Pharmaceutical Research

, Volume 27, Issue 7, pp 1398–1407 | Cite as

Prediction of the Corneal Permeability of Drug-Like Compounds

  • Heidi Kidron
  • Kati-Sisko Vellonen
  • Eva M. del Amo
  • Anita Tissari
  • Arto Urtti
Research Paper



To develop a computational model for optimisation of low corneal permeability, which is a key feature in ocular drug development.


We have used multivariate analysis to build corneal permeability models based on a structurally diverse set of 58 drug-like compounds.


According to the models, the most important parameters for permeability are logD at physiologically relevant pH and the number of hydrogen bonds that can be formed. Combining these descriptors resulted in models with Q2 and R2 values ranging from 0.77 to 0.79. The predictive capability of the models was verified by estimating the corneal permeability of an external data set of 11 compounds and by using predicted permeability values to calculate the aqueous humour concentrations in the steady-state of seven compounds. The predicted values correlated well with experimental values.


The developed models are useful in early drug development to predict the corneal permeability and steady-state drug concentration in aqueous humor without experimental data.


computational model multivariate analysis ocular absorption ophthalmic drugs QSPR 



steady-state concentration


number of hydrogen bond acceptors


number of hydrogen bond donors


total number of putative hydrogen bonds, i.e. HBD + HBA


the logarithm of the octanol-water partition coefficient of the neutral form


the logarithm of the corneal permeability

logD7.0, logD7.4 and logD8.0

the logarithm of the octanol-water partition coefficient at pH 7.0, 7.4 and 8.0, respectively


molecular volume


molecular weight


principal component analysis


partial least squares


polar surface area


quantitative structure-property relationship


root mean squared error


root mean squared error of prediction


variable importance in the projection

Supplementary material

11095_2010_132_MOESM1_ESM.doc (389 kb)
DOC (389 KB)


