Predicting in vivo safety characteristics using physiochemical properties and in vitro assays

Future Medicinal Chemistry

Volumn 3, Issue 12, 2011, Pages 1503-1511

  Greene, Nigel ^a   Song, Minghu ^a  

^a PFIZER INC   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

GENOMIC DNA;

APOPTOSIS; ARTICLE; BIOASSAY; BIOAVAILABILITY; CELL PROLIFERATION; CELL VIABILITY; CORRELATION ANALYSIS; CORRELATION COEFFICIENT; CYTOTOXICITY; GLYCOBIOLOGY; HIGH THROUGHPUT SCREENING; HUMAN; IC 50; IN VITRO STUDY; IN VIVO STUDY; LIPOPHILICITY; METABOLOMICS; MITOCHONDRIAL PERMEABILITY; OXIDATIVE PHOSPHORYLATION; PHYSICAL CHEMISTRY; PLASMA; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROTEIN BINDING; PROTEOMICS; QT PROLONGATION; TOXICOLOGY;

ANIMALS; CELL LINE; CELL PHYSIOLOGICAL PROCESSES; DRUG TOXICITY; HUMANS; MITOCHONDRIA; PHARMACEUTICAL PREPARATIONS; PHARMACOKINETICS; TOXICITY TESTS;

EID: 80052467190     PISSN: 17568919     EISSN: 17568927     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.4155/fmc.11.89     Document Type: Article

References (63)

