Estimating the Octanol/water Partition Coefficient for Aliphatic Organic Compounds Using Semi-empirical Electrotopological Index

Overview

Journal Int J Mol Sci

Publisher MDPI

Specialties Biochemistry
Chemistry
Molecular Biology

Date 2011 Nov 11

PMID 22072945

Citations 8

Authors

Erica Silva Souza

Laize Zaramello

Carlos Alberto Kuhnen

Berenice da Silva Junkes

Rosendo Augusto Yunes

Vilma Edite Fonseca Heinzen

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

A new possibility for estimating the octanol/water coefficient (log P) was investigated using only one descriptor, the semi-empirical electrotopological index (I(SET)). The predictability of four octanol/water partition coefficient (log P) calculation models was compared using a set of 131 aliphatic organic compounds from five different classes. Log P values were calculated employing atomic-contribution methods, as in the Ghose/Crippen approach and its later refinement, AlogP; using fragmental methods through the ClogP method; and employing an approach considering the whole molecule using topological indices with the MlogP method. The efficiency and the applicability of the I(SET) in terms of calculating log P were demonstrated through good statistical quality (r > 0.99; s < 0.18), high internal stability and good predictive ability for an external group of compounds in the same order as the widely used models based on the fragmental method, ClogP, and the atomic contribution method, AlogP, which are among the most used methods of predicting log P.

Citing Articles

Electropolymerized polypyrrole-MOF composite as a coating material for SPME fiber for extraction VOCs liberated by bacteria.

Mametov R, Sagandykova G, Monedeiro-Milanowski M, Gabrys D, Pomastowski P Sci Rep. 2023; 13(1):8933.

PMID: 37264070 PMC: 10235416. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-023-36081-9.

Molecular Framework Analysis of the Generated Database GDB-13s.

Buehler Y, Reymond J J Chem Inf Model. 2022; 63(2):484-492.

PMID: 36533982 PMC: 9875802. DOI: 10.1021/acs.jcim.2c01107.

Quantitative prediction model for affinity of drug-target interactions based on molecular vibrations and overall system of ligand-receptor.

Wang X, Cao T, Jia C, Tian X, Wang Y BMC Bioinformatics. 2021; 22(1):497.

PMID: 34649499 PMC: 8515642. DOI: 10.1186/s12859-021-04389-w.

Exploring the RC-106 Chemical Space: Design and Synthesis of Novel ()-1-(3-Arylbut-2-en-1-yl)-4-(Substituted) Piperazine Derivatives as Potential Anticancer Agents.

Listro R, Stotani S, Rossino G, Rui M, Malacrida A, Cavaletti G Front Chem. 2020; 8:495.

PMID: 32695745 PMC: 7338850. DOI: 10.3389/fchem.2020.00495.

Synthesis of diN-Substituted Glycyl-Phenylalanine Derivatives by Using Ugi Four Component Reaction and Their Potential as Acetylcholinesterase Inhibitors.

Prent-Penaloza L, F de la Torre A, Velazquez-Libera J, Gutierrez M, Caballero J Molecules. 2019; 24(1).

PMID: 30621344 PMC: 6337627. DOI: 10.3390/molecules24010189.

References

Ren B . Novel atomic-level-based AI topological descriptors: application to QSPR/QSAR modeling. J Chem Inf Comput Sci. 2002; 42(4):858-68. DOI: 10.1021/ci020362l. View

Souza E, Kuhnen C, Junkes B, Yunes R, Heinzen V . Quantitative structure-retention relationship modelling of esters on stationary phases of different polarity. J Mol Graph Model. 2009; 28(1):20-7. DOI: 10.1016/j.jmgm.2009.03.003. View

Ghose A, Crippen G . Atomic physicochemical parameters for three-dimensional-structure-directed quantitative structure-activity relationships. 2. Modeling dispersive and hydrophobic interactions. J Chem Inf Comput Sci. 1987; 27(1):21-35. DOI: 10.1021/ci00053a005. View

Mannhold R, van de Waterbeemd H . Substructure and whole molecule approaches for calculating log P. J Comput Aided Mol Des. 2001; 15(4):337-54. DOI: 10.1023/a:1011107422318. View

Liu F, Cao C, Cheng B . A Quantitative Structure-Property Relationship (QSPR) Study of aliphatic alcohols by the method of dividing the molecular structure into substructure. Int J Mol Sci. 2011; 12(4):2448-62. PMC: 3127127. DOI: 10.3390/ijms12042448. View

Mannhold R, Poda G, Ostermann C, Tetko I . Calculation of molecular lipophilicity: State-of-the-art and comparison of log P methods on more than 96,000 compounds. J Pharm Sci. 2008; 98(3):861-93. DOI: 10.1002/jps.21494. View

Heberger K . Quantitative structure-(chromatographic) retention relationships. J Chromatogr A. 2007; 1158(1-2):273-305. DOI: 10.1016/j.chroma.2007.03.108. View

Leo A, Jow P, Silipo C, HANSCH C . Calculation of hydrophobic constant (log P) from pi and f constants. J Med Chem. 1975; 18(9):865-8. DOI: 10.1021/jm00243a001. View

Golbraikh A, Tropsha A . Beware of q2!. J Mol Graph Model. 2002; 20(4):269-76. DOI: 10.1016/s1093-3263(01)00123-1. View

10.

Golbraikh A, Shen M, Xiao Z, Xiao Y, Lee K, Tropsha A . Rational selection of training and test sets for the development of validated QSAR models. J Comput Aided Mol Des. 2003; 17(2-4):241-53. DOI: 10.1023/a:1025386326946. View

11.

Katritzky A, Petrukhin R, Tatham D, Basak S, Benfenati E, Karelson M . Interpretation of quantitative structure-property and -activity relationships. J Chem Inf Comput Sci. 2001; 41(3):679-85. DOI: 10.1021/ci000134w. View

12.

Hughes L, Palmer D, Nigsch F, Mitchell J . Why are some properties more difficult to predict than others? A study of QSPR models of solubility, melting point, and Log P. J Chem Inf Model. 2008; 48(1):220-32. DOI: 10.1021/ci700307p. View

13.

Randic M, Zupan J . On interpretation of well-known topological indices. J Chem Inf Comput Sci. 2001; 41(3):550-60. DOI: 10.1021/ci000095o. View