In Silico Methods for ADMET and Solubility Prediction Dr John Mitchell University of St Andrews.
-
Upload
toby-jackson -
Category
Documents
-
view
224 -
download
2
Transcript of In Silico Methods for ADMET and Solubility Prediction Dr John Mitchell University of St Andrews.
![Page 1: In Silico Methods for ADMET and Solubility Prediction Dr John Mitchell University of St Andrews.](https://reader031.fdocuments.net/reader031/viewer/2022032016/56649e2d5503460f94b1c796/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
In Silico Methods for ADMET and Solubility Prediction
Dr John MitchellUniversity of St Andrews
![Page 2: In Silico Methods for ADMET and Solubility Prediction Dr John Mitchell University of St Andrews.](https://reader031.fdocuments.net/reader031/viewer/2022032016/56649e2d5503460f94b1c796/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
Outline
• Part 1: Computational Toxicology• Part 2: Aqueous Solubility
![Page 3: In Silico Methods for ADMET and Solubility Prediction Dr John Mitchell University of St Andrews.](https://reader031.fdocuments.net/reader031/viewer/2022032016/56649e2d5503460f94b1c796/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
1. Toxicological Relationships Between Proteins Obtained From
a Molecular Spam Filter
Florian Nigsch & John Mitchell
Now at Novartis Institutes, Boston
![Page 4: In Silico Methods for ADMET and Solubility Prediction Dr John Mitchell University of St Andrews.](https://reader031.fdocuments.net/reader031/viewer/2022032016/56649e2d5503460f94b1c796/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
![Page 5: In Silico Methods for ADMET and Solubility Prediction Dr John Mitchell University of St Andrews.](https://reader031.fdocuments.net/reader031/viewer/2022032016/56649e2d5503460f94b1c796/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
![Page 6: In Silico Methods for ADMET and Solubility Prediction Dr John Mitchell University of St Andrews.](https://reader031.fdocuments.net/reader031/viewer/2022032016/56649e2d5503460f94b1c796/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
![Page 7: In Silico Methods for ADMET and Solubility Prediction Dr John Mitchell University of St Andrews.](https://reader031.fdocuments.net/reader031/viewer/2022032016/56649e2d5503460f94b1c796/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
Spam
• Unsolicited (commercial) email
• Approx. 90% of all email traffic is spam
• Where are the legitimate messages?
• Filtering
![Page 8: In Silico Methods for ADMET and Solubility Prediction Dr John Mitchell University of St Andrews.](https://reader031.fdocuments.net/reader031/viewer/2022032016/56649e2d5503460f94b1c796/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
Analogy to Drug Discovery
• Huge number of possible candidates• Virtual screening to help in selection process
![Page 9: In Silico Methods for ADMET and Solubility Prediction Dr John Mitchell University of St Andrews.](https://reader031.fdocuments.net/reader031/viewer/2022032016/56649e2d5503460f94b1c796/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
Properties of Drugs
• High affinity to protein target
• Soluble• Permeable• Absorbable• High bioavailability• Specific rate of metabolism• Renal/hepatic clearance?
• Volume of distribution?• Low toxicity• Plasma protein binding?• Blood-Brain-Barrier
penetration?• Dosage (once/twice daily?)• Synthetic accessibility• Formulation (important in
development)
![Page 10: In Silico Methods for ADMET and Solubility Prediction Dr John Mitchell University of St Andrews.](https://reader031.fdocuments.net/reader031/viewer/2022032016/56649e2d5503460f94b1c796/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
Multiobjective Optimisation
Bioactivity Synthetic accessibility
Permeability
Toxicity
Metabolism
Solubility
Huge number of candidates …
![Page 11: In Silico Methods for ADMET and Solubility Prediction Dr John Mitchell University of St Andrews.](https://reader031.fdocuments.net/reader031/viewer/2022032016/56649e2d5503460f94b1c796/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
Multiobjective Optimisation
Bioactivity Synthetic accessibility
Permeability
Toxicity
Metabolism
Solubility
U S E L E
S SDrug
Huge number of candidates … most of which are useless!
