Lead optimization filters

Following an introduction to the necessities of filtering and risk assessment of potential new drug molecules before entering lead optimization, the equally important aspects of pharmacokinetic (ADME) and safety (toxicity) profiling are covered in separate parts. 

There are a number of QSAR approaches useful for predicting receptor binding affinity. These range from simple rejection filters for drug-like chemical identification to more sophisticated QSAR models used in lead optimization. We have constructed various types of QSAR models for ER binding. 

Reactive, unstable compounds, as well as covalent binders, can be removed from screening collections by substructure searches [21, 22]. At Roche, a global team of experienced medicinal chemists has defined more than 100 functionalities which are reviewed at regular intervals. This list has been augmented by unwanted features (e.g., polyacids, alkyl aldehydes, polyhalogenated phenols, etc.) which are chemically unattractive starting points for a hit-to-lead optimization, because they often result in non-optimizable SAR patterns. These chemotypes have been coded into Markush-type substructures for automated detection and removal of unwanted compounds. However, we need to stress that these filters are fully customizable, and removed chemotypes can be restored if required. 

Fig. 5 Platforms comprising the pre-clinical lead optimization technology (PLOT) filters in the selection of lead development candidate molecules in drug development.

Several concepts for this series connection have been developed. In cell designs optimized for high specific power, the series cormection should exert only a minimal electric resistance to minimize losses and have low volume and weight. Generally, in these cases a bipolar type series cormection is chosen, which interconnects individual cells over the entire active area and leads to filter-press type cell arrangements called stacks (see Fig. 8.8). 

Lead Optimization of siRNA Lead identification can be visualized as an upside down pyramid (Fig. 4.2) where an initial set of siRNA are filtered through a set of assays in order to hone in on one or more lead designs. Lead optimization, in contrast, best fits the visnal metaphor of a diamond, whereby each potent lead is diversified throngh chemical modification of the nucleotides (Elbashir et al., 2001a Czaudema et al., 2003) and subseqnently refiltered. This process is very much iterative. In each round the... 

In this figure the next definitions are used A - projection operator, B - pseudo-inverse operator for the image parameters a,( ), C - empirical posterior restoration of the FDD function w(a, ), E - optimal estimator. The projection operator A is non-observable due to the Kalman criteria [10] which is the main singularity for this problem. This leads to use the two step estimation procedure. First, the pseudo-inverse operator B has to be found among the regularization techniques in the class of linear filters. In the second step the optimal estimation d (n) for the pseudo-inverse image parameters d,(n) has to be done in the presence of transformed noise j(n). 

---