Quantifying the chemical beauty of drugs.

Drug-likeness is a key consideration when selecting compounds during the early stages of drug discovery. However, evaluation of drug-likeness in absolute terms does not reflect adequately the whole spectrum of compound quality. More worryingly, widely used rules may inadvertently foster undesirable molecular property inflation as they permit the encroachment of rule-compliant compounds towards their boundaries. We propose a measure of drug-likeness based on the concept of desirability called the quantitative estimate of drug-likeness (QED). The empirical rationale of QED reflects the underlying distribution of molecular properties. QED is intuitive, transparent, straightforward to implement in many practical settings and allows compounds to be ranked by their relative merit. We extended the utility of QED by applying it to the problem of molecular target druggability assessment by prioritizing a large set of published bioactive compounds. The measure may also capture the abstract notion of aesthetics in medicinal chemistry.

[1]  G. Derringer,et al.  Simultaneous Optimization of Several Response Variables , 1980 .

[2]  W. Todd Wipke,et al.  Artificial intelligence in organic synthesis. SST: starting material selection strategies. An application of superstructure search , 1984, J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci..

[3]  A. Ghose,et al.  Atomic Physicochemical Parameters for Three‐Dimensional Structure‐Directed Quantitative Structure‐Activity Relationships I. Partition Coefficients as a Measure of Hydrophobicity , 1986 .

[4]  Michael I. Jordan,et al.  Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 30 , 1995 .

[5]  William T. Scherer,et al.  "The desirability function: underlying assumptions and application implications" , 1998, SMC'98 Conference Proceedings. 1998 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics (Cat. No.98CH36218).

[6]  A. Ghose,et al.  A knowledge-based approach in designing combinatorial or medicinal chemistry libraries for drug discovery. 1. A qualitative and quantitative characterization of known drug databases. , 1999, Journal of combinatorial chemistry.

[7]  C. Lipinski.  Drug-like properties and the causes of poor solubility and poor permeability. , 2000, Journal of pharmacological and toxicological methods.

[8]  Tudor I. Oprea,et al.  Property distribution of drug-related chemical databases* , 2000, J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des..

[9]  Jun Xu,et al.  Drug-Like Index: A New Approach to Measure Drug-Like Compounds and Their Diversity. , 2001 .

[10]  F. Lombardo,et al.  Experimental and computational approaches to estimate solubility and permeability in drug discovery and development settings. , 2001, Advanced drug delivery reviews.

[11]  A. Hopkins,et al.  The druggable genome , 2002, Nature Reviews Drug Discovery.

[12]  Stephen R. Johnson,et al.  Molecular properties that influence the oral bioavailability of drug candidates. , 2002, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[13]  W. Pearson,et al.  Current Protocols in Bioinformatics , 2002 .

[14]  M. Congreve,et al.  A 'rule of three' for fragment-based lead discovery? , 2003, Drug discovery today.

[15]  Yutaka Endo,et al.  Development of a Method for Evaluating Drug-Likeness and Ease of Synthesis Using a Data Set in Which Compounds Are Assigned Scores Based on Chemists' Intuition , 2003, J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci..

[16]  P. Leeson,et al.  A comparison of physiochemical property profiles of development and marketed oral drugs. , 2003, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[17]  Michael S Lajiness,et al.  Assessment of the consistency of medicinal chemists in reviewing sets of compounds. , 2004, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[18]  R. Abagyan,et al.  Comprehensive identification of "druggable" protein ligand binding sites. , 2004, Genome informatics. International Conference on Genome Informatics.

[19]  Bruno Boulanger,et al.  A Fast Exchange Algorithm for Designing Focused Libraries in Lead Optimization. , 2005 .

[20]  J. Proudfoot,et al.  The evolution of synthetic oral drug properties. , 2005, Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry letters.

[21]  John P. Overington,et al.  How many drug targets are there? , 2006, Nature Reviews Drug Discovery.

[22]  Sang Joon Kim,et al.  A Mathematical Theory of Communication , 2006 .

[23]  T. Keller,et al.  A practical view of 'druggability'. , 2006, Current opinion in chemical biology.

[24]  Abhyuday Mandal,et al.  Identifying Promising Compounds in Drug Discovery: Genetic Algorithms and Some New Statistical Techniques , 2007, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[25]  P. Leeson,et al.  The influence of drug-like concepts on decision-making in medicinal chemistry , 2007, Nature Reviews Drug Discovery.