![Page 12: In Silico Methods for ADMET and Solubility Prediction Dr John Mitchell University of St Andrews.](https://reader031.fdocuments.net/reader031/viewer/2022032016/56649e2d5503460f94b1c796/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
Feature Space - Chemical Space
m = (f1,f2,…,fn)
f1
f2
f3
Feature spaces of high dimensionality
COX2
f2
f3
f1
DHFR
CDK1CDK2
![Page 13: In Silico Methods for ADMET and Solubility Prediction Dr John Mitchell University of St Andrews.](https://reader031.fdocuments.net/reader031/viewer/2022032016/56649e2d5503460f94b1c796/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
Features of Molecules
Based on circular fingerprints
![Page 14: In Silico Methods for ADMET and Solubility Prediction Dr John Mitchell University of St Andrews.](https://reader031.fdocuments.net/reader031/viewer/2022032016/56649e2d5503460f94b1c796/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
Combinations of Features
Combinations of molecular features to account for synergies.
![Page 15: In Silico Methods for ADMET and Solubility Prediction Dr John Mitchell University of St Andrews.](https://reader031.fdocuments.net/reader031/viewer/2022032016/56649e2d5503460f94b1c796/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
Winnow Algorithm
![Page 16: In Silico Methods for ADMET and Solubility Prediction Dr John Mitchell University of St Andrews.](https://reader031.fdocuments.net/reader031/viewer/2022032016/56649e2d5503460f94b1c796/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
Protein Target Prediction
• Which protein does a given molecule bind to?• Virtual Screening• Multiple endpoint drugs - polypharmacology• New targets for existing drugs• Prediction of adverse drug reactions (ADR)
– Computational toxicology
![Page 17: In Silico Methods for ADMET and Solubility Prediction Dr John Mitchell University of St Andrews.](https://reader031.fdocuments.net/reader031/viewer/2022032016/56649e2d5503460f94b1c796/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
Predicted Protein Targets
• Selection of 233 classes from the MDL Drug Data Report
• ~90,000 molecules• 15 independent
50%/50% splits into training/test set
![Page 18: In Silico Methods for ADMET and Solubility Prediction Dr John Mitchell University of St Andrews.](https://reader031.fdocuments.net/reader031/viewer/2022032016/56649e2d5503460f94b1c796/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
Predicted Protein Targets
Cumulative probability of correct prediction within the three top-ranking predictions: 82.1% (±0.5%)
![Page 19: In Silico Methods for ADMET and Solubility Prediction Dr John Mitchell University of St Andrews.](https://reader031.fdocuments.net/reader031/viewer/2022032016/56649e2d5503460f94b1c796/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
Computational Toxicology
• Model for target prediction
• Annotated library of toxic molecules– MDL Toxicity database– ~150,000 molecules
• For each molecule we predict the likely target
• Correlations between predicted protein targets and known toxicity codes– Canonical (23)– Full (490)
![Page 20: In Silico Methods for ADMET and Solubility Prediction Dr John Mitchell University of St Andrews.](https://reader031.fdocuments.net/reader031/viewer/2022032016/56649e2d5503460f94b1c796/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
Toxicological Relationships Outline (1)
• Protein target prediction allows us to link (predictively) 150,000 toxic organic molecules to 233 specific protein targets
• Each target is treated as a single protein, although may be sets of related proteins
• Toxicological databases link (experimentally) these 150,000 molecules to 23 toxicity classes
• Combining these two sources of data matches the 233 proteins with the 23 toxicity classes
![Page 21: In Silico Methods for ADMET and Solubility Prediction Dr John Mitchell University of St Andrews.](https://reader031.fdocuments.net/reader031/viewer/2022032016/56649e2d5503460f94b1c796/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
Toxicity Annotations
CANONICAL TOXICITY CODES (23)
FULL TOXICITY CODES (490)Y41 : Glycolytic < Metabolism (intermediary) < Biochemical
![Page 22: In Silico Methods for ADMET and Solubility Prediction Dr John Mitchell University of St Andrews.](https://reader031.fdocuments.net/reader031/viewer/2022032016/56649e2d5503460f94b1c796/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
Toxicological Relationships Outline (2)
• For each protein target, we have a profile of association with the 23 toxicity classes
• Proteins with similar profiles are clustered together
• We demonstrate that these clusters of proteins can be physiologically meaningful.
