|
· Concordance
· Medicines distribution
· Pharmacy education
· Management training
· Medicines stability
· New contract
· Technicians
· Prescription charge
· Personal control
· Private dispensing
· Dispensing
· Health services
· Drug delivery
· The Society
· The Journal
Letters to the Editor
|
Drug delivery
We are well on the way to understanding the blood brain barrier
From Professor J. C. Dearden, Hon MRPharmS
May I add to the comments made by Jenny Bryan in her article “Crossing
the blood-brain barrier: drug delivery to the brain is still elusive” (PJ,
2 October, p475) and the letter from Mohammad
Alavijeh (PJ, 9 October,
p516)? I concur with Dr Alavijeh’s comment that “we are still
far from fully understanding the complexity of the brain”. Nevertheless,
we have learnt a great deal about the molecular requirements for drugs
to be able to cross the BBB effectively, and much of what we know has
come from quantitative structure-activity relationship (QSAR) studies.
Many years ago Hansch et al1 showed that one of the key factors controlling
the crossing of the BBB by drugs was their hydrophobicity, as represented
by the logarithm of the octanol-water partition coefficient (log P),
and that a log P value of around 2 was optimal in this respect. This
was exemplified by a cardiotonic drug candidate (log P 2.59) which gave
rise to “bright colour vision” due to central nervous system
penetration; when a small molecular modification lowered the log P value
to 1.17, there was negligible loss of efficacy but the “bright
colour vision” problem disappeared.
Partition coefficient is a composite property, with components of molecular
size, polarity, polarisability and hydrogen bonding. The linear solvation
energy descriptors developed by Abraham reflect these components, and
Abraham et al2 have shown that they can model BBB penetration well: (see
PDF 45K)
It can be inferred from equation (1) that the best penetration of the
BBB is achieved by large non-polar, non-hydrogen bonding drugs. Others
such as van de Waterbeemd and Kansy3 have suggested that small drug molecules
penetrate the BBB better; van de Waterbeemd et al4 have given the optimal
requirements for crossing the BBB as log P 1–4, molecular weight < 400,
and polar surface area (which correlates highly with hydrogen bonding
ability) <90 Å2.
As Ms Bryan pointed out in her article, efflux is a problem in BBB penetration,
and some believe that crossing of the BBB is controlled largely by efflux.
Using BBB penetration data obtained by the use of P-glycoprotein knockout
mice, we recently showed5 that the role of efflux in BBB penetration
could be modelled by a QSAR containing terms representing molecular size,
polarity and polarisability.
We thus have considerable knowledge from QSAR about the molecular requirements
for drugs to cross the BBB, and this has already aided the design of
a number of CNS drugs. Clearly there is more to be done, but we are well
on the way.
John C. Dearden
School of Pharmacy and Chemistry
Liverpool John Moores University
References
1. Hansch C, Bjorkroth JP, Leo A. Hydrophobicity and central-nervous-system
agents – on the principle of minimal hydrophobicity in drug design.
Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences 1987;76:663–87.
2. Abraham MH, Chadha HS, Mitchell RC. Hydrogen bonding. 33. Factors
that influence the distribution of solutes between blood and brain. Journal
of Pharmaceutical Sciences 1994;83:1257–68.
3. van de Waterbeemd H, Kansy M. Hydrogen-bonding capacity and brain
penetration. Chimia 1992;46:299–303.
4. van de Waterbeemd H, Camenisch G, Folkers G, Chretien JR, Raevsky
OR. Estimation of blood-brain crossing of drugs using molecular size
and shape, and H-bonding descriptors. Journal of Drug Targeting 1998;6:151–65.
5. Dearden JC, Al-Noobi A, Scott AC, Thomson SA. QSAR studies on P-glycoprotein-regulated
multidrug resistance and on its reversal by phenothiazines. SAR QSAR
Environmental Research 2003;14:447–454. |