Physical properties in drug design

Topics in Medicinal Chemistry

Volumn 9, Issue , 2014, Pages 1-68

  Young, Robert J ^a  

^a GLAXOSMITHKLINE   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Aromaticity; Attrition; Chromatographic hydrophocbity measurements; Cytochrome P450; Developability; Developability classification system; Drug efficiency; HERG; Hydrophobicity; Ligand efficiency; Ligand lipophilicity efficiency; Lipophilicity; Log D; Log P; Permeation; Physical properties; PKa; Plasma protein binding; Promiscuity; Property forecast index; Solubility; Structure property relationships; Thermodynamics

Indexed keywords

ACETYLSALICYLIC ACID; ATENOLOL; BLOOD CLOTTING FACTOR 10A INHIBITOR; CYTOCHROME P450; HUMAN IMMUNODEFICIENCY VIRUS PROTEINASE INHIBITOR; HUMAN SERUM ALBUMIN; OCTANOL; POTASSIUM CHANNEL HERG; SUMATRIPTAN; WATER; ZOLMITRIPTAN;

ARTICLE; BLOOD BRAIN BARRIER; CHROMATOGRAPHY; DRUG ABSORPTION; DRUG BIOAVAILABILITY; DRUG DESIGN; DRUG PENETRATION; DRUG SOLUBILITY; HUMAN; HYDROPHOBICITY; IC50; INTESTINE ABSORPTION; INTESTINE FLUID; INTRINSIC CLEARANCE; IONIZATION; LIPOPHILICITY; MEASUREMENT; MEMBRANE TRANSPORT; MOLECULAR WEIGHT; NONHUMAN; PARTITION COEFFICIENT; PH; PLASMA PROTEIN BINDING; PREDICTION; RECEPTOR OCCUPANCY; STOMACH JUICE; STRUCTURE ACTIVITY RELATION; THERMODYNAMICS;

EID: 84916230872     PISSN: 18622461     EISSN: 1862247X     Source Type: Book Series    
DOI: 10.1007/7355_2013_35     Document Type: Article

References (129)