![Page 23: In Silico Methods for ADMET and Solubility Prediction Dr John Mitchell University of St Andrews.](https://reader031.fdocuments.net/reader031/viewer/2022032016/56649e2d5503460f94b1c796/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
Predictions Obtained
L70 - Changes in liver weight<LiverY07 - Hepatic microsomal oxidase<Enzyme inhibitionM30 - Other changes<Kidney, Urether, and BladderL30 - Other changes<Liver
Target Prediction Highest ranking one IS predicted protein targetProtein code j
Toxicity codes i
Result matrix R = (rij)rij incremented for each prediction.
( )Protein targetsToxcodes
r11 r12
r21
…
![Page 24: In Silico Methods for ADMET and Solubility Prediction Dr John Mitchell University of St Andrews.](https://reader031.fdocuments.net/reader031/viewer/2022032016/56649e2d5503460f94b1c796/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
Proteins by Toxicity
• Cardiac - G1. Kainic acid receptor2. Adrenergic alpha23. Phosphodiesterase III4. cAMP Phosphodiesterase5. O6-Alkylguanine-DNA
alkyltransferase
• Vascular - H1. Angiotensin II AT22. Dopamine (D2)3. Bombesin4. Adrenergic alpha25. 5-HT antagonist
![Page 25: In Silico Methods for ADMET and Solubility Prediction Dr John Mitchell University of St Andrews.](https://reader031.fdocuments.net/reader031/viewer/2022032016/56649e2d5503460f94b1c796/html5/thumbnails/25.jpg)
Top 5 Proteins by Toxicity
68 distinct proteins for 23 toxicity classes, i.e., 3 proteins per canonical toxicity code.
Lanosterol 14alpha-Methyl Demethylase 5 Glucose-6-phosphate Translocase 4 IL-6 4 Benzodiazepine Antagonist 3 Kainic Acid Receptor 3
Proteins and their connectivities
![Page 26: In Silico Methods for ADMET and Solubility Prediction Dr John Mitchell University of St Andrews.](https://reader031.fdocuments.net/reader031/viewer/2022032016/56649e2d5503460f94b1c796/html5/thumbnails/26.jpg)
Correlations between proteins: 233 by 233 correlation matrix
Cluster 1 (proteins 6-11)
Correlation Between Proteins
![Page 27: In Silico Methods for ADMET and Solubility Prediction Dr John Mitchell University of St Andrews.](https://reader031.fdocuments.net/reader031/viewer/2022032016/56649e2d5503460f94b1c796/html5/thumbnails/27.jpg)
• Carbonic Anhydrase Inhibitor
• Estrogen Receptor Modulator
• LHRH Agonist• Aromatase Inhibitor• Cysteine Protease
Inhibitor• DHFR Inhibitor
Cluster 1• Within-cluster
correlation (without auto-correlation)
r = 0.95
Proteins involved in breast cancer
Cluster 1
![Page 28: In Silico Methods for ADMET and Solubility Prediction Dr John Mitchell University of St Andrews.](https://reader031.fdocuments.net/reader031/viewer/2022032016/56649e2d5503460f94b1c796/html5/thumbnails/28.jpg)
Proteins involved in breast cancer
Cluster 1
![Page 29: In Silico Methods for ADMET and Solubility Prediction Dr John Mitchell University of St Andrews.](https://reader031.fdocuments.net/reader031/viewer/2022032016/56649e2d5503460f94b1c796/html5/thumbnails/29.jpg)
CA
ER LHRH
Aromatase Cysteine Prot.
