Do Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetic Departments Make Any Contribution to Drug Discovery?

The alignment of drug metabolism and pharmacokinetic departments with drug discovery has not produced a radical improvement in the pharmacokinetic properties of new chemical entities. The reason for this is complex, reflecting in part the difficulty of combining potency, selectivity, water solubility, metabolic stability and membrane permeability into a single molecule. This combination becomes increasingly problematic as the drug targets become more distant from aminergic seven-transmembrane-spanning receptors (7-TMs). The leads available for aminergic 7-TMs, like the natural agonists, are invariably small molecular weight, water soluble and potent. Even moving to 7-TMs for which the agonist is a peptide invariably produces lead matter that is less drug-like (higher molecular weight and lipophilic). The role of drug metabolism departments, therefore, has been to guide chemistry to obtaining adequate, rather than optimal, pharmacokinetic properties for these ‘difficult’ drug targets.A consistent belief of many researchers is that a high value is placed on optimal, rather than adequate, pharmacokinetic properties. One measure of value is market sales, and when these are examined no clear pattern emerges. Part of the success of amlodipine in the calcium channel antagonist sector must be due to its excellent pharmacokinetic profile, but the best-selling drugs among the angiotensin antagonists and β-blockers have a much greater market share than other agents with better pharmacokinetic properties. Clearly, many other factors are important in the successful launch of a medicine, some reflected in the manner the compound is developed and the subsequent structure of the labelling.Overall, therefore the presence of drug metabolism in drug discovery has probably contributed most by allowing ‘difficult’ drug targets to be prosecuted, rather than by guiding medicinal chemists to optimal pharmacokinetics. These ‘difficult’ target candidates become successful drugs when skilfully developed. There is no doubt that skilful development relies heavily on drug metabolism and pharmacokinetic departments, in this case those with a clinical rather than a preclinical orientation.

[1]  R. Raag,et al.  Crystal structures of cytochrome P-450CAM complexed with camphane, thiocamphor, and adamantane: factors controlling P-450 substrate hydroxylation. , 1991, Biochemistry.

[2]  J. Vacca,et al.  P450 interaction with HIV protease inhibitors: relationship between metabolic stability, inhibitory potency, and P450 binding spectra. , 2001, Drug metabolism and disposition: the biological fate of chemicals.

[3]  C. Masimirembwa,et al.  Competitive CYP2C9 inhibitors: enzyme inhibition studies, protein homology modeling, and three-dimensional quantitative structure-activity relationship analysis. , 2001, Molecular pharmacology.

[4]  Han van de Waterbeemd,et al.  Lipophilicity in PK design: methyl, ethyl, futile , 2001, J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des..

[5]  ZH Israili,et al.  Clinical pharmacokinetics of angiotensin II (AT1) receptor blockers in hypertension , 2000, Journal of Human Hypertension.

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

[7]  A. Alex,et al.  A novel approach to predicting P450 mediated drug metabolism. CYP2D6 catalyzed N-dealkylation reactions and qualitative metabolite predictions using a combined protein and pharmacophore model for CYP2D6. , 1999, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[8]  R. Zusman Are there differences among angiotensin receptor blockers? , 1999, American journal of hypertension.

[9]  D E McRee,et al.  Mammalian microsomal cytochrome P450 monooxygenase: structural adaptations for membrane binding and functional diversity. , 2000, Molecular cell.

[10]  Shiew-Mei Huang,et al.  FDA Evaluations Using In Vitro Metabolism to Predict and Interpret In Vivo Metabolic Drug‐Drug Interactions: Impact on Labeling , 1999, Journal of clinical pharmacology.

[11]  G. Belz,et al.  Time course and extent of angiotensin II antagonism after irbesartan, losartan, and valsartan in humans assessed by angiotensin II dose response and radioligand receptor assay , 1999, Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics.

[12]  F. Lombardo,et al.  Experimental and computational approaches to estimate solubility and permeability in drug discovery and development settings , 1997 .

[13]  P. Lam,et al.  Discovery of 1-[3-(aminomethyl)phenyl]-N-3-fluoro-2'-(methylsulfonyl)-[1,1'-biphenyl]-4-yl]-3-(trifluoromethyl)-1H-pyrazole-5-carboxamide (DPC423), a highly potent, selective, and orally bioavailable inhibitor of blood coagulation factor Xa. , 2001, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[14]  Lin,et al.  Role of pharmacokinetics in the discovery and development of indinavir. , 1999, Advanced drug delivery reviews.

[15]  G. Tucker,et al.  Comparison of the disposition of two novel combined thromboxane synthase inhibitors/thromboxane A2 receptor antagonists in the isolated perfused rat liver. , 1995, Xenobiotica; the fate of foreign compounds in biological systems.

[16]  John G. Topliss,et al.  QSAR Model for Drug Human Oral Bioavailability1 , 2000 .

[17]  S. Walker,et al.  Pharmaceutical innovation by the seven UK-owned pharmaceutical companies (1964-1985). , 1988, British journal of clinical pharmacology.

[18]  T Ishizaki,et al.  Prediction of in vivo drug metabolism in the human liver from in vitro metabolism data. , 1997, Pharmacology & therapeutics.