Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 20, 2026

Assessing Changes in Volatile General Anesthetic Sensitivity of Mice after Local or Systemic Pharmacological Intervention
Published on: October 16, 2013
Comparative molecular field analysis to derive pharmacophore maps for disposition parameters of intravenous
1Nuffield Department of Anaesthetics, University of Oxford, Oxford OX3 9DU, UK. john.sear@nda.ox.ac.uk
Background:
The present study examines the molecular basis of the disposition kinetics for i.v. hypnotic agents using comparative molecular field analysis (CoMFA).
Methods:
The systemic clearance (Cl(s) litre min(-1)) and apparent volume of distribution at steady state (Vd(ss) litres) for 14 i.v. anaesthetics in human subjects were obtained from the literature, or from unpublished data, and used to form CoMFA models for the two aspects of drug disposition. Molecular alignment was achieved by field-fit minimization with the lead structure for all models eltanolone. The resulting pharmacophore maps were also compared with the pharmacophores for cardiovascular depression (expressed in terms of the drug concentration in 50% patients, associated with a 20% decrease in mean arterial pressure during infusion anaesthesia in the absence of other adjuvant drugs or noxious stimulation), which were taken from the literature.
Results:
The CoMFA model for Cl was based on two latent variables, explained 95.2% of the variance in observed activities, and showed good intrinsic predictability (cross-validated q(2) 0.663). The model for Vd(ss) was also based on two latent variables: r(2) 0.986 and q(2) 0.718. Comparison of the pharmacophores for the two disposition parameters showed poor correlation for both electrostatic and steric regions (r=-0.220 and 0.018; both NS). The relative contributions of electrostatic and steric interactions differed between the models (Cl(s) 1.9:1; Vd(ss) 2.5:1). Comparison with the cardiovascular pharmacophores depression models gave r values of 0.551 (P<0.05) and 0.407 (ns) for Cl(s) (for electrostatic and steric models) and -0.225 and -0.448 for Vd(ss) (both ns).
Conclusions:
Comparison of CoMFA models for drug disposition show only small elements of commonality, suggesting different molecular features may be responsible are two properties. There was better similarity for both disposition pharmacophores with the pharmacophores for cardiovascular depression.
More Related Videos
Related Concept Videos
Model Approaches for Pharmacokinetic Data: Compartment Models
Two primary types of compartment models are recognized: mammillary and catenary. The more...
Pharmacokinetic Models: Overview
There are three primary types of models: empirical, compartment, and physiological. Empirical models, with minimal assumptions,...
Pharmacodynamic Models: Direct Effect Model and Indirect Response Model
Pharmacokinetic Models: Comparison and Selection Criterion
Physiological models take a detailed approach by considering specific molecular processes. They can predict drug distribution, metabolism, and elimination changes, providing a comprehensive understanding of how drugs interact with the body.
Analysis Methods of Pharmacokinetic Data: Model and Model-Independent Approaches
The model approach uses mathematical models to describe changes in drug concentration over time. Pharmacokinetic models help characterize drug behavior in patients, predict drug concentration in the body fluids, calculate optimum dosage regimens, and evaluate the risk of toxicity. However, ensuring that the model fits the experimental data accurately...
Mechanistic Models: Overview of Compartment Models

