Drug–target residence time and its implications for lead optimization

A Corrigendum to this article was published on 01 March 2007


Much of drug discovery today is predicated on the concept of selective targeting of particular bioactive macromolecules by low-molecular-mass drugs. The binding of drugs to their macromolecular targets is therefore seen as paramount for pharmacological activity. In vitro assessment of drug–target interactions is classically quantified in terms of binding parameters such as IC50 or Kd. This article presents an alternative perspective on drug optimization in terms of drug–target binary complex residence time, as quantified by the dissociative half-life of the drug–target binary complex. We describe the potential advantages of long residence time in terms of duration of pharmacological effect and target selectivity.

Access options

Rent or Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.


All prices are NET prices.

Figure 1: Dissociative half-life affects cellular efficacy.
Figure 2: Residence time determines target selectivity.
Figure 3: Relating cell growth inhibition to receptor–ligand interactions.
Figure 4: Extended action of finesteride.


  1. 1

    Ehrlich, P. Chemotherapeutics: scientific principles, methods and results. Lancet 182, 445–451 (1913).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. 2

    Kenakin, T. Efficacy at G-protein-coupled receptors. Nature Rev. Drug Discov. 1, 103–110 (2002).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  3. 3

    Norman, A. W., Mizwicki, M. T. & Norman, D. P. G. Steroid-hormone rapid actions, membrane receptors and a conformational ensemble model. Nature Rev. Drug Discov. 3, 27–41 (2004).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  4. 4

    Swinney, D. C. Biochemical mechanisms of drug action: what does it take for success? Nature Rev. Drug Discov. 3, 801–808 (2004).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  5. 5

    Copeland, R. A. Evaluation of Enzyme Inhibitors in Drug Discovery: A Guide for Medicinal Chemists and Pharmacologists (Wiley, New York, 2005).

    Google Scholar 

  6. 6

    Fersht, A. Structure and Mechanism in Protein Science p153 (Freeman, New York, 1999).

    Google Scholar 

  7. 7

    Maschera, B. et al. Human immunodeficiency virus: Mutations in the viral protease that confer resistance to saquinavir increase the dissociation rate constant of the protease-saquinavir complex. J. Biol. Chem. 271, 33231–33235 (1996).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  8. 8

    Shulman, C. F., Markgren, P.-O., Hämäläinen, M. & Danielson, U. H. Elucidation of HIV-1 protease resistance by characterization of interaction kinetics between inhibitors and enzyme variants. Antiviral Res. 58, 235–242 (2003).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. 9

    Shulman, C. F., Vrang, L. & Danielson, U. H. Improved structure-activity relationship analysis of HIV-1 protease inhibitors using interaction kinetic data. J. Med. Chem. 47, 5953–5961 (2004).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. 10

    Berezov, A., Zhang, H.-T., Greene, M. I. & Murali, R. Disabling Erb B receptors with rationally designed exocyclic mimetics of antibodies: Structure–function analysis. J. Med. Chem. 44, 2565–2574 (2001).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  11. 11

    Wood, E. R. et al. A unique structure for epidermal growth factor receptor bound to GW572016 (Lapatinib): Relationship among protein conformation, inhibitor off-rate, and receptor activity in tumor cells. Cancer Res. 64, 6652–6659 (2004).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  12. 12

    Rusnak, D. W. et al. The effects of the novel, reversible epidermal growth factor receptor/ErbB-2 tyrosine kinase inhibitor, GW2016, on the growth of human normal and tumor-derived cell lines in vitro and in vivo. Mol. Cancer Ther. 1, 85–94 (2004).

    Google Scholar 

  13. 13

    Jencks, W. P. Catalysis in Chemistry and Enzymology (McGraw-Hill, New York, 1969).

    Google Scholar 

  14. 14

    Liang, J., Edelsbrunner, H. & Woodward, C. Anatomy of protein pockets and cavities: Measurement of binding site geometry and implications for ligand design. Protein Sci. 7, 1884–1897 (1998).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  15. 15

    Veith, M. et al. Characteristic physical properties and structural fragments of marketed oral drugs. J. Med. Chem. 47, 224–232 (2004).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. 16

    Kenakin, T. A Pharmacology Primer: Theory, Application and Methods p28–29 (Elsevier, New York, 2004).