1. Kola I, Landis J. Can the pharmaceutical industry reduce attrition rates? Nat. Rev. Drug Discov. 3, 711-716 (2004).
2. 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 Deliv. Rev. 23(1-3), 3-25 (1997). (Pubitemid 27046991)
3. Ashby J, Tennant RW. Definitive relationships among chemical structure, carcinogenicity and mutagenicity for 301 chemicals tested by the US NTP. Mutat. Res. 257(3), 229-306 (1991). (Pubitemid 121007619)
4. Benigni R, Bossa C. Predictivity and reliability of QSAR models: the case of mutagens and carcinogens. Toxicol. Mech. Meth. 18(2-3), 137-147 (2008). (Pubitemid 351414963)
5. Contrera JF, Matthews EJ, Kruhlak NL, Benz RD. In silico screening of chemicals for genetic toxicity using MDL-QSAR, nonparametric discriminant analysis, e-state, connectivity, and molecular property descriptors. Toxicol. Mech. Meth. 18(2-3), 207-216 (2008). (Pubitemid 351414972)
6. Marchant CA. Prediction of rodent carcinogenicity using the DEREK system for 30 chemicals currently being tested by the National Toxicology Program. The DEREK Collaborative Group. Env. Health Perspect. 104(Suppl. 5), 1065-1073 (1996). (Pubitemid 26402352)
7. Matthews EJ, Contrera JF. A new highly specific method for predicting the carcinogenic potential of pharmaceuticals in rodents using enhanced MCASE QSAR-ES software. Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 28(3), 242-264 (1998). (Pubitemid 29096166)
8. Matthews EJ, Kruhlak NL, Benz RD, Contrera JF, Marchant CA, Yang C. Combined use of MC4PC, MDL-QSAR, BioEpisteme, Leadscope PDM, and DEREK for Windows software to achieve high-performance, high-confidence, mode of action-βased predictions of chemical carcinogenesis in rodents. Toxicol. Mech. Meth. 18(2-3), 189-206 (2008). (Pubitemid 351414971)
9. Halliwell WH. Cationic amphiphilic drug-induced phospholipidosis. Toxicol. Pathol. 25(1), 53-60 (1997). (Pubitemid 27100559)
10. Hughes JD, Blagg J, Price DA et al. Physiochemical drug properties associated with in vivo toxicological outcomes. Bioorg. Med. Chem. Lett. 18(17), 4872-4875 (2008).
11. Leeson PD, Springthorpe B. The influence of drug-like concepts on decision-making in medicinal chemistry. Nat. Rev. Drug Discov. 6(11), 881-890 (2007). (Pubitemid 350042396)
12. Ploemen JP, Kelder J, Hafmans T et al. Use of physicochemical calculation of pKa and CLogP to predict phospholipidosis-inducing potential: a case study with structurally related piperazines. Exp. Toxicol. Pathol. 55(5), 347-355 (2004). (Pubitemid 38425469)
13. Price DA, Blagg J, Jones L, Greene N, Wager T. Physicochemical drug properties associated with in vivo toxicological outcomes: a review. Expert. Opin. Drug Metab. Toxicol. 5(8), 921-931 (2009).
14. Gibb S. Toxicity testing in the 21st Century: a vision and a strategy. Reprod. Toxicol. 25(1), 136-138 (2008).
15. Kavlock RJ, Austin CP, Tice RR. Toxicity testing in the 21st Century: implications for human health risk assessment. Risk Anal. 29(4), 485-487; discussion 492-487 (2009).
16. Blagg J. Structure-activity relationships for in vitro and in vivo toxicity. Ann. Rep. Med. Chem. 41, 353-368 (2006).
17. Ertl P, Rohde B, Selzer P. Fast calculation of molecular polar surface area as a sum of fragment-βased contributions and its application to the prediction of drug transport properties. J. Med. Chem. 43(20), 3714-3717 (2000).
18. Pelletier DJ, Gehlhaar D, Tilloy-Ellul A, Johnson TO, Greene N. Evaluation of a published in silico model and construction of a novel Bayesian model for predicting phospholipidosis inducing potential. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 47(3), 1196-1205 (2007). (Pubitemid 46973733)
19. Raschi E, Ceccarini L, De Ponti F, Recanatini M. hERG-related drug toxicity and models for predicting hERG liability and QT prolongation. Expert. Opin. Drug Metab. Toxicol. 5(9), 1005-1021 (2009).
20. Recanatini M, Cavalli A, Masetti M. Modeling HERG and its interactions with drugs: recent advances in light of current potassium channel simulations. ChemMedChem 3(4), 523-535 (2008).
21. Combs AB, Acosta D Jr, Xu JJ et al. Computation Toxicology - Risk Assessment for Pharmaceutical and Environmental Chemicals. Ekins S (Ed.).John Wiley & Sons Inc., Hoboken, NJ, USA. (2007).