DHFR
Tissue-specific transcripts of human steroid sulfatase are under control of estrogen signaling pathways in breast carcinoma, Zaichuk 2007 “aim of this study was to characterize carbonic anhydrase II (CA2), as novel estrogen responsive gene” Caldarelli 2005 The Transactivation Domain AF-2
but not the DNA-Binding Domain of the Estrogen Receptor Is Required to Inhibit Differentiation of Avian Erythroid Progenitors, Marieke von Lindern 1998
This led to premature expression of CAII, a possible explanation for the toxic effects of overexpressed ER.
Cathepsin L Gene Expression and Promoter Activation in Rodent Granulosa Cells, Sriraman 2004showed that cathepsin L expression in granulosa cells of small, growing follicles in- creased in periovulatory follicles after human chorionic gonadotropin stimulation.
Controversies of adjuvant endocrine treatment for breast cancer and recommendations of the 2007 St Gallen conference, Rabaglio 2007
Merchenthaler 2005
Summary of aromatase inhibitor trials: The past and future, Goss 2007 Regulation of collagenolytic cysteine protease
synthesis by estrogen in osteoclasts, Furuyama 2000
Antimalarials?
Induction by estrogens of methotrexate resistance in MCF-7 breast cancer cells, Thibodeau 1998
Literature-based links between these proteins
![Page 30: In Silico Methods for ADMET and Solubility Prediction Dr John Mitchell University of St Andrews.](https://reader031.fdocuments.net/reader031/viewer/2022032016/56649e2d5503460f94b1c796/html5/thumbnails/30.jpg)
Breast Cancer Proteins
![Page 31: In Silico Methods for ADMET and Solubility Prediction Dr John Mitchell University of St Andrews.](https://reader031.fdocuments.net/reader031/viewer/2022032016/56649e2d5503460f94b1c796/html5/thumbnails/31.jpg)
Cluster 4
![Page 32: In Silico Methods for ADMET and Solubility Prediction Dr John Mitchell University of St Andrews.](https://reader031.fdocuments.net/reader031/viewer/2022032016/56649e2d5503460f94b1c796/html5/thumbnails/32.jpg)
This cluster links treatment of stomach ulcers to loss of bone mass!
![Page 33: In Silico Methods for ADMET and Solubility Prediction Dr John Mitchell University of St Andrews.](https://reader031.fdocuments.net/reader031/viewer/2022032016/56649e2d5503460f94b1c796/html5/thumbnails/33.jpg)
Proton Pump Inhibitors etc.
Correlation above 0.98
![Page 34: In Silico Methods for ADMET and Solubility Prediction Dr John Mitchell University of St Andrews.](https://reader031.fdocuments.net/reader031/viewer/2022032016/56649e2d5503460f94b1c796/html5/thumbnails/34.jpg)
Proton Pump Inhibitors etc.
Correlation above 0.99
Correlation above 0.98
![Page 35: In Silico Methods for ADMET and Solubility Prediction Dr John Mitchell University of St Andrews.](https://reader031.fdocuments.net/reader031/viewer/2022032016/56649e2d5503460f94b1c796/html5/thumbnails/35.jpg)
Proton Pump Inhibitors etc.
• Proton pump inhibitors used to limit production of gastric acid
• PTH is important in the developent/regulation of osteoclasts (cells for bone resorption)
• PTH controls levels of Ca2+ in the blood; increased PTH levels are associated with age-related decrease of bone mass
Recent clinical studies showed increased risk of hip fractures resulting from long-term use of proton pump inhibitors. Hence link between PTH and proton pump inhibitors.