    Google Scholar 

  17. 17

    Harris, G. S. & Kozarich, J. W. Steroid 5α-reductase inhibitors in androgen-dependent disorders. Curr. Opin. Chem. Biol. 1, 254–259 (1997).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  18. 18

    Bull, H. G. et al. Mechanism-based inhibition of human steroid 5α-reductase by finasteride: Enzyme catalyzed formation of NADP-dihydrofinasteride, a potent bisubstrate analog inhibitor. J. Am. Chem. Soc. USA 118, 2359–2365 (1996).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  19. 19

    Tian, G. In vivo time-dependent inhibition of human steroid 5α-reductase by finasteride. J. Pharma. Sci. 85, 106–111 (1996)

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  20. 20

    Lewandowicz, A., Tyler, P. C., Evans, G. B., Furneaux, R. H. & Schramm, V. L. Achieving the ultimate physiological goal in transition state analogue inhibitors for purine nucleoside phosphorylase. J. Biol. Chem. 278, 31465–31468 (2003).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  21. 21

    Ojima, M. et al. Candesartan (CV-11974) dissociates slowly from the angiotensin AT1 receptor. Eur. J. Pharmacol. 319, 137–146 (1997).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  22. 22

    Laciurcière, Y. & Asmar, R. A comparison of the efficacy and duration of action of candesartan cilexetil and losartan as assessed by clinic and ambulatory blood pressure after a missed dose in truly hypertensive patients. Am. J. Hypertens. 12, 1181–1187 (1999).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. 23

    Vanderheyden, P. M. L., Fierens, F. L. P. & Vauquelin, G. Angiotensin II type 1 receptor antagonists: why do some of them produce insurmountable inhibition? Biochem. Pharmacol. 60, 1557–1563 (2000).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  24. 24

    Abrahamsson, T., Brandt-Eliasson, U., Morsing, P. & Sjöqvist, P. O. Candesartan causes a long-lasting antagonism of the angiotensin II receptor mediated contractile effects in isolated vascular preparations: a comparison with losartan and its active metabolite (EXP 3174). Am. J. Hypertens. 11 (Suppl. 2), 36A (1998).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. 25

    Mousa, S. A., Bozarth, J. M., Naik, U. P. & Slee, A. Platlet GPIIb/IIIa binding characteristics of small molecule RGD mimetics: Distinct binding profile for roxifiban. Br. J. Pharmacol. 133, 331–336 (2001).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  26. 26

    Billheimer, J. T. et al. Evidence that thrombocytopenia observed in humans treated with orally bioavailable glycoprotein IIb/IIIa antagonists is immune mediated. Blood 99, 3540–3546 (2002).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  27. 27

    Seiffert, D. et al. Prospective testing for drug-dependent antibodies reduces the incidence of thrombocytopenia observed with the small molecule glycoprotein IIb/IIIa antagonist roxifiban: Implications for the etiology of thrombocytopenia. Blood 101, 58–63 (2003).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  28. 28

    Kapur, S. & Seeman, P. Antipsychotic agents differ in how fast they come off the dopamine D2 receptors. Implications for atypical antipsychotic action. J. Psychiatry Neurosci. 25, 161–166 (2000).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  29. 29

    Meltzer, H. Y. Action of atypical antipsychotics (letter to the editor). Am. J. Psychiatry 159, 153–154 (2002).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. 30

    Shim, S. S. Action of atypical antipsychotics (letter to the editor). Am. J. Psychiatry 159, 154 (2002).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. 31

    Planells-Cases, R. et al. A novel N-methyl-D-aspartate receptor open channel blocker with in vivo neuroprotectant activity. J. Pharmacol. Exp. Ther. 302, 163–173 (2002).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  32. 32

    Lipton, S. A. & Chen, H.-S. V. Paradigm shift in NMDA receptor drug development. Expert Opin. Ther. Targets 9, 427–419 (2005).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  33. 33

    Copeland, R. A. Methods for Protein Analysis: A Practical Guide to Laboratory Protocols (Chapman & Hall, New York, 1994).

    Google Scholar 

  34. 34

    Copeland, R. A. Enzymes: A Practical Introduction to Structure, Mechanism, and Data Analysis 2nd edn (Wiley, New York, 2000).