[26]  Cele Abad-Zapatero,et al.  A sorcerer's apprentice and The Rule of Five: from rule-of-thumb to commandment and beyond. , 2007, Drug discovery today.

[27]  Abhyuday Mandal,et al.  Identifying Promising Compounds in Drug Discovery: Genetic Algorithms and Some New Statistical Techniques. , 2007 .

[28]  Raimund Mannhold,et al.  Molecular Drug Properties: Measurement and Prediction , 2007 .

[29]  Daniel R. Caffrey,et al.  Structure-based maximal affinity model predicts small-molecule druggability , 2007, Nature Biotechnology.

[30]  Daniel James,et al.  Lessons Learnt from Assembling Screening Libraries for Drug Discovery for Neglected Diseases , 2007, ChemMedChem.

[31]  Reinaldo Molina Ruiz,et al.  Desirability-based methods of multiobjective optimization and ranking for global QSAR studies. Filtering safe and potent drug candidates from combinatorial libraries. , 2008, Journal of combinatorial chemistry.

[32]  M. Gleeson.  Generation of a set of simple, interpretable ADMET rules of thumb. , 2008, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[33]  C. Humblet,et al.  Escape from flatland: increasing saturation as an approach to improving clinical success. , 2009, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[34]  T. Ritchie,et al.  The impact of aromatic ring count on compound developability--are too many aromatic rings a liability in drug design? , 2009, Drug discovery today.

[35]  A. Capasso.  Comparison with Naloxone of Two Dynorphin a Analogues with K- and δ-Opioid Antagonist Activity , 2009 .

[36]  Thomas A. Halgren,et al.  Identifying and Characterizing Binding Sites and Assessing Druggability , 2009, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[37]  Christopher A. Lipinski.  Chemist's Role from HTS Retest to Lead , 2009 .

[38]  Nigel Greene,et al.  Physicochemical drug properties associated with in vivo toxicological outcomes: a review , 2009, Expert opinion on drug metabolism & toxicology.

[39]  F. Hosseinzadeh Lotfi,et al.  Imprecise Shannon's Entropy and Multi Attribute Decision Making , 2010, Entropy.

[40]  John Manchester,et al.  Evaluation of pKa Estimation Methods on 211 Druglike Compounds , 2010, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[41]  Stevan W. Djuric,et al.  F1000Prime recommendation of Moving beyond rules: the development of a central nervous system multiparameter optimization (CNS MPO) approach to enable alignment of druglike properties. , 2010 .

[42]  G. V. Paolini,et al.  How Desirable Are Your IC50s? , 2010, Journal of biomolecular screening.

[43]  Amiram Goldblum,et al.  Predicting Oral Druglikeness by Iterative Stochastic Elimination , 2010, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[44]  P. Verhoest,et al.  Defining desirable central nervous system drug space through the alignment of molecular properties, in vitro ADME, and safety attributes. , 2010, ACS chemical neuroscience.

[45]  X. Barril,et al.  Understanding and predicting druggability. A high-throughput method for detection of drug binding sites. , 2010, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[46]  Yuichi Nagahara,et al.  Are There Differences between Launched Drugs, Clinical Candidates, and Commercially Available Compounds? , 2010, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[47]  P. Verhoest,et al.  Moving beyond rules: the development of a central nervous system multiparameter optimization (CNS MPO) approach to enable alignment of druglike properties. , 2010, ACS chemical neuroscience.

[48]  Tudor I. Oprea,et al.  Understanding drug‐likeness , 2011 .

[49]  John P. Overington,et al.  Probing the links between in vitro potency, ADMET and physicochemical parameters , 2011, Nature Reviews Drug Discovery.

[50]  David S. Wishart,et al.  DrugBank 3.0: a comprehensive resource for ‘Omics’ research on drugs , 2010, Nucleic Acids Res..

[51]  Sorel Muresan,et al.  Analysis of in vitro bioactivity data extracted from drug discovery literature and patents: Ranking 1654 human protein targets by assayed compounds and molecular scaffolds , 2011, J. Cheminformatics.

[52]  Niklas Blomberg,et al.  Strategies to improve in vivo toxicology outcomes for basic candidate drug molecules. , 2011, Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry letters.

[53]  M. Hann.  Molecular obesity, potency and other addictions in drug discovery , 2011 .