Multivariate analysis of experimental and computational descriptors of molecular lipophilicity

Two experimental (log P, RMw) and 17 calculation descriptors for molecular lipophilicity (fragmental, atom-based or based on molecular properties) were investigated by multivariate analysis for a database of 159 compounds including both simple structures as well as more complex drug molecules. Principal component analysis (PCA) of the entire database exhibits a clustering of chemical groups; preciseness of clustering corresponds to chemical similarity. Thus, diversity searching in databases might effectively be performed by PCA on the basis of calculated log P. The comparative validity check of experimental and computational procedures by regression analysis and PCA was performed with a chemically balanced, reduced data set (n=55) representing 11 chemical groups with 5 members each. Regression of experimental descriptors (log Poct versus RMw) proves that chromatographic data, obtained under well-defined experimental conditions, can be used as valid substitutes for log P. Regression of calculated versus experimental lipophilicity data shows a superiority of fragmental over atom-based methods and approaches based on molecular properties, as indicated by correlation coefficients, slopes and intercepts. In addition, PCA revealed that fragmental methods (Rekker-type, KOWWIN, KLOGP) sense the compound ranking in log P data to almost the same extent as experimental approaches. For atom-based procedures and CLOGP, both the comparability of absolute values and the sensing of the compound ranking in the database are slightly less. This trend is more pronounced for the methods based on molecular properties, with the exception of BLOGP.

[1]  Patrick Gaillard,et al.  Molecular Lipophilicity Potential, a tool in 3D QSAR: Method and applications , 1994, J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des..

[2]  Wolfgang Heiden,et al.  Empirical Method for the Quantification and Localization of Molecular Hydrophobicity , 1994, J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci..

[3]  Han van de Waterbeemd,et al.  Lipophilicity in drug action and toxicology , 1996 .

[4]  Jürgen Brickmann,et al.  A new approach to analysis and display of local lipophilicity/hydrophilicity mapped on molecular surfaces , 1993, J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des..

[5]  R. Mannhold,et al.  Determination of the hydrophobicity parameter RMw by reversed-phase thin-layer chromatography , 1994 .

[6]  Arup K. Ghose,et al.  Atomic physicochemical parameters for three dimensional structure directed quantitative structure-activity relationships. 4. Additional parameters for hydrophobic and dispersive interactions and their application for an automated superposition of certain naturally occurring nucleoside antibiotics , 1989, J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci..

[7]  R. Mannhold,et al.  Calculation Procedures for Molecular Lipophilicity: a Comparative Study† , 1996 .

[8]  J. Cruickshank,et al.  Distribution coefficients of atenolol and sotalol , 1984, The Journal of pharmacy and pharmacology.

[9]  Paul Geladi,et al.  Principal Component Analysis , 1987, Comprehensive Chemometrics.

[10]  Thierry Convard,et al.  SmilogP: A Program for a Fast Evaluation of Theoretical Log P from the Smiles Code of a Molecule , 1994 .

[11]  R. Mannhold,et al.  On the precise estimation of RM values in reversed-phase thin-layer chromatography including aspects of pH dependence , 1993 .

[12]  G. Cruciani,et al.  Generating Optimal Linear PLS Estimations (GOLPE): An Advanced Chemometric Tool for Handling 3D‐QSAR Problems , 1993 .

[13]  C Silipo,et al.  Calculation of hydrophobic constant (log P) from pi and f constants. , 1975, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[14]  A. Leo,et al.  Substituent constants for correlation analysis in chemistry and biology , 1979 .

[15]  W. Meylan,et al.  Atom/fragment contribution method for estimating octanol-water partition coefficients. , 1995, Journal of pharmaceutical sciences.

[16]  Gordon M. Crippen,et al.  Atomic physicochemical parameters for three-dimensional-structure-directed quantitative structure-activity relationships. 2. Modeling dispersive and hydrophobic interactions , 1987, J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci..

[17]  R. Mannhold,et al.  Comparative evaluation of the predictive power of calculation procedures for molecular lipophilicity. , 1995, Journal of pharmaceutical sciences.

[18]  A. Leo CALCULATING LOG POCT FROM STRUCTURES , 1993 .

[19]  Raimund Mannhold,et al.  Drug lipophilicity in QSAR practice. I: A comparison of experimental with calculative approaches , 1990 .

[20]  Shaomeng Wang,et al.  Computer Automated log P Calculations Based on an Extended Group Contribution Approach , 1994, J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci..