Transcript Document
Memories and the future: From experimental to in silico physical chemistry Han van de Waterbeemd AstraZeneca, DMPK Alderley Park, Macclesfield, UK PhysChem Forum, 29 Nov 2006, PhysChem Forum, 29 Nov 2006, Newhouse Newhouse 1 Overview • Why physchem data? • Wet screening (in vitro) • Web screening (in silico) • Future developments PhysChem Forum, 29 Nov 2006, PhysChem Forum, 29 Nov 2006, Newhouse Newhouse 2 Medchem evolution <1980 target affinity/binding using intuition and experience protein crystallography >1980 structure-based design attrition analyses >1995 drug/lead filters such as rule of five physchem/DMPK considerations >2000 property-based design HT property screening >2005 in silico/in vitro (in combo) approaches PhysChem Forum, 29 Nov 2006, PhysChem Forum, 29 Nov 2006, Newhouse Newhouse 3 Key ADME questions • Drugability • Attrition • Appropriate PK Optimisation problem Poor systemic exposure Distribution vs First-pass clearance Clearance Volume of Distribution Target affinity Poor oral bioavailability Renal Plasma Hepatic Gut Stability Physicochemical Properties Biliary Blood Brain Plasma Protein Barrier Binding Metabolic Transporters Others pKa Cytochromes P-450 ADME P-gp MRP OATP OCTP Which P-450? Which Conjugate? 1A2, 2C9, 2C19, 2D6, 3A4 Regiospecificity Lability Affinity Carlson and Segall, Curr.Drug Disc. 34-36 (2002) PhysChem Forum, 29 Nov 2006, 4 Glucuronide Membrane permeation Solubility LogP/D Paracellular Transcellular Sulphate Amino Acids Induction PXR PhysChem Forum, 29 Nov 2006, Newhouse Newhouse Absorption CAR AHR Type II binding Inhibition Mechanistic ADMET screening strategy • • • • Biopharmaceutical (physchem) profiling Pharmacokinetics Metabolism Early toxicology • • • • In vitro = wet screening In silico = web screening In combo In cerebro PhysChem Forum, 29 Nov 2006, PhysChem Forum, 29 Nov 2006, Newhouse Newhouse 5 Wet screening (in vitro measurement) PhysChem Forum, 29 Nov 2006, PhysChem Forum, 29 Nov 2006, Newhouse Newhouse 6 Han very early days Leiden (PhD) • log P vs log k • Are rate constants of partitioning useful in QSAR? PhysChem Forum, 29 Nov 2006, PhysChem Forum, 29 Nov 2006, Newhouse Newhouse 7 Han early days Lausanne (post-doc with Bernard Testa) pKa - Apple III, IBM PC log kHPLC - first attempts to HT log P = aV + L = hydrophobicity + polarity = size + hydrogen bonding PhysChem Forum, 29 Nov 2006, PhysChem Forum, 29 Nov 2006, Newhouse Newhouse 8 Han early days Roche (Molecular Properties Group) pKa (GLpKa101, John Comer, Colin Peake) log kHPLC log Papp (artificial membranes pre-PAMPA, Gian Camenisch) PAMPA (Manfred Kansy) PSA – polar surface area Van de Waterbeemd and Kansy, Chimia 46 (1992) 299-303 PhysChem Forum, 29 Nov 2006, PhysChem Forum, 29 Nov 2006, Newhouse Newhouse 9 Han more recent days Pfizer (automated ADME screening) log D - 96 well plates log S PAMPA Pfizer (in silico ADME) PhysChem Forum, 29 Nov 2006, PhysChem Forum, 29 Nov 2006, Newhouse Newhouse 10 Lessons learned • • • • • Calculation goes faster Computed data often good enough No need to measure too much In silico for virtual compounds But, good quality experimental data are needed to build robust models PhysChem Forum, 29 Nov 2006, PhysChem Forum, 29 Nov 2006, Newhouse Newhouse 11 Kinetic vs equilibrium Caco-2 PAMPA (cm/s) Water log P log D Membrane Water log k (w/o) = a log P + b log (bP+1) + c Kubinyi, 1978 Van de Waterbeemd et al, 1981 PhysChem Forum, 29 Nov 2006, PhysChem Forum, 29 Nov 2006, Newhouse Newhouse 12 Permeability = lipophilicity scale Caco-2 PAMPA Absorption Permeability? log Ddodecane log Doct Lipophilicity (log P/D) In reality sigmoidal relationships PhysChem Forum, 29 Nov 2006, PhysChem Forum, 29 Nov 2006, Newhouse Newhouse 13 Web screening (in silico prediction) PhysChem Forum, 29 Nov 2006, PhysChem Forum, 29 Nov 2006, Newhouse Newhouse 14 Why in silico ? • Lots of compounds (libraries, parallel synthesis) • Lots of data (in vitro ADME/physchem screening) • Screening is expensive • In vitro models not always predictive for in vivo (e.g. Caco-2, PAMPA) • In silico models to complement and/or replace in vitro/in vivo • Only option for virtual compounds • Guide in decision-making PhysChem Forum, 29 Nov 2006, PhysChem Forum, 29 Nov 