PTH = Parathyroid hormone (84 aa mini-protein)
![Page 36: In Silico Methods for ADMET and Solubility Prediction Dr John Mitchell University of St Andrews.](https://reader031.fdocuments.net/reader031/viewer/2022032016/56649e2d5503460f94b1c796/html5/thumbnails/36.jpg)
Conclusions from Part 1
• Successful adaptation of algorithm formerly not used in chemoinformatics
• Can find correct protein targets for molecules• Hence link proteins together via ligand-binding properties and
associations of ligands with toxicities• Identify clinically relevant toxicological relationships between
proteins
![Page 37: In Silico Methods for ADMET and Solubility Prediction Dr John Mitchell University of St Andrews.](https://reader031.fdocuments.net/reader031/viewer/2022032016/56649e2d5503460f94b1c796/html5/thumbnails/37.jpg)
2. In silico calculation of aqueous solubility
Dr John MitchellUniversity of St Andrews
![Page 38: In Silico Methods for ADMET and Solubility Prediction Dr John Mitchell University of St Andrews.](https://reader031.fdocuments.net/reader031/viewer/2022032016/56649e2d5503460f94b1c796/html5/thumbnails/38.jpg)
Our Methods …
(a) Random Forest (informatics)
![Page 39: In Silico Methods for ADMET and Solubility Prediction Dr John Mitchell University of St Andrews.](https://reader031.fdocuments.net/reader031/viewer/2022032016/56649e2d5503460f94b1c796/html5/thumbnails/39.jpg)
References
![Page 40: In Silico Methods for ADMET and Solubility Prediction Dr John Mitchell University of St Andrews.](https://reader031.fdocuments.net/reader031/viewer/2022032016/56649e2d5503460f94b1c796/html5/thumbnails/40.jpg)
We want to construct a model that will predict solubility for druglike molecules …
We don’t expect our model either to use real physics and chemistry or to be easily interpretable …
We do expect it to be fast and reasonably accurate …
Our Random Forest Model …
![Page 41: In Silico Methods for ADMET and Solubility Prediction Dr John Mitchell University of St Andrews.](https://reader031.fdocuments.net/reader031/viewer/2022032016/56649e2d5503460f94b1c796/html5/thumbnails/41.jpg)
Machine Learning Method
Random Forest
![Page 42: In Silico Methods for ADMET and Solubility Prediction Dr John Mitchell University of St Andrews.](https://reader031.fdocuments.net/reader031/viewer/2022032016/56649e2d5503460f94b1c796/html5/thumbnails/42.jpg)
Random Forest for Predicting Solubility
• Dataset is partitioned into consecutively smaller subsets (of similar solubility)
• Each partition is based upon the value of one descriptor
• The descriptor used at each split is selected so as to minimise the MSE
• High predictive accuracy• Includes descriptor selection• No training problems – largely immune from
overfitting• “Out-of-bag” validation – using those
molecules not in the bootstrap samples.
Leo Breiman, "Random Forests“, Machine Learning 45, 5-32 (2001).
A Forest of Regression Trees
![Page 43: In Silico Methods for ADMET and Solubility Prediction Dr John Mitchell University of St Andrews.](https://reader031.fdocuments.net/reader031/viewer/2022032016/56649e2d5503460f94b1c796/html5/thumbnails/43.jpg)
DatasetLiterature Data• Compiled from Huuskonen dataset and AquaSol database – pharmaceutically relevant molecules• All molecules solid at room temperature• n = 988 molecules• Training = 658 molecules• Test = 330 molecules• MOE descriptors 2D/3D
Datasets compiled from diverse literature data may have significant random and systematic errors.
● Intrinsic aqueous solubility – the thermodynamic solubility of the neutral form in unbuffered water at 25oC
![Page 44: In Silico Methods for ADMET and Solubility Prediction Dr John Mitchell University of St Andrews.](https://reader031.fdocuments.net/reader031/viewer/2022032016/56649e2d5503460f94b1c796/html5/thumbnails/44.jpg)
RMSE(te)=0.69r2(te)=0.89Bias(te)=-0.04
RMSE(tr)=0.27r2(tr)=0.98Bias(tr)=0.005
RMSE(oob)=0.68r2(oob)=0.90Bias(oob)=0.01
DS Palmer et al., J. Chem. Inf. Model., 47, 150-158 (2007)
These results are competitive with any other informatics or QSPR solubility prediction method
Random Forest: Solubility Results
![Page 45: In Silico Methods for ADMET and Solubility Prediction Dr John Mitchell University of St Andrews.](https://reader031.fdocuments.net/reader031/viewer/2022032016/56649e2d5503460f94b1c796/html5/thumbnails/45.jpg)
Part 2a, Solubility by Random Forest: Conclusions
● Random Forest gives an RMS error of 0.69 logS units.