1. Meanwell NA (2011) Improving drug candidates by design: a focus on physicochemical properties as a means of improving compound disposition and safety. Chem Res Toxicol 24:1420–1456
2. Hansch C, Bjorkroth J, Leo A (1987) Hydrophobicity and central nervous system agents: on the principle of minimal hydrophobicity. J Pharm Sci 76:663–687
3. Hann MM (1994) Considerations for the use of computational chemistry techniques by medicinal chemists. In: King FD (ed) Medicinal chemistry, principles and practice. RSC, Cambridge, pp 130–142
4. Lipinski CA et al (2001) Experimental and computational approaches to estimate solubility and permeability in drug discovery and development settings. Adv Drug Deliv Rev 46:3–26
5. Leeson PD, Springthorpe B (2007) The influence of drug-like concepts on decision-making in medicinal chemistry. Nat Rev Drug Discov 6:881–890
6. Hann MM (2011) Molecular obesity, potency and other addictions in drug discovery. Med Chem Comm 2:349–355
7. Hubbard RE, Murray JB (2011) Experiences in fragment-based lead discovery. Methods Enzymol 493:509–531
8. Congreve M et al (2008) Recent developments in fragment-based drug discovery. J Med Chem 51:3661–3680
9. Erlanson DA et al (2004) Fragment-based drug discovery. J Med Chem 47:3463–3482
10. Muresan S, Sadowski J (2008) Properties guiding drug- and lead-likeness. In: Mannhold R (ed) Molecular drug properties -measurement and prediction. Wiley-VCH, Weinheim, pp 439–461
11. Hopkins AL, Groom CR, Alex A (2004) Ligand efficiency: a useful metric for lead selection. Drug Discov Today 9:430–431
12. Leeson PD, Empfield JR (2010) Reducing the risk of drug attrition associated with physicochemical properties. Annu Rep Med Chem 45:393–407
13. Van De Waterbeemd H et al (2001) Property-based design: optimization of drug absorption and pharmacokinetics. J Med Chem 44:1313–1333
14. Tarcsay Á, Nyíri K, Keserű GM (2012) Impact of lipophilic efficiency on compound quality. J Med Chem 55:1252–1260
15. Gleeson MP et al (2011) Probing the links between in vitro potency, ADMET and physicochemical parameters. Nat Rev Drug Discov 10:197–208
16. Hill AP, Young RJ (2010) Getting physical in drug discovery: a contemporary perspective on solubility and hydrophobicity. Drug Discov Today 15:648–655
17. Roden DM, George AL Jr (2002) The genetic basis of variability in drug responses. Nat Rev Drug Discov 1:37–44
18. Faller B et al (2011) Evolution of the physicochemical properties of marketed drugs: can history foretell the future? Drug Discov Today 16:976–984
19. Zhao H (2010) Lead optimization in the nondrug-like space. Drug Discov Today 16:158–163
20. Van de Waterbeemd H, Gifford E (2003) Admet in silico modelling: towards prediction paradise? Nat Rev Drug Discov 2:192–204
21. Bickerton GR et al (2012) Quantifying the chemical beauty of drugs. Nat Chem 4:90–98
22. Kerns EH, Di L (2004) Physicochemical profiling: overview of the screens. Drug Discov Today Technol 1:343–348
23. Kerns EH, Di L (2004) Drug-like properties: concepts, structure design and methods: from ADME to toxicity optimization. Academic, Amsterdam, Boston
24. Wan H, Holmen AG (2009) High throughput screening of physicochemical properties and in vitro ADME profiling in drug discovery. Comb Chem High Throughput Screen 12:315–329
25. Smith RN et al (1975) Selection of a reference partitioning system for drug design work. J Pharm Sci 64:599–606
26. Tute MS (1996) Lipophilicity: a history. In: Mannhold R et al (eds) Methods and principles in medicinal chemistry. Wiley, New York, pp 7–26
27. Fujita T, Iwasha J, Hansch C (1964) A new substituent constant, π, derived from partition coefficients. J Am Chem Soc 86:5175–5180
28. Leo A, Hansch C, Elkins D (1971) Partition coefficients and their uses. Chem Rev 71:525–616
29. Young RJ et al (2011) Getting physical in drug discovery II: the impact of chromatographic hydrophobicity measurements and aromaticity. Drug Discov Today 16:822–830
30. He Y-L et al (1998) Species differences in size discrimination in the paracellular pathway reflected by oral bioavailability of polyethylene glycol and D-peptides. J Pharm Sci 87:626–633
31. Kirch W, Görg KG (1982) Clinical pharmacokinetics of atenolol. Eur J Drug Metab Pharmacokinet 7:81–91
32. Bunnage ME et al (2007) Discovery of potent & selective inhibitors of activated thrombinactivatable fibrinolysis inhibitor for the treatment of thrombosis. J Med Chem 50:6095–6103
33. Hansch C, Leo A (1979) Substituent constants for correlation analysis in chemistry and biology. Wiley, New York
34. Leo AJ (1993) Calculating log POct from structures. Chem Rev 93:1281–1306
