Prediction of metabolism and solubility of tablet-form drugs according to the biopharmaceutical drug disposition classification system: Original scientific article

Yaroslava Pushkarova; Galina Zaitseva; Kaouthar  Bouaalam

doi:10.5599/admet.2945

Authors

Yaroslava Pushkarova Bogomolets National Medical University https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9856-7846
Galina Zaitseva Bogomolets National Medical University https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3138-6324
Kaouthar Bouaalam Bogomolets National Medical University https://orcid.org/0009-0005-4564-6942

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.5599/admet.2945

Keywords:

Molecular descriptors, probabilistic neural network, chemometrics, drug classification

Abstract

Background and purpose: Prediction of metabolism and solubility of tablet-form drugs is essential in pharmaceutical development, impacting drug efficacy, safety and formulation strategies. This study aimed to develop predictive models for classifying drugs according to metabolism and solubility within the Biopharmaceutical Drug Disposition Classification System. Experimental approach: A dataset of 220 tablet-form drugs characterized by eleven molecular descriptors was analysed. The Kruskal–Wallis test identified relevant descriptors for metabolism (extensive vs. poor) and solubility (high vs. low) classifications. Probabilistic Neural Networks were employed for predictive modelling, with model parameters optimized to enhance accuracy. Key results: Six molecular descriptors (hydrogen bond acidity, logarithm of the partition coefficient, distribution coefficient, hydrogen bond acceptor count, molecular weight and polar surface area) predicted metabolism class with 97 % accuracy. For solubility classification, five descriptors (dipolarity/polarizability, logarithm of the partition coefficient, distribution coefficient, hydrogen bond donor count and molecular weight) achieved 88 % accuracy. Removal of key descriptors significantly reduced model performance, confirming their importance. Conclusion: The developed models demonstrate robust predictive capability for drug metabolism and solubility classes as defined by the Biopharmaceutical Drug Disposition Classification System, supporting early-stage drug screening based solely on molecular structure. The lower accuracy observed for solubility prediction reflects its complex and multifactorial nature, highlighting the need for further refinement of molecular descriptors. These findings advance the field by providing effective computational tools to predict key biopharmaceutical properties, potentially accelerating the drug development process.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

[1] L.Z. Benet. The role of BCS (biopharmaceutics classification system) and BDDCS (biopharmaceutics drug disposition classification system) in drug development. Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences 102 (2013) 34-42. https://doi.org/10.1002/jps.23359 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/jps.23359

[2] T.T. Tran, H. Tayara, K.T. Chong. Artificial intelligence in drug metabolism and excretion prediction: recent advances, challenges, and future perspectives. Pharmaceutics 15 (2023) 1260. https://doi.org/10.3390/pharmaceutics15041260 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/pharmaceutics15041260

[3] C.A. Bergström, P. Larsson. Computational prediction of drug solubility in water-based systems: Qualitative and quantitative approaches used in the current drug discovery and development setting. International journal of pharmaceutics 540 (2018) 185-193. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpharm.2018.01.044 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpharm.2018.01.044

[4] C.Y. Wu, L.Z. Benet. Predicting drug disposition via application of BDDCS: The Biopharmaceutics Drug Disposition Classification System. Pharmaceutical Sciences 22 (2005) 11-23. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11095-004-9004-4 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11095-004-9004-4

[5] A. Charalabidis, M. Sfouni, C. Bergström, P. Macheras. The biopharmaceutics classification system (BCS) and the biopharmaceutics drug disposition classification system (BDDCS): beyond guidelines. International Journal of Pharmaceutics 566 (2019) 264-281. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpharm.2019.05.04 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpharm.2019.05.041

[6] C.M. Bowman, L.Z. Benet. Hepatic clearance predictions from in vitro–in vivo extrapolation and the biopharmaceutics drug disposition classification system. Drug Metabolism and Disposition 44 (2016) 1731-1735. https://doi.org/10.1124/dmd.116.071514 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1124/dmd.116.071514

[7] R. Cristofoletti, C. Chiann, J.B. Dressman, S. Storpirtis. A comparative analysis of biopharmaceutics classification system and biopharmaceutics drug disposition classification system: a cross-sectional survey with 500 bioequivalence studies. Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences 102 (2013) 3136-3144. https://doi.org/10.1002/jps.23515 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/jps.23515

[8] A. Ashrafi, K. Teimouri, F. Aghazadeh, A. Shayanfar. Neural Network Models for Predicting Solubility and Metabolism Class of Drugs in the Biopharmaceutics Drug Disposition Classification System (BDDCS). European Journal of Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics 49 (2024) 1-6. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13318-023-00861-5 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13318-023-00861-5

[9] E. Ostertagova, O. Ostertag, J. Kováč. Methodology and application of the Kruskal-Wallis test. Applied Mechanics and Materials 611 (2014) 115-120. https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMM.611.115 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMM.611.115

[10] T.V. Hecke. Power study of anova versus Kruskal-Wallis test. Journal of Statistics and Management Systems 15 (2012) 241-247. https://doi.org/10.1080/09720510.2012.10701623 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09720510.2012.10701623

[11] N.M. Razali, Y.B. Wah. Power Comparisons of Shapiro-Wilk, Kolmogorov-Smirnov, Lilliefors and Anderson-Darling Tests. Journal of Statistical Modeling and Analytics 2 (2011) 21. https://www.nbi.dk/~petersen/Teaching/Stat2017/Power_Comparisons_of_Shapiro-Wilk_Kolmogorov-Smirn.pdf

[12] U. Michelucci. Skewness, Kurtosis, and Modality. In Statistics for Scientists: A Concise Guide for Data-driven Research, Cham: Springer Nature, Switzerland, 2025, p. 95-108. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-78147-6_9 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-78147-6_9

[13] D.F. Specht. Probabilistic neural networks. Neural Networks 3 (1990) 109-118. https://doi.org/10.1016/0893-6080(90)90049-Q DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0893-6080(90)90049-Q

[14] Y. Pushkarova, G. Zaitseva, A. Kaliuzhenko. 13th International conference on advanced computer information technologies, Classification of residuals by risk assessment using chemometric methods, Wrocław, Poland, 2023, p. 562-565. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACIT58437.2023.10275405 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/ACIT58437.2023.10275405

[15] J.N. Miller, J.C. Miller. Statistics and Chemometrics for Analytical Chemistry, Pearson, Harlow, England, 2010, p. 268. ISBN: 978-0-273-73042-2