In silico prediction of ADMET properties: how far have we come?

There have been considerable advances in the last few years in both the quantity and the quality of in silico ADMET property predictions. Most ADMET properties are now computable, and the accuracy of some of the software predictions for physicochemical properties in particular is close to that of measured data. There is, however, universal agreement that more good experimental ADMET data are needed for use in in silico model development, for models are only as good as the data on which they are based. Many data remain confidential but it is to be hoped that, with projects such as the Vitic toxicity database, being developed by Lhasa Limited, pharmaceutical companies will be prepared to release data to an ‘honest broker’ on a confidential basis, so that better in silico models can be developed. Incorporation of calculated ADMET properties into drug discovery and development is a multi-factorial problem and really needs a multi-factorial solution. Some progress is being made in this direction and it is hoped that within the foreseeable future software will be available for this purpose.

[1]  H. van de Waterbeemd,et al.  From in vivo to in vitro/in silico ADME: progress and challenges , 2005, Expert opinion on drug metabolism & toxicology.

[2]  Yuko Ito,et al.  Cytochrome P450 structures and their substrate interactions , 2005 .

[3]  Harpreet S. Chadha,et al.  Hydrogen bonding. 33. Factors that influence the distribution of solutes between blood and brain. , 1994, Journal of pharmaceutical sciences.

[4]  Stephen R. Johnson,et al.  Recent progress in the computational prediction of aqueous solubility and absorption , 2006, The AAPS Journal.

[5]  H. Mewes,et al.  Can we estimate the accuracy of ADME-Tox predictions? , 2006, Drug discovery today.

[6]  S A Kulkarni,et al.  In silico techniques for the study and prediction of xenobiotic metabolism: A review , 2005, Xenobiotica; the fate of foreign compounds in biological systems.

[7]  John C Dearden,et al.  Quantitative structure‐property relationships for prediction of boiling point, vapor pressure, and melting point , 2003, Environmental toxicology and chemistry.

[8]  H. van de Waterbeemd,et al.  ADMET in silico modelling: towards prediction paradise? , 2003, Nature reviews. Drug discovery.

[9]  Wei Zhang,et al.  Recent advances in computational prediction of drug absorption and permeability in drug discovery. , 2006, Current medicinal chemistry.

[10]  J. Dearden.  In silico prediction of aqueous solubility , 2006, Expert opinion on drug discovery.

[11]  Matthew D. Segall,et al.  ADMET Property Prediction: The State of the Art and Current Challenges , 2007 .

[12]  Judith C Madden,et al.  Structure-based methods for the prediction of drug metabolism , 2006, Expert opinion on drug metabolism & toxicology.

[13]  D. Leahy,et al.  Progress in simulation modelling for pharmacokinetics. , 2003, Current topics in medicinal chemistry.

[14]  John C. Dearden,et al.  In silico prediction of drug toxicity , 2003, J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des..

[15]  Gilles Klopman,et al.  Recent methodologies for the estimation of n-octanol/water partition coefficients and their use in the prediction of membrane transport properties of drugs. , 2005, Mini reviews in medicinal chemistry.

[16]  J. Devillers,et al.  Practical applications of quantitative structure-activity relationships (QSAR) in environmental chemistry and toxicology , 1990 .

[17]  Johan Ulander,et al.  High-throughput pKa screening and prediction amenable for ADME profiling , 2006, Expert opinion on drug metabolism & toxicology.

[18]  T Abshear,et al.  A model validation and consensus building environment , 2006, SAR and QSAR in environmental research.

[19]  Katharine A. Briggs.  Vitic—A data source for (quantitative) structure–activity relationship modelling , 2007 .

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

[21]  Edmund J. Mills.  XXIII. On melting-point and boiling-point as related to chemical composition , 1884 .

[22]  J. DiMasi,et al.  New Drug Innovation and Pharmaceutical Industry Structure: Trends in the Output of Pharmaceutical Firms , 2000 .

[23]  William B. Langdon,et al.  Advances in the Application of Machine Learning Techniques in Drug Discovery, Design and Development , 2006 .

[24]  T. Kennedy.  Managing the drug discovery/development interface , 1997 .

[25]  Anthony E. Klon,et al.  Improved Naïve Bayesian Modeling of Numerical Data for Absorption, Distribution, Metabolism and Excretion (ADME) Property Prediction , 2006, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[26]  Chris de Graaf,et al.  Cytochrome p450 in silico: an integrative modeling approach. , 2005, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[27]  Franco Lombardo,et al.  In silico ADME prediction: data, models, facts and myths. , 2003, Mini reviews in medicinal chemistry.

[28]  A. Beresford,et al.  The emerging importance of predictive ADME simulation in drug discovery. , 2002, Drug discovery today.

[29]  Yann Bidault.  A flexible approach for optimising in silico ADME/Tox characterisation of lead candidates , 2006, Expert opinion on drug metabolism & toxicology.

[30]  C. Hansch,et al.  Linear free-energy relationship between partition coefficients and the aqueous solubility of organic liquids , 1968 .

[31]  Peter Gedeck,et al.  Computational Chemistry at Novartis , 2005 .

[32]  Christel A. S. Bergström,et al.  Absorption classification of oral drugs based on molecular surface properties. , 2003, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[33]  H. van de Waterbeemd,et al.  Can the Internet help to meet the challenges in ADME and e-ADME? , 2002, SAR and QSAR in environmental research.

[34]  Joelle M. R. Gola,et al.  Focus on success: using a probabilistic approach to achieve an optimal balance of compound properties in drug discovery , 2006, Expert opinion on drug metabolism & toxicology.