35. Rekker RE et al (1993) On the reliability of calculated log P-values: Rekker, Hansch-Leo and Suzuki approach. Quant Struct Act Relat 12:152–157
36. Ribeiro MMB et al (2010) Drug–lipid interaction evaluation: why a 19th century solution? Trends Pharmacol Sci 31:449–454
37. Wenlock MC, Barton P, Luker T (2011) Lipophilicity of acidic compounds: impact of ion pair partitioning on drug design. Bioorg Med Chem Lett 21:3550–3556
38. Valkó K (2004) Application of high-performance liquid chromatography based measurements of lipophilicity to model biological distribution. J Chromatogr A 1037:299–310
39. Valkó K et al (1997) Chromatographic hydrophobicity index by fast-gradient RP-HPLC: a high-throughput alternative to log P/log D. Anal Chem 69:2022–2029
40. Albert A, Serjeant EP (1984) The determination of ionization constants, 3rd edn. Chapman and Hall, New York
41. Avdeef A, Bucher JJ (1978) Accurate measurements of the concentration of hydrogen ions with a glass electrode. Anal Chem 50:2137–2142
42. Avdeef A et al (2000) pH-metric solubility: correlation between the acid–base titration and the saturation shake-flask solubility-pH methods. Pharm Res 17:85–89
43. Allen RI et al (1998) Multiwavelength spectrophotometric determination of acid dissociation constants of ionisable drugs. J Pharm Biomed Anal 17:699–712
44. Gift AD et al (2012) Experimental determination of pKa values by use of NMR chemical shifts, revisited. J Chem Educ 89:1458–1460
45. Cleveland JA et al (1993) Automated pKa determination at low solute concentrations by capillary electrophoresis. J Chromatogr A 652:301–308
46. Box K et al (2003) High throughput measurement of pKa values in a mixed-buffer linear pH gradient system. Anal Chem 75:883–892
47. Perrin DD, Dempsey B, Serjeant EP (1981) pKa prediction for organic acids and bases. Chapman and Hall, London
48. Di L, Fish PV, Mano T (2012) Bridging solubility between drug discovery and development. Drug Discov Today 17:486–495
49. Sugano K et al (2007) Solubility and dissolution profile assessment in drug discovery. Drug Metab Pharmacokinet 22:225–254
50. Huang LF, Tong WQ (2004) Impact of solid state properties on developability assessment of drug candidates. Adv Drug Deliv Rev 56:321–334
51. Bhattachar SN et al (2006) Evaluation of the chemiluminescent nitrogen detector for solubility determinations to support drug discovery. J Pharm Biomed Anal 41:152–157
52. Jain N, Yalkowsky SH (2001) Estimation of the aqueous solubility I: application to organic non-electrolytes. J Pharm Sci 90:234–252
53. European pharmacopeia. http://pharmeuropa.edqm.eu/home/
54. Bergström CA et al (2007) Poorly soluble marketed drugs display solvation limited solubility. J Med Chem 50:5858–5862
55. Ishikawa, Hashimoto (2011) Improvement in aqueous solubility in small molecule drug discovery programs by disruption of molecular planarity and symmetry. J Med Chem 54:1539–1554
56. Chu KA, Yalkowsky SH (2009) An interesting relationship between drug absorption and melting point. Int J Pharm 373:24–40
57. Llinàs A, Glen RC, Goodman JM (2008) Can you predict solubilities of thirty-two molecules using a database of one hundred reliable measurements? J Chem Inf Model 48:1289–1303
58. Elder D, Holm R (2013) Aqueous solubility: simple predictive methods (in silico, in vitro and bio-relevant approaches). Int J Pharm 453:3–11
59. Jantratid E et al (2008) Dissolution media simulating conditions in the proximal human gastrointestinal tract: an update. Pharm Res 25:1663–1676
60. Holm R et al (2013) Bile salts and their importance for drug absorption. Int J Pharm 453:44–45
61. Bevernage J et al (2013) Evaluation of gastrointestinal drug supersaturation and precipitation: strategies and issues. Int J Pharm 453:25–35
62. Ritchie TJ, Macdonald SJF (2009) The impact of aromatic ring count on compound developability -are too many aromatic rings a liability in drug design? Drug Discov Today 14:1011–1020
63. Lovering F, Bikker J, Humblet C (2009) Escape from flatland: increasing saturation as an approach to improving clinical success. J Med Chem 52:6752–6756
64. Yang Y et al (2012) Beyond size, ionization state, and lipophilicity: influence of molecular topology on absorption, distribution, metabolism, excretion, and toxicity for drug-like compounds. J Med Chem 55:3667–3677
65. Lovering F (2013) Escape from Flatland 2: complexity and promiscuity. Med Chem Comm 4:515
66. Ritchie TJ et al (2011) The impact of aromatic ring count on compound developability -further insights by examining carbo- and hetero- aromatic and aliphatic ring types. Drug Discov Today 16:164–171
67. Kimura T, Higaki K (2002) Gastrointestinal transit and drug absorption. Biol Pharm Bull 25:149–164