22. Greene N. Computational Models to Predict Toxicity. (1st Edition).Elsevier Ltd, Oxford, UK (2007).
23. Durham SK, Pearl GM. Computational methods to predict drug safety liabilities. Curr. Opin. Drug Discov. Devel. 4(1), 110-115 (2001). (Pubitemid 32118466)
24. Ekins S, Williams AJ, Xu JJ. A predictive ligand-βased Bayesian model for human drug-induced liver injury. Drug Metab. Dispos. 38(12), 2302-2308 (2010).
25. Frid AA, Matthews EJ. Prediction of drug-related cardiac adverse effects in humans - B: use of QSAR programs for early detection of drug-induced cardiac toxicities. Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 56(3), 276-289 (2010).
26. Matthews EJ, Frid AA. Prediction of drug-related cardiac adverse effects in humans- A: creation of a database of effects and identification of factors affecting their occurrence. Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 56(3), 247-275 (2010).
27. Matthews EJ, Kruhlak NL, Benz RD, Sabate DA, Marchant CA, Contrera JF. Identification of structure activity relationships for adverse effects of pharmaceuticals in humans: C. Use of QSAR and an expert system for the estimation of the mechanism of action of drug-induced hepatobiliary and urinary tract toxicities. Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 54(1), 43-65 (2009).
28. Uetrecht JP. Is it possible to more accurately predict which drug candidates will cause idiosyncratic drug reactions? Curr. Drug Metab. 1(2), 133-141 (2000).
29. Ursem CJ, Kruhlak NL, Contrera JF, Maclaughlin PM, Benz RD, Matthews EJ. Identification of structure activity relationships for adverse effects of pharmaceuticals in humans: A. Use of FDA post-market reports to create a database of hepatobiliary and urinary tract toxicities. Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 54(1), 1-22 (2009).
30. O'Brien PJ, Irwin W, Diaz D et al. High concordance of drug-induced human hepatotoxicity with in vitro cytotoxicity measured in a novel cell-βased model using high content screening. Arch. Toxicol. 80(9), 580-604 (2006). (Pubitemid 44214526)
31. Tafazoli S, Spehar DD, O'Brien PJ. Oxidative stress mediated idiosyncratic drug toxicity. Drug Metab. Rev. 37(2), 311-325 (2005). (Pubitemid 40677507)
32. Kikkawa R, Yamamoto T, Fukushima T, Yamada H, Horii I. Investigation of a hepatotoxicity screening system in primary cell cultures - what biomarkers would need to be addressed to estimate toxicity in conventional and new approaches? J. Toxicol. Sci. 30(1), 61-72 (2005). (Pubitemid 40410215)
33. Benbow JW, Aubrecht J, Banker MJ, Nettleton D, Aleo MD. Predicting safety toleration of pharmaceutical chemical leads: cytotoxicity correlations to exploratory toxicity studies. Toxicol. Lett. 197(3), 175-182 (2010).
34. Greer ML, Smith TJD, Kenna JG. Mechanisms of drug hepatotoxicity in man: novel insights provided by the THLE-CYP cell panel. Toxicology 262(1), 4 (2009).
35. Dykens JA, Will Y. The significance of mitochondrial toxicity testing in drug development. Drug Discov. Today 12(17-18), 777-785 (2007). (Pubitemid 47362789)
36. Morgan RE, Trauner M, Van Staden CJ et al. Interference with bile salt export pump function is a susceptibility factor for human liver injury in drug development. Toxicol. Sci. 118(2), 485-500 (2010).
37. Gomez-Lechon MJ, Lahoz A, Gombau L, Castell JV, Donato MT. In vitro evaluation of potential hepatotoxicity induced by drugs. Curr. Pharm. Des. 16(17), 1963-1977 (2010).
38. Park BK, Boobis A, Clarke S et al. Managing the challenge of chemically reactive metabolites in drug development. Nat. Rev. Drug Discov. 10(4), 292-306 (2011).
39. Greer ML, Barber J, Eakins J, Kenna JG. Cell based approaches for evaluation of drug-induced liver injury. Toxicology 268(3), 125-131 (2010).
40. Thompson RA, Isin EM, Li Y et al. Risk assessment and mitigation strategies for reactive metabolites in drug discovery and development. Chem. Biol. Interact. 192(1-2), 65-71 (2010).
41. Suter W. Predictive value of in vitro safety studies. Curr. Opin. Chem. Biol. 10(4), 362-366 (2006). (Pubitemid 44080653)