  1. 1.
    Maurice DM, Mishima S. In: Sears ML, editor. Ocular pharmacokinetics. Berlin-Heidelberg: Springer Verlag; 1984. p. 16–119.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Schoenwald RD, Ward RL. Relationship between steroid permeability across excised rabbit cornea and octanol-water partition coefficients. J Pharm Sci. 1978;67:786–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Urtti A, Salminen L. Minimizing systemic absorption of topically administered ophthalmic drugs. Surv Ophthalmol. 1993;37:435–56.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Huang HS, Schoenwald RD, Lach JL. Corneal penetration behavior of beta-blocking agents II: assessment of barrier contributions. J Pharm Sci. 1983;72:1272–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Toropainen E, Ranta VP, Talvitie A, Suhonen P, Urtti A. Culture model of human corneal epithelium for prediction of ocular drug absorption. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2001;42:2942–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Toropainen E, Ranta VP, Vellonen KS, Palmgren J, Talvitie A, Laavola M et al. Paracellular and passive transcellular permeability in immortalized human corneal epithelial cell culture model. Eur J Pharm Sci. 2003;20:99–106.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Linnankoski J, Ranta VP, Yliperttula M, Urtti A. Passive oral drug absorption can be predicted more reliably by experimental than computational models—fact or myth. Eur J Pharm Sci. 2008;34:129–39.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Linnankoski J, Makela JM, Ranta VP, Urtti A, Yliperttula M. Computational prediction of oral drug absorption based on absorption rate constants in humans. J Med Chem. 2006;49:3674–81.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Winiwarter S, Bonham NM, Ax F, Hallberg A, Lennernas H, Karlen A. Correlation of human jejunal permeability (in vivo) of drugs with experimentally and theoretically derived parameters. A multivariate data analysis approach. J Med Chem. 1998;41:4939–49.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Moss GP, Dearden JC, Patel H, Cronin MT. Quantitative structure-permeability relationships (QSPRs) for percutaneous absorption. Toxicol In Vitro. 2002;16:299–317.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Yoshida F, Topliss JG. Unified model for the corneal permeability of related and diverse compounds with respect to their physicochemical properties. J Pharm Sci. 1996;85:819–23.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Fu XC, Liang WQ. A simple model for the prediction of corneal permeability. Int J Pharm. 2002;232:193–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Schoenwald RD, Huang HS. Corneal penetration behavior of beta-blocking agents I: physiochemical factors. J Pharm Sci. 1983;72:1266–72.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Li Y, Liu J, Pan D, Hopfinger AJ. A study of the relationship between cornea permeability and eye irritation using membrane-interaction QSAR analysis. Toxicol Sci. 2005;88:434–46.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Edwards A, Prausnitz MR. Predicted permeability of the cornea to topical drugs. Pharm Res. 2001;18:1497–508.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Duffel MW, Ing IS, Segarra TM, Dixson JA, Barfknecht CF, Schoenwald RD. N-Substituted sulfonamide carbonic anhydrase inhibitors with topical effects on intraocular pressure. J Med Chem. 1986;29:1488–94.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Maren TH, Jankowska L, Sanyal G, Edelhauser HF. The transcorneal permeability of sulfonamide carbonic anhydrase inhibitors and their effect on aqueous humor secretion. Exp Eye Res. 1983;36:457–79.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Wang W, Sasaki H, Chien DS, Lee VH. Lipophilicity influence on conjunctival drug penetration in the pigmented rabbit: a comparison with corneal penetration. Curr Eye Res. 1991;10:571–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Chiang CH, Schoenwald RD. Ocular pharmacokinetic models of clonidine-3H hydrochloride. J Pharmacokin Biopharm. 1986;14:175–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Chiang CH, Schoenwald RD, Huang HS. Corneal permeability of adrenergic agents potentially useful in glaucoma. J Taiwan Pharmaceut Assoc. 1986;38:67–84.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Schoenwald RD, Houseman JA. Disposition of cyclo-phosphamide in the rabbit and human cornea. Biopharm Drug Dispos. 1982;3:231–41.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Eller MG, Schoenwald RD, Dixson JA, Segarra T, Barfknecht CF. Topical carbonic anhydrase inhibitors. III: optimization model for corneal penetration of ethoxzolamide analogues. J Pharm Sci. 1985;74:155–60.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Wu NC, Chiang CH, Lee AR. Studies of carbonic anhydrase inhibitors: physicochemical properties and bioactivities of new thiadiazole derivatives. J Ocul Pharmacol. 1993;9:97–108.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Jankowska L, Bar-Ilan A, Maren TH. The relations between ionic and nonionic diffusion of sulfonamides across the rabbit cornea. Invest Ophthal Vis Sci. 1986;27:29–37.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Advanced Chemistry Developement, Toronto, Canada.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Bolton EE, Wang Y, Thiessen PA, Bryant SH. PubChem: integrated platform of small molecules and biological activities. Annu Rep Comput Chem. 2008;4:217–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Umetrics AB, Box 7960, SE-90719 Umeå, Sweden. Simca-P. 10.5.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Wold S. In: van de Waterbeemd H, editor. PLS for multivariate linear modeling. Weinheim: VCH; 1995. p. 195–218.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Rao CS, Schoenwald RD, Barfknecht CF, Laban SL. Biopharmaceutical evaluation of ibufenac, ibuprofen, and their hydroxyethoxy analogs in the rabbit eye. J Pharmacokinet Biopharm. 1992;20:357–88.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Schoenwald RD, Chien DS. Ocular absorption and disposition of phenylephrine and phenylephrine oxazolidine. Biopharm Drug Dispos. 1988;9:527–38.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Rusinko A, Hellberg MR, May JA, Owen GR. Use of MDCK cell line to predict corneal penetration of drugs. 2007;11114649.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Worth AP, Cronin MTD. Structure-permeability relationship for transcorneal penetration. ATLA. 2000;28:403–13.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Norinder U, Sjoberg P, Osterberg T. Theoretical calculation and prediction of brain-blood partitioning of organic solutes using MolSurf parametrization and PLS statistics. J Pharm Sci. 1998;87:952–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Malkia A, Murtomaki L, Urtti A, Kontturi K. Drug permeation in biomembranes: in vitro and in silico prediction and influence of physicochemical properties. Eur J Pharm Sci. 2004;23:13–47.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Tonjum AM. Movement of horseradish peroxidase in the cornea, sclera and the anterior uvea. Acta Ophthalmol (Copenh). 1977;55:771–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Urtti A. Challenges and obstacles of ocular pharmacokinetics and drug delivery. Adv Drug Deliv Rev. 2006;58:1131–5.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Ahmed I, Patton TF. Importance of the noncorneal absorption route in topical ophthalmic drug delivery. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1985;26:584–7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Kawazu K, Oshita A, Nakamura T, Nakashima M, Ichikawa N, Sasaki H. Transport of acebutolol through rabbit corneal epithelium. 2006;29:846–9.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Heidi Kidron
    • 1
  • Kati-Sisko Vellonen
    • 1
    • 2
  • Eva M. del Amo
    • 1
    • 2
  • Anita Tissari
    • 2
  • Arto Urtti
    • 1
  1. 1.Centre for Drug ResearchUniversity of HelsinkiHelsinkiFinland
  2. 2.Division of Biopharmacy and PharmacokineticsUniversity of HelsinkiHelsinkiFinland

Personalised recommendations