
doi: 10.1002/jps.24506
pmid: 26037784
Accurately determining fraction unbound (fu ) with currently available methods has been challenging for certain compounds. Inaccurate fu values can lead to the misinterpretation of important attributes of a drug candidate. Our analysis of over 2000 Pfizer drug discovery compounds showed no systematic bias in low or high fu precision using the equilibrium dialysis method. However, the accuracy of the plasma protein binding (PPB) estimate for highly bound compounds may be poor, should equilibrium not be fully achieved in the equilibrium dialysis assay. Here, a dilution method and a presaturation method were applied to accelerate equilibration for a set of challenging compounds. These improved methods demonstrate the ability to provide an accurate measurement of PPB for highly bound compounds with fu values much less than 1%. Therefore, we recommend that the actual experimental fu value be used for the prediction of drug-drug interaction potential and for the characterization of important drug candidate properties. Our recommendation calls into question the need for current regulatory guidelines that restrict the reporting of fu values below 1%.
Male, Drug Evaluation, Preclinical, Reproducibility of Results, Blood Proteins, Models, Biological, Rats, Small Molecule Libraries, Kinetics, Macaca fascicularis, Mice, Dogs, Drug Stability, Solubility, Animals, Humans, Drug Interactions, Female, Dialysis, Hydrophobic and Hydrophilic Interactions, Algorithms
Male, Drug Evaluation, Preclinical, Reproducibility of Results, Blood Proteins, Models, Biological, Rats, Small Molecule Libraries, Kinetics, Macaca fascicularis, Mice, Dogs, Drug Stability, Solubility, Animals, Humans, Drug Interactions, Female, Dialysis, Hydrophobic and Hydrophilic Interactions, Algorithms
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 103 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 1% | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Top 10% | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% |
