
13. Ghafourian T., Cronin T.D.M. The effect of variable selection on nonlinear modelling of oestrogen receptor binding. QSAR Comb. Sci. 2006, 25:824-835.
14. Godden J.W., Furr J.R., Bajorath J. Recursive median partitioning for virtual screening of large databases. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 2003, 43:182-188.
15. Hall L.H., Kier L.B. Issues in representation of molecular structure: the development of molecular connectivity. J. Mol. Graph. Model. 2001, 20:4-18.
16. Hawkins D.M., Young S.S., Rusinko A. Analysis of a large structure-activity data set using recursive partitioning. Quant. Struct. Act. Relat. 1997, 16:296-302.
17. Hermann R.B. Use of solvent cavity area and number of packed solvent molecules around a solute in regard to hydrocarbon solubilities and hydrophobic interactions. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 1977, 74:4144-4145.
18. Hewitt M., Cronin M.T.D., Madden J.C., Steven Enoch J. Consensus QSAR models: do the benefits outweigh the complexity?. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2007, 47:1460-1468.
19. Hildebrand J.H., Scott R.L. The Solubility of Nonelectrolytes 1950, Reinhold, New York. 3rd ed.
20. Hou T.J., Xi K., Zhang W., Xu X.J. ADME evaluation in drug discovery. 4. Prediction of aqueous solubility based on atom contribution approach. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci 2004, 44:266-275.
21. Hu Q.N., Liang Y.-Z., Yin H., Peng X.-L., Fang K.-T. structural interpretation of the topological index. 2. The molecular connectivity index, the kappa index, and the atom-type E-state index. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 2004, 44:1193-1201.
22. Huuskonen J., Livingstone D.J., Manallack D.T. Prediction of drug solubility from molecular structure using a drug-like training set. SAR QSAR Environ. Res. 2008, 19:191-212.
23. Huuskonen J., Salo M., Taskinen J. Aqueous solubility prediction of drugs based on molecular topology and neural network modeling. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 1998, 38:450-456.
24. Johnson S.R., Zheng W. Recent progress in the computational prediction of aqueous solubility and absorption. AAPS J. 2006, 8:4. (http://www.aapsj.org).
25. Jouyban-Gharamaleki A., Valaee L., Barzegar-Jalali M., Clark B.J., Acree W.E. Comparison of various cosolvency models for calculating solute solubility in water-cosolvent mixtures. Int. J. Pharm. 1999, 177:93-101.
26. Klopman G., Zhu H. Estimation of the aqueous solubility of organic molecules by the group contribution approach. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 2001, 41:439-445.
27. Lee Y.C., Pinsuwan S., Yalkowsky S.H. A comparison of AQUAFAC group q-values to their corresponding CLOGP f-values. Chemosphere 1997, 35:775-782.
28. Lipinski C.A. Drug-like properties and the causes of poor solubility and poor permeability. J. Pharmacol. Toxicol. Methods 2000, 44:235-249.
29. Lipinski C.A. Poor aqueous solubility - an industry wide problem in drug delivery. Am. Pharm. Rev. 2002, 5:82-85.
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 Del. Rev. 1997, 23:3-25.
31. Meylan W.M., Howard P.H., Boethling R.S. Improved method for estimating water solubility from octanol water partition coefficient. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 1996, 15:100-106.
32. O'Boyle N.M., Palmer D.S., Nigsch F., Mitchell J.B.O. Simultaneous feature selection and parameter optimisation using an artificial ant colony: case study of melting point prediction. Chem. Centr. J. 2008, 2:21.
33. Palmer D.S., O'Boyle N.M., Glen R.C., Mitchel J.B.O. Random forest models to predict aqueous solubility. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2007, 47:150-158.
34. Paruta A.N., Sciarrone B.J., Lordi N.G. Solubility of salicylic acid as a function of dielectric constant. J. Pharm. Sci. 1964, 53:1349-1353.
35. Rytting E., Lentz K.A., Chen X.Q., Qian F., Venkatesh S. A quantitative structure-property relationship for predicting drug solubility in PEG 400/water cosolvent systems. Pharm. Res. 2004, 21:237-244.
36. Rytting, E., Lentz, K.A., Chen, X.Q., Qian, F., Venkatesh, S., 2005. Aqueous and co-solvent solubility data for drug-like organic compounds. AAPS J. 7, Article 10 (). http://www.aapsj.org/.
37. Santos O.A., Hopfinger A.J. Combined 4D-fingerprint and clustering based membrane-interaction QSAR analyses for constructing consensus Caco-2 cell permeation virtual screens. J. Pharm. Sci. 2008, 97:566-583.
38. Schroeter T.S., Schwaighofer A., Mika S., Ter Laak A., Suelzle D., Ganzer U., Heinrich N., Mueller K.R. Estimating the domain of applicability for machine learning QSAR models: a study on aqueous solubility of drug discovery molecules. J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des. 2007, 21:485-498.
39. Sengwa R.J., Sankhla S. Characterization of heterogeneous interaction in binary mixtures of ethylene glycol oligomer with water, ethyl alcohol and dioxane by dielectric analysis. J. Mol. Liq. 2007, 130:119-131.
40. Syracuse Research Corporation, 2010. Interactive PhysProp Database. Website: (accessed on March 2010). http://www.syrres.com/what-we-do/databaseforms.aspx%3Fid=386.
41. Stengele A., Stephanie R., Leuenberger H. A novel approach to the characterisation of polar liquids. Part 1: pure liquids. Int. J. Pharm. 2001, 225:123-134.
42. Thakur A., Thakur M., Khadikar P.V., Supuran C.T., Sudele P. QSAR study on benzenesulphonamide carbonic anhydrase inhibitors: topological approach using Balaban index. Bioorg. Med. Chem. 2004, 12:789-793.
43. Votano J.R., Parham M., Hall L.H., Kier L.B., Oloff S., Tropsha A., Xie Q., Tong W. Three new consensus QSAR models for the prediction of Ames genotoxicity. Mutagenesis 2004, 19:365-377.
44. Wassvik C.M., Holmen A.G., Bergstrom C.A.S., Zamora I., Artursson P. Contribution of solid-state properties to the aqueous solubility of drugs. Eur. J. Pharm. Sci. 2006, 29:294-305.
45. Wishart D.S., Knox C., Guo A.C., Cheng D., Shrivastava S., Tzur D., Gautam B., Hassanali M. DrugBank: a knowledgebase for drugs, drug actions and drug targets. Nucleic Acids Res. 2008, 36(Database issue):D901-D906. The DrugBank database website accessed on March 2010.
46. Yalkowsky S.H. Solubility and Solubilization in Aqueous Media 1999, Oxford University Press, New York.
47. Yalkowsky S.H., Flynn G.L., Amidon G.L. Solubility of nonelectrolytes in polar solvents. J. Pharm. Sci. 1972, 61:983-984.
48. Yalkowsky S.H., Roseman T. Solubilization of Drugs by Cosolvents 1981, Marcel Dekker, New York, pp. 91-134.
49. Yurquina A., Manzur M.E., Brito P., Manzo R., Molina M.A. A. Physicochemical studies of acetaminophen in Water-PEG 400 systems. J. Mol. Liq. 2007, 133:47-53.
50. Zhou D.S., Alelyunas Y., Liu R.F. Scores of extended connectivity fingerprint as descriptors in QSPR study of melting point and aqueous solubility. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2008, 48:981-987.