42. Greene N, Naven R. Early toxicity screening strategies. Curr. Opin. Drug Discov. Dev. 12(1), 90-97 (2009).
43. Hamon J, Whitebread S, Techer-Etienne V, Le Coq H, Azzaoui K, Urban L. In vitro safety pharmacology profiling: what else beyonf hERG? Future Med. Chem. 1(4), 645-665 (2009).
44. Smith DA, Obach RS. Metabolites in safety testing (MIST): considerations of mechanisms of toxicity with dose, abundance, and duration of treatment. Chem. Res. Toxicol. 22(2), 267-279 (2009).
45. Wilson A, Liu X, Kramer J. Application of emerging toxicology screens in drug discovery: challengers and implications. Future Med. Chem. 1(7), 1201-1205 (2009).
46. Shukla SJ, Huang R, Austin CP, Xia M. The future of toxicity testing: a focus on in vitro methods using a quantitative high-throughput screening platform. Drug Discov. Today 15(23-24), 997-1007 (2010).
47. Greene N, Aleo MD, Louise-May S, Price DA, Will Y. Using an in vitro cytotoxicity assay to aid in compound selection for in vivo safety studies. Bioorg. Med. Chem. Lett. 20(17), 5308-5312 (2010).
48. Chan K, Truong D, Shangari N, O'brien PJ. Drug-induced mitochondrial toxicity. Expert Opin. Drug Metab. Toxicol. 1(4), 655-669 (2005).
49. Pereira CV, Moreira AC, Pereira SP et al. Investigating drug-induced mitochondrial toxicity: a biosensor to increase drug safety? Curr. Drug Safety 4(1), 34-54 (2009).
50. Xu JJ, Diaz D, O'brien PJ. Applications of cytotoxicity assays and pre-lethal mechanistic assays for assessment of human hepatotoxicity potential. Chem. Biol. Interact. 150(1), 115-128 (2004). (Pubitemid 39441298)
51. Abraham VC, Towne DL, Waring JF, Warrior U, Burns DJ. Application of a high-content multiparameter cytotoxicity assay to prioritize compounds based on toxicity potential in humans. J. Biomol. Screen. 13(6), 527-537 (2008). (Pubitemid 351905075)
52. Hartung T. Toxicology for the twenty-first Century. Nature 460(7252), 208-212 (2009).
53. Rothman RB, Baumann MH, Savage JE et al. Evidence for possible involvement of 5-HT(2B) receptors in the cardiac valvulopathy associated with fenfluramine and other serotonergic medications. Circulation 102(23), 2836-2841 (2000).
54. Rothman RB, Baumann MH. Serotonergic drugs and valvular heart disease. Expert Opin. Drug Safety 8(3), 317-329 (2009).
55. Berson A, Descatoire V, Sutton A et al. Toxicity of alpidem, a peripheral benzodiazepine receptor ligand, but not zolpidem, in rat hepatocytes: role of mitochondrial permeability transition and metabolic activation. J. Pharmacol. Exp. Ther. 299(2), 793-800 (2001).
56. Whitebread S, Hamon J, Bojanic D, Urban L. Keynote review: in vitro safety pharmacology profiling: an essential tool for successful drug development. Drug Discov. Today 10(21), 1421-1433 (2005). (Pubitemid 41483871)
57. Azzaoui K, Hamon J, Faller B et al. Modeling promiscuity based on in vitro safety pharmacology profiling data. ChemMedChem 2(6), 874-880 (2007).
58. Krejsa CM, Horvath D, Rogalski SL et al. Predicting ADME properties and side effects: the BioPrint approach. Curr. Opin. Drug Discov. Dev. 6(4), 470-480 (2003). (Pubitemid 36975350)
59. Hancock MK, Lebakken CS, Wang J, Bi K. Multi-pathway cellular analysis of compound selectivity. Mol. Biosystems 6(10), 1834-1843 (2010).
60. Reif DM, Martin MT, Tan SW et al. Endocrine profiling and prioritization of environmental chemicals using ToxCast data. Env. Health Persp. 118(12), 1714-1720 (2010).
61. Kroeger M. How omics technologies can contribute to the '3R' principles by introducing new strategies in animal testing. Trends Biotechnol. 24(8), 343-346 (2006). (Pubitemid 44041702)
62. Fielden MR, Eynon BP, Natsoulis G, Jarnagin K, Banas D, Kolaja KL. A gene expression signature that predicts the future onset of drug-induced renal tubular toxicity. Toxicol. Pathol. 33(6), 675-683 (2005). (Pubitemid 43154594)
63. Boess F, Kamber M, Romer S et al. Gene expression in two hepatic cell lines, cultured primary hepatocytes, and liver slices compared with the in vivo liver gene expression in rats: possible implications for toxicogenomics use of in vitro systems. Toxicol. Sci. 73(2), 386-402 (2003).(Pubitemid 36701742)