● These results are competitive with any other informatics or QSPR solubility prediction method.
● The nature of the model is predictive, without offering much insight.
![Page 46: In Silico Methods for ADMET and Solubility Prediction Dr John Mitchell University of St Andrews.](https://reader031.fdocuments.net/reader031/viewer/2022032016/56649e2d5503460f94b1c796/html5/thumbnails/46.jpg)
Our Methods …
(b) Thermodynamic Cycle (A hybrid of theoretical chemistry & informatics)
![Page 47: In Silico Methods for ADMET and Solubility Prediction Dr John Mitchell University of St Andrews.](https://reader031.fdocuments.net/reader031/viewer/2022032016/56649e2d5503460f94b1c796/html5/thumbnails/47.jpg)
Reference
![Page 48: In Silico Methods for ADMET and Solubility Prediction Dr John Mitchell University of St Andrews.](https://reader031.fdocuments.net/reader031/viewer/2022032016/56649e2d5503460f94b1c796/html5/thumbnails/48.jpg)
We want to construct a theoretical model that will predict solubility for druglike molecules …
We expect our model to use real physics and chemistry and to give some insight …
We don’t expect it to be fast by informatics or QSPR standards, but it should be reasonably accurate …
Our Thermodynamic Cycle method …
We may need to include some empirical parameters…
![Page 49: In Silico Methods for ADMET and Solubility Prediction Dr John Mitchell University of St Andrews.](https://reader031.fdocuments.net/reader031/viewer/2022032016/56649e2d5503460f94b1c796/html5/thumbnails/49.jpg)
For this study Toni Llinàs measured 30 solubilities using the CheqSol method and took another 30 from other high quality studies (Bergstrom & Rytting).
We use a Sirius glpKa instrument
![Page 50: In Silico Methods for ADMET and Solubility Prediction Dr John Mitchell University of St Andrews.](https://reader031.fdocuments.net/reader031/viewer/2022032016/56649e2d5503460f94b1c796/html5/thumbnails/50.jpg)
Can we use theoretical chemistry to calculate solubility via a thermodynamic cycle?
![Page 51: In Silico Methods for ADMET and Solubility Prediction Dr John Mitchell University of St Andrews.](https://reader031.fdocuments.net/reader031/viewer/2022032016/56649e2d5503460f94b1c796/html5/thumbnails/51.jpg)
Gsub comes mostly from lattice energy minimisation based on the experimental crystal structure.
![Page 52: In Silico Methods for ADMET and Solubility Prediction Dr John Mitchell University of St Andrews.](https://reader031.fdocuments.net/reader031/viewer/2022032016/56649e2d5503460f94b1c796/html5/thumbnails/52.jpg)
Gsolv comes from a semi-empirical solvation model (SCRF B3LYP/6-31G* in Jaguar)
This is likely to be the least accurate term in our equation.
We also tried SM5.4 with AM1 & PM3 in Spartan, with similar results.
![Page 53: In Silico Methods for ADMET and Solubility Prediction Dr John Mitchell University of St Andrews.](https://reader031.fdocuments.net/reader031/viewer/2022032016/56649e2d5503460f94b1c796/html5/thumbnails/53.jpg)
Gtr comes from ClogP
ClogP is a fragment-based (informatics) method of estimating the octanol-water partition coefficient.
![Page 54: In Silico Methods for ADMET and Solubility Prediction Dr John Mitchell University of St Andrews.](https://reader031.fdocuments.net/reader031/viewer/2022032016/56649e2d5503460f94b1c796/html5/thumbnails/54.jpg)
![Page 55: In Silico Methods for ADMET and Solubility Prediction Dr John Mitchell University of St Andrews.](https://reader031.fdocuments.net/reader031/viewer/2022032016/56649e2d5503460f94b1c796/html5/thumbnails/55.jpg)
What Error is Acceptable?
• For typically diverse sets of druglike molecules, a “good” QSPR will have an RMSE ≈ 0.7 logS units.
• An RMSE > 1.0 logS unit is probably unacceptable.