2006, Newhouse Newhouse 15 In silico • Sound QSAR and molecular modeling methods/tools are available • Commercial and in-house solutions for physchem and ADME screening data • Modeling and simulation for human PK • Confidence is growing PhysChem Forum, 29 Nov 2006, PhysChem Forum, 29 Nov 2006, Newhouse Newhouse 16 In silico solubility ? Artificial GI fluid and buffered water are models for solubility in human GI In silico models of these surrogate conditions are therefore a model of a model What is predictive power of such solubility models? We don’t take solid state properties into account! Human GI Artificial GI r2 = 0.7 PhysChem Forum, 29 Nov 2006, PhysChem Forum, 29 Nov 2006, Newhouse Newhouse Aqueous buffer r2 = 0.7 r2=0.5 17 In silico PAMPA and Caco-2 ? Caco-2 and PAMPA are models for oral absorption In silico models of Caco-2 and PAMPA are therefore a model of a model What is predictive power of such models? in vivo in vitro in silico Human %A Caco-2/PAMPA r2 = 0.7 PhysChem Forum, 29 Nov 2006, PhysChem Forum, 29 Nov 2006, Newhouse Newhouse r2=0.5 Caco-2/PAMPA models r2 = 0.7 model x model = random 18 100 C. Lupfert, A. Reichel, Chem.Biodivers. 2 (2005) 1462-1486 FA (%) 80 good 60 40 uncertain 20 0 0 50 100 poor 150 200 250 300 350 400 Papp (10-7 cm/s) Typical range of Papp values in the Caco-2 permeation assay “blind spot” Papp values with acceptable in vivo predictivity PhysChem Forum, 29 Nov 2006, PhysChem Forum,Papp 29 Nov values 2006,in this region have a highly 19 ambiguous in vivo relevance, Newhouse Newhouse i.e. the fraction dose absorbed may be anything between 10-100%! ADME Unravelling the processes Bioavailability Liver first-pass metabolism Absorption Transporters Gut-wall metabolism Permeability Lipophilicity Molecular size Molecular shape Flexibility Hydrogen bonding Solubility PhysChem Forum, 29 Nov 2006, PhysChem Forum, 29 Nov 2006, Newhouse Newhouse 20 In vitro and in silico screens? Prediction of A% Design Lead Profiling Lead Optimization Clinical Candidate ACAT PBPK R-o-5 Single QSAR Descriptors MW<500 ClogP<5 HBA<10 HBD<5 MW<500 0<ClogP<4 0<logD<3 PSA<140A2 Structural ppb Descriptors pKa logD Caco-2 PAMPA Peff Vmax, Km Solubility >60% 80-90% 75% 78% A% human measured = 76 + 15% !! PhysChem Forum, 29 Nov 2006, PhysChem Forum, 29 Nov 2006, Newhouse Newhouse 21 Development Population 78 + 10% Towards prediction paradise? Solubility A% CL log D F% T1/2 Dose Vd ADME Activity Toxicity IC50 Tox Van de Waterbeemd and Gifford, Nature Revs. Drug Disc. 2 (2003) 192-204 PhysChem Forum, 29 Nov 2006, PhysChem Forum, 29 Nov 2006, Newhouse Newhouse 22 Future developments • • • • Property-based design is best practise In combo approach established in drug discovery Further progress in silico QSAR technology New ADME/T world • Pharma industry fully adapts in silico approach to design, screening, and optimisation PhysChem Forum, 29 Nov 2006, PhysChem Forum, 29 Nov 2006, Newhouse Newhouse 23 In vitro + in silico = in combo Integration of experimental and computational technologies - Reducing cost of screening - Maximising data information Yu and Adedoyin, Drug Disc.Today 8, 852-861 (2003) Dickins and Van de Waterbeemd, DDT: Biosilico, 2, 38-45 (2004) PhysChem Forum, 29 Nov 2006, PhysChem Forum, 29 Nov 2006, Newhouse Newhouse 24 ADME technologies - autoQSAR Automated model building and updating Data in combo Build in silico model Update in silico model in vitro priorities J.Cartmell et al, J.Comp.-Aid.Mol.Des. 19 (2005) 821-833 PhysChem Forum, 29 Nov 2006, PhysChem Forum, 29 Nov 2006, Newhouse Newhouse 25 In vitro: logP conferences Great series of meetings, Excellent Proceedings Lausanne 1995, 2000 Zurich 2004, 2009 PhysChem Forum, 29 Nov 2006, PhysChem Forum, 29 Nov 2006, Newhouse Newhouse 26 In silico: EuroQSAR conferences QSAR has its attraction … PhysChem Forum, 29 Nov 2006, PhysChem Forum, 29 Nov 2006, Newhouse Newhouse 27 References Volume 5 ADME-Tox Approaches (B. Testa and H. van de Waterbeemd), Elsevier, November 2006 PhysChem Forum, 29 Nov 2006, PhysChem Forum, 29 Nov 2006, Newhouse Newhouse 28 Thanks et bon appetit…… PhysChem Forum, 29 Nov 2006, PhysChem Forum, 29 Nov 2006, Newhouse Newhouse 29 PhysChem Forum, 29 Nov 2006, PhysChem Forum, 29 Nov 2006, Newhouse Newhouse 30