Advertisement

Journal of Computer-Aided Molecular Design

, Volume 32, Issue 4, pp 537–546 | Cite as

WhichP450: a multi-class categorical model to predict the major metabolising CYP450 isoform for a compound

  • Peter A. Hunt
  • Matthew D. Segall
  • Jonathan D. Tyzack
Article

Abstract

In the development of novel pharmaceuticals, the knowledge of how many, and which, Cytochrome P450 isoforms are involved in the phase I metabolism of a compound is important. Potential problems can arise if a compound is metabolised predominantly by a single isoform in terms of drug–drug interactions or genetic polymorphisms that would lead to variations in exposure in the general population. Combined with models of regioselectivities of metabolism by each isoform, such a model would also aid in the prediction of the metabolites likely to be formed by P450-mediated metabolism. We describe the generation of a multi-class random forest model to predict which, out of a list of the seven leading Cytochrome P450 isoforms, would be the major metabolising isoforms for a novel compound. The model has a 76% success rate with a top-1 criterion and an 88% success rate for a top-2 criterion and shows significant enrichment over randomised models.

Keywords

Multi-class classification Random forests Cytochrome P450 Drug–drug interactions Metabolism 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This research has received funding from the Union Seventh Framework Programme 2013 under the Grant agreement no. 602156.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

Matthew Segall and Peter Hunt are current employees of Optibrium Ltd., which develops the StarDrop software in which the methods described herein are implemented. Jonathan Tyzack is a former employee of Optibrium Ltd.

Supplementary material

10822_2018_107_MOESM1_ESM.docx (190 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 190 KB)

References

  1. 1.
    Kantae V, Krekels EHJ, Esdonk MJV et al (2017) Integration of pharmacometabolomics with pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics: towards personalized drug therapy. Metabolomics 13:9.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11306-016-1143-1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Tyzack JD, Hunt PA, Segall MD (2016) Predicting regioselectivity and lability of cytochrome P450 metabolism using quantum mechanical simulations. J Chem Inf Model 56:2180–2193CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Zanger UM, Schwab M (2013) Cytochrome P450 enzymes in drug metabolism: regulation of gene expression, enzyme activities, and impact of genetic variation. Pharmacol Ther 138:103–141CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kirchmair J, Göller AH, Lang D, Kunze J, Testa B, Wilson ID, Glen RC, Schneider G (2015) Predicting drug metabolism: experiment and/or computation? Nat Rev Drug Discov 14:387–404CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Rostkowski M, Spjuth O, Rydberg P (2013) WhichCyp: prediction of cytochromes P450. Inhib Bioinform 29:2051–2052CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    ACD/Labs Percepta platform (2017) http://www.acdlabs.com/products/percepta/ Accessed 6 Sept 2017
  7. 7.
    MetaPred website (2017) http://crdd.osdd.net/raghava/metapred/ Accessed 6 Sept 2017
  8. 8.
    Mishra NM, Agarwal S, Raghava GPS (2010) Prediction of cytochrome P450 isoform responsible for metabolizing a drug molecule. BMC Pharmacol 10:8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Hagymási K, Müllner K, Herszényi L, Tulassay Z (2011) Update on the Pharmacogenomics of proton pump inhibitors. Pharmacogenomics 12:873–888CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    García-Suástegui WA, Ramos-Chávez LA, Rubio-Osornio M, Calvillo-Velasco M, Atzin-Méndez JA, Guevara J, Silva-Adaya D (2017) The role of CYP2E1 in the drug metabolism or bioactivation in the brain. Oxid Med Cell Longev 2017(4680732):14Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Wang B, Zhou SF (2009) Synthetic and natural compounds that interact with human cytochrome P450 1A2 and implications in drug development. Curr Med Chem 16:4066–4218CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    van der Maaten L, Hinton G (2008) Visualizing high-dimensional data using t-SNE. J Mach Learn Res 9:2579–2605Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Breiman L (2011) Random forests. Mach Learn 45:5–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    StarDrop landing page on the Optibrium website (2017) http://optibrium.com/stardrop/. Accessed 6 Sept 2017
  15. 15.
    Abraham MH, McGowan JC (1987) The use of characteristic volumes to measure cavity terms in reversed-phase liquid-chromatography. Chromatographia 23:243–246CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Preissner SC, Hoffmann MF, Preissner R, Dunkel M, Gewiess A, Preissner S (2013) Polymorphic cytochrome P450 enzymes (CYPs) and their role in personalized therapy. PLoS ONE 8:e82562CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Fogelman SM, Schmider J, Venkatakrishnan K, von Moltke LL, Harmatz JS, Shader RI, Greenblatt DJ (1999) O- and N-demethylation of Venlafaxine in vitro by human liver microsomes and by microsomes from cDNA-Transfected cells: effect of metabolic inhibitors and. SSRI Antidepressants Neuropsychopharmacol 20:480–490CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Optibrium Ltd.CambridgeUK
  2. 2.The European Bioinformatics Institute (EMBL-EBI)CambridgeUK

Personalised recommendations