• This corresponds to an error range of 4.0 to 5.7 kJ/mol in Gsol.
![Page 56: In Silico Methods for ADMET and Solubility Prediction Dr John Mitchell University of St Andrews.](https://reader031.fdocuments.net/reader031/viewer/2022032016/56649e2d5503460f94b1c796/html5/thumbnails/56.jpg)
What Error is Acceptable?
• A useless model would have an RMSE close to the SD of the test set logS values: ~ 1.4 logS units;
• The best possible model would have an RMSE close to the SD resulting from the experimental error in the underlying data:
~ 0.5 logS units?
![Page 57: In Silico Methods for ADMET and Solubility Prediction Dr John Mitchell University of St Andrews.](https://reader031.fdocuments.net/reader031/viewer/2022032016/56649e2d5503460f94b1c796/html5/thumbnails/57.jpg)
● Direct calculation was a nice idea, but didn’t quite work – errors larger than QSPR
● “Why not add a correction factor to account for the difference between the theoretical methods?”
● This was originally intended to calibrate the different theoretical approaches, but
…
Results from Theoretical Calculations
![Page 58: In Silico Methods for ADMET and Solubility Prediction Dr John Mitchell University of St Andrews.](https://reader031.fdocuments.net/reader031/viewer/2022032016/56649e2d5503460f94b1c796/html5/thumbnails/58.jpg)
…
● Within a week this had become a hybrid method, essentially a QSPR with the theoretical energies as descriptors
![Page 59: In Silico Methods for ADMET and Solubility Prediction Dr John Mitchell University of St Andrews.](https://reader031.fdocuments.net/reader031/viewer/2022032016/56649e2d5503460f94b1c796/html5/thumbnails/59.jpg)
Results from Hybrid Model
![Page 60: In Silico Methods for ADMET and Solubility Prediction Dr John Mitchell University of St Andrews.](https://reader031.fdocuments.net/reader031/viewer/2022032016/56649e2d5503460f94b1c796/html5/thumbnails/60.jpg)
This regression equation gives r2=0.77 and RMSE=0.71
![Page 61: In Silico Methods for ADMET and Solubility Prediction Dr John Mitchell University of St Andrews.](https://reader031.fdocuments.net/reader031/viewer/2022032016/56649e2d5503460f94b1c796/html5/thumbnails/61.jpg)
How Well Did We Do?
• For a training-test split of 34:26, we obtain an RMSE of 0.71 logS units for the test set.
• This is comparable with the performance of “pure” QSPR models.
• This corresponds to an error of about 4.0 kJ/mol in Gsol.
![Page 62: In Silico Methods for ADMET and Solubility Prediction Dr John Mitchell University of St Andrews.](https://reader031.fdocuments.net/reader031/viewer/2022032016/56649e2d5503460f94b1c796/html5/thumbnails/62.jpg)
Drug Disc.Today, 10 (4), 289 (2005)
Ulatt
Ssub & b_rotR
Gsolv & ClogP
![Page 63: In Silico Methods for ADMET and Solubility Prediction Dr John Mitchell University of St Andrews.](https://reader031.fdocuments.net/reader031/viewer/2022032016/56649e2d5503460f94b1c796/html5/thumbnails/63.jpg)
Part 2b, Solubility by TD Cycle: Conclusions
● We have a hybrid part-theoretical, part-empirical method.
● An interesting idea, but relatively low throughput - and an experimental (or possibly predicted?) crystal structure is needed.
● Similarly accurate to pure QSPR for a druglike set.
● Instructive to compare with literature of theoretical solubility studies.
![Page 64: In Silico Methods for ADMET and Solubility Prediction Dr John Mitchell University of St Andrews.](https://reader031.fdocuments.net/reader031/viewer/2022032016/56649e2d5503460f94b1c796/html5/thumbnails/64.jpg)
Thanks• Unilever• Dr Florian Nigsch
• Pfizer & PIPMS• Dr Dave Palmer• Pfizer (Dr Iñaki Morao, Dr Nick Terrett & Dr Hua Gao)