Meta-Analysis of Permeability Literature Data Shows Possibilities and Limitations of Popular Methods

Kód výsledku v IS VaVaI

<a href="https://www.isvavai.cz/riv?ss=detail&h=RIV%2F61989592%3A15310%2F25%3A73633284" target="_blank" >RIV/61989592:15310/25:73633284 - isvavai.cz</a>

Nalezeny alternativní kódy

RIV/60461373:22340/25:43933690

Výsledek na webu

<a href="https://pubs.acs.org/doi/pdf/10.1021/acs.molpharmaceut.4c00975" target="_blank" >https://pubs.acs.org/doi/pdf/10.1021/acs.molpharmaceut.4c00975</a>

DOI - Digital Object Identifier

<a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/acs.molpharmaceut.4c00975" target="_blank" >10.1021/acs.molpharmaceut.4c00975</a>

Jazyk výsledku

angličtina

Název v původním jazyce

Meta-Analysis of Permeability Literature Data Shows Possibilities and Limitations of Popular Methods

Popis výsledku v původním jazyce

Permeability is an important molecular property in drug discovery, as it co-determines pharmacokinetics whenever a drug crosses the phospholipid bilayer, e.g., into the cell, in the gastrointestinal tract, or across the blood-brain barrier. Many methods for the determination of permeability have been developed, including cell line assays (CACO-2 and MDCK), cell-free model systems like parallel artificial membrane permeability assay (PAMPA) mimicking, e.g., gastrointestinal epithelia or the skin, as well as the black lipid membrane (BLM) and submicrometer liposomes. Furthermore, many in silico approaches have been developed for permeability prediction: meta-analysis of publicly available databases for permeability data (MolMeDB and ChEMBL) was performed to establish their usability. Four experimental and two computational methods were evaluated. It was shown that repeatability of the reported permeability measurement is not great even for the same method. For the PAMPA method, two different permeabilities are reported: intrinsic and apparent. They can vary in degrees of magnitude; thus, we suggest being extra cautious using literature data on permeability. When we compared data for the same molecules using different methods, the best agreement was between cell-based methods and between BLM and computational methods. Existence of unstirred water layer (UWL) permeability limits the data agreement between cell-based methods (and apparent PAMPA) with data that are not limited by UWL permeability (computational methods, BLM, intrinsic PAMPA). Therefore, different methods have different limitations. Cell-based methods provide results only in a small range of permeabilities (-8 to -4 in cm/s), and computational methods can predict a wider range of permeabilities beyond physical limitations, but their precision is therefore limited. BLM with liposomes can be used for both fast and slow permeating molecules, but its usage is more complicated than standard transwell techniques. To sum up, when working with in-house measured or published permeability data, we recommend caution in interpreting and combining them.

Název v anglickém jazyce

Meta-Analysis of Permeability Literature Data Shows Possibilities and Limitations of Popular Methods

Popis výsledku anglicky

Permeability is an important molecular property in drug discovery, as it co-determines pharmacokinetics whenever a drug crosses the phospholipid bilayer, e.g., into the cell, in the gastrointestinal tract, or across the blood-brain barrier. Many methods for the determination of permeability have been developed, including cell line assays (CACO-2 and MDCK), cell-free model systems like parallel artificial membrane permeability assay (PAMPA) mimicking, e.g., gastrointestinal epithelia or the skin, as well as the black lipid membrane (BLM) and submicrometer liposomes. Furthermore, many in silico approaches have been developed for permeability prediction: meta-analysis of publicly available databases for permeability data (MolMeDB and ChEMBL) was performed to establish their usability. Four experimental and two computational methods were evaluated. It was shown that repeatability of the reported permeability measurement is not great even for the same method. For the PAMPA method, two different permeabilities are reported: intrinsic and apparent. They can vary in degrees of magnitude; thus, we suggest being extra cautious using literature data on permeability. When we compared data for the same molecules using different methods, the best agreement was between cell-based methods and between BLM and computational methods. Existence of unstirred water layer (UWL) permeability limits the data agreement between cell-based methods (and apparent PAMPA) with data that are not limited by UWL permeability (computational methods, BLM, intrinsic PAMPA). Therefore, different methods have different limitations. Cell-based methods provide results only in a small range of permeabilities (-8 to -4 in cm/s), and computational methods can predict a wider range of permeabilities beyond physical limitations, but their precision is therefore limited. BLM with liposomes can be used for both fast and slow permeating molecules, but its usage is more complicated than standard transwell techniques. To sum up, when working with in-house measured or published permeability data, we recommend caution in interpreting and combining them.

Druh

J_imp - Článek v periodiku v databázi Web of Science

CEP obor

—

OECD FORD obor

10403 - Physical chemistry

Projekt

Výsledek vznikl pri realizaci vícero projektů. Více informací v záložce Projekty.

Návaznosti

P - Projekt vyzkumu a vyvoje financovany z verejnych zdroju (s odkazem do CEP)<br>S - Specificky vyzkum na vysokych skolach

Rok uplatnění

2025

Kód důvěrnosti údajů

S - Úplné a pravdivé údaje o projektu nepodléhají ochraně podle zvláštních právních předpisů

Název periodika

MOLECULAR PHARMACEUTICS

ISSN

1543-8384

e-ISSN

1543-8392

Svazek periodika

22

Číslo periodika v rámci svazku

3

Stát vydavatele periodika

US - Spojené státy americké

Počet stran výsledku

12

Strana od-do

1293-1304

Kód UT WoS článku

001427040400001

EID výsledku v databázi Scopus

2-s2.0-85218227875