68. Davies B, Morris T (1993) Physiological parameters in laboratory animals and humans. Pharm Res 10:1093–1095
69. Riley RJ et al (2002) The influence of DMPK as an integrated partner in modern drug discovery. Curr Drug Metab 3:527–550
70. Schiller C et al (2005) Intestinal fluid volumes and transit of dosage forms as assessed by magnetic resonance imaging. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 22:971–979
71. Uetrecht JP, Trager W (2007) Conjugation pathways. Drug metabolism, chemical and enzymatic aspects. Informa Healthcare, New York, pp 130–144
72. Wager TT et al (2010) Moving beyond rules: the development of a central nervous system multiparameter optimization (CNS MPO) approach to enable alignment of drug-like properties. ACS Chem Neurosci 1:435–449
73. Butler JM, Dressman JB (2010) The developability classification system: application of biopharmaceutics concepts to formulation development. J Pharm Sci 99:4940–4954
74. Kola I, Landis J (2004) Can the pharmaceutical industry reduce attrition rates? Nat Rev Drug Discov 3:711–715
75. Waring MJ (2010) Lipophilicity in drug discovery. Expert Opin Drug Discov 5:235–248
76. Hann MM, Keserű GM (2012) Finding the sweet spot -the role of nature and nurture in medicinal chemistry. Nat Rev Drug Discov 11:355–365
77. Waring MJ (2009) Defining optimum lipophilicity and molecular weight ranges for drug candidates -molecular weight dependent lower logD limits based on permeability. Bioorg Med Chem Lett 19:2844–2851
78. Gleeson MP (2008) Generation of a set of simple, interpretable ADMET rules of thumb. J Med Chem 51:817–834
79. Kenny PW, Montanari CA (2013) Inflation of correlation in the pursuit of drug-likeness. J Comput Aided Mol Des 27:1–13
80. Sugano K et al (2010) Coexistence of passive and carrier-mediated processes in drug transport. Nat Rev Drug Discov 9:597–614
81. Gleeson MP, Hersey A, Hannongbua S (2011) In-silico ADME models: a general assessment of their utility in drug discovery applications. Curr Top Med Chem 11:358–381
82. Kell DB, Dobson PD, Oliver SG (2011) Pharmaceutical drug transport: the issues and the implications that it is essentially carrier-mediated only. Drug Discov Today 16:704–714
83. Di L et al (2012) Evidence-based approach to assess passive diffusion and carrier-mediated drug transport. Drug Discov Today 17:905–912
84. Kubinyi H (1978) Drug partitioning: relationships between forward and reverse rate constants and partition coefficient. J Pharm Sci 67:262–263
85. Kubinyi H (1979) Lipophilicity and drug activity. Prog Drug Res 23:97–198
86. Glen RC et al (1995) Computer-aided design and synthesis of 5-substituted tryptamines and their pharmacology at the 5-HT1D receptor: discovery of compounds with potential antimigraine properties. J Med Chem 38:3566–3580
87. Young RJ (2011) The successful quest for oral factor Xa inhibitors; learnings for all of medicinal chemistry? Bioorg Med Chem Lett 21:6228–6235
88. Johnson TW et al (2009) Using the Golden Triangle to optimize clearance and oral absorption. Bioorg Med Chem Lett 19:5560–5564
89. Obach RL et al (2005) In vitro cytochrome P450 inhibition data and the prediction of drug-drug interactions: qualitative relationships, quantitative predictions, and the rank-order approach. Clin Pharmacol Ther 78:582–592
90. Lewis DFV et al (2007) Quantitative structure-activity relationships (QSARs) in inhibitors of various cytochromes P450: the importance of compound lipophilicity. J Enzyme Inhib Med Chem 22:1–6
91. Lewis DFV et al (2004) Compound lipophilicity for substrate binding to human P450s in drug metabolism. Drug Discov Today 9:530–537
92. Lewis DFV, Dickins M (2002) Substrate SAR in human p450s. Drug Discov Today 7:918–925
93. Jamieson C et al (2006) Medicinal chemistry of hERG optimizations: highlights and hangups. J Med Chem 49:5029–5046
94. Waring MJ, Johnstone C (2007) A quantitative assessment of hERG liability as a function of lipophilicity. Bioorg Med Chem Lett 17:1759–1764
95. Wood A, Armour D (2005) The discovery of the CCR5 receptor antagonist, UK-427,857, a new agent for the treatment of HIV infection and AIDS. Prog Med Chem 43:239–271
96. Diller DJ (2009) In silico hERG modelling: challenges and progress. Curr Comput Aided Drug Des 5:106–121
97. Tarcsay Á, Keserű GM (2013) Contributions of molecular properties to drug promiscuity. J Med Chem 56:1789–1795
98. Hopkins AL, Mason JS, Overington JP (2006) Can we rationally design promiscuous drugs? Curr Opin Struct Biol 16:127–136
99. Hughes JD et al (2008) Physiochemical drug properties associated with in vivo toxicological outcomes. Bioorg Med Chem Lett 18:4872–4875
100. Morphy R, Rankovic Z (2007) Fragments, network biology and designing multiple ligands. Drug Discov Today 12:156–160
101. Azzaoui K et al (2007) Modeling promiscuity based on in vitro safety pharmacology profiling data. ChemMedChem 2007(2):874–880
102. Peters J-U et al (2009) Pharmacological promiscuity: dependence on compound properties and target specificity in a set of recent Roche compounds. ChemMedChem 4:680–686
103. Yang Y et al (2010) Investigation of the relationship between topology and selectivity for drug-like molecules. J Med Chem 53:7709–7714
104. Peters J-U et al (2012) Can we discover pharmacological promiscuity early in the drug discovery process? Drug Discov Today 17:325–335
105. Lounkine E et al (2012) Large-scale prediction and testing of drug activity on side-effect targets. Nature 486:361–367
106. Leeson PD et al (2011) Impact of ion class and time on oral drug molecular properties. Med Chem Comm 2:91–105
107. Leach AR, Hann MM (2011) Molecular complexity and fragment-based drug discovery: ten years on. Curr Opin Chem Biol 15:489–496
108. Trainor GL (2007) The importance of plasma protein binding in drug discovery. Expert Opin Drug Discov 2:51–64
109. Valkó K et al (2003) Fast gradient HPLC method to determine compounds binding to human serum albumin: relationships with octanol/water and immobilized artificial membrane lipophilicity. J Pharm Sci 92:2236–2248
110. Smith DA et al (2010) The effect of plasma protein binding on in vivo efficacy: misconceptions in drug discovery. Nat Rev Drug Discov 9:929–939
111. Riley RJ et al (2005) A unified model for predicting human hepatic metabolic clearance from in vitro intrinsic clearance data in hepatocytes and microsomes. Drug Metab Dispos 33:1304–1311
112. Braggio et al (2010) Drug efficiency: a new concept to guide lead optimization programs towards the selection of better clinical candidates. Expert Opin Drug Discov 5:609–618
113. Montanari D et al (2011) Application of drug efficiency index in drug discovery: a strategy towards low therapeutic dose. Expert Opin Drug Discov 6:913–920
114. Valkó K et al (2012) In vitro measurement of drug efficiency index to aid early lead optimization. J Pharm Sci 101:4155–4169
115. Valkó K, Nunhuck SB, Hill AP (2011) Estimating unbound volume of distribution and tissue binding by in vitro HPLC-based human serum albumin and immobilized artificial membranebinding measurements. J Pharm Sci 100:849–862
116. Hopkins AL et al (2014) The role of ligand efficiency measures in drug discovery. Nat Rev Drug Discov 13:105–121
117. Reynolds CH et al (2008) Ligand binding efficiency: trends, physical basis, and implications. J Med Chem 51:2432–2438
118. Nissink JWM (2009) Simple size-independent measure of ligand efficiency. J Chem Inf Model 49:1617–1622
119. Hann MM, Leach AR, Harper G (2001) Molecular complexity and its impact on the probability of finding leads for drug discovery. J Chem Inf Comput Sci 41:856–864
120. Mortenson PN, Murray CW (2011) Assessing the lipophilicity of fragments and early hits. J Comput Aided Mol Des 25:663–667
121. Wyatt PG et al (2008) Identification of N-(4-Piperidinyl)-4-(2,6-dichlorobenzoylamino)-1Hpyrazole- 3-carboxamide (AT7519), a novel cyclin dependent kinase inhibitor using fragment-based X-ray crystallography and structure based drug design. J Med Chem 51:4986–4999
122. Gill AL et al (2005) Identification of novel p38alpha MAP kinase inhibitors using fragmentbased lead generation. J Med Chem 48:414–426
123. Freeman-Cook KD, Hoffman RL, Johnson TW (2013) Lipophilic efficiency: the most important efficiency metric in medicinal chemistry. Future Med Chem 5:113–115
124. Gill AL et al (2007) A comparison of physicochemical property profiles of marketed oral drugs and orally bioavailable anti-cancer protein kinase inhibitors in clinical development. Curr Top Med Chem 7:1408–1422
125. McTigue M et al (2012) Molecular conformations, interactions, and properties associated with drug efficiency and clinical performance among VEGFR TK inhibitors. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 109:18281–18289
126. Shultz MD (2013) Setting expectations in molecular optimizations: strengths and limitations of commonly used composite parameters. Bioorg Med Chem Lett 23:5980–5991
127. Freire E (2008) Do enthalpy and entropy distinguish first in class from best in class? Drug Discov Today 13:869–874
128. Shultz MD (2013) The thermodynamic basis for the use of lipophilic efficiency (LipE) in enthalpic optimizations. Bioorg Med Chem Lett 23:5992–6000
129. Morgan P et al (2012) Can the flow of medicines be improved? fundamental pharmacokinetic and pharmacological principles toward improving Phase II survival. Drug Discov Today 17:419–424