    Google Scholar 

  35. 35

    Motulsky, H. J. & Mahan, L. C. The kinetics of competitive radioligand binding predicted by the law of mass action. Mol. Pharmacol. 25, 1–9 (1984).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. 36

    Williams, J. W., Morrison, J. F. & Duggleby, R. G. Methotrexate, a high-affinity pseudosubstrate of dihydrofolate reductase. Biochemistry 18, 2567–2573 (1979)

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  37. 37

    Darling, R. J. & Brault, P. A. Kinetic exclusion assay technology: Characterization of molecular interactions. Assay Drug Devel. Technol. 2, 647–657 (2004).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  38. 38

    Cooper, M. A. Optical biosensors in drug discovery. Nature Rev. Drug Discov. 1, 515–528 (2002).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  39. 39

    Gooljarsing, L. T. et al. A biochemical rationale for the anti-cancer efficacy of Hsp90 inhibitors: Slow, tight binding inhibition by geldanamycin and its analogues. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA (in the press).

  40. 40

    Chan, C.-C. et al. Rofecoxib [Vioxx, MK-0966; 4-(4′-Methylsulfonylphenyl)-3-phenyl-2-(5H)-furanone]: A potent and orally active cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitor. Pharmacological and biochemical profiles. J. Pharmacol. Exp. Ther. 290, 551–560 (1999).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. 41

    Kati, W. M. et al. In vitro characterization of A-315675, a highly potent inhibitor of A and B strain influenza virus replication. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 46, 1014–1021 (2002).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  42. 42

    Inada, Y., et al. Pharmacologic properties of candesartan cilexetil – possible mechanism of long-acting antihypertensive action. J. Hum. Hypertens. 13, S75–S80 (1999).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  43. 43

    Maschera, B., Furfine, E. & Blair, E. D. Analysis of resistance to human immunodeficiency virus type 1 protease inhibitors by using matched bacterial expression and proviral infection vectors. J. Virol. 69, 5431–5436 (1995).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references


The authors are grateful to D. Yamashita, E. Wood, P. Tummino, Z. Lai, J. Yang, D. Seiffert, R. Gontarek, M. Harpel, B. Brown and V. Schramm for helpful discussions and suggestions.

Author information



Corresponding author

Correspondence to Robert A. Copeland.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors are employees of and own stocks in GlaxoSmithKline.


Association rate constant/on-rate/kon

A second-order rate constant that quantifies the rate at which a free ligand and free receptor combine (through collisional encounters) to form a binary receptor–ligand complex.

Closed system

A system in which the binding partners (ligand and receptor) are present at temporally invariant concentrations throughout the course of an experimental measure.


The maximum concentration of drug in systemic circulation that is attained after dosing. The Cmax is typically attained at a specific time point after dosing and this time point is commonly referred to as the tmax.

Dissociation rate constant/off-rate/koff

A first-order rate constant that quantifies the rate at which a binary receptor–ligand complex dissociates to the free ligand and free receptor.

Equilibrium model (of drug action)

A model in which the pharmacological activity of a drug is dependent on the establishment of an equilibrium between the free concentration of drug and the concentration of drug bound to its pharmacological target receptor.

Equilibrium dissociation constant (Kd)

An inverse measure of the affinity of a receptor–ligand pair under equilibrium conditions. The value of Kd is mathematically equivalent to the ratio koff/kon.

Inhibition constant (Ki)

The Ki is the equilibrium dissociation constant for an inhibitor and a specific form of the enzyme target. See Ref. 5 for further information.


For the purposes of this review, the term ligand refers to a small molecule, such as a drug, that binds to, and thereby affects the activity of, a specific macromolecular target (receptor).

Non-equilibrium model (of drug action)

Any model in which the pharmacological activity of a drug is most dependent on a departure from equilibrium conditions with respect to the drug and its pharmacological target receptor. See Refs 4,5 for additional information.

Open system

A system in which the concentration(s) of one or more of the binding partners (ligand and receptor) can change over time as molecules of these species enter the system (for example, by distribution to the tissue) and leave the system (for example, by metabolism and other elimination mechanisms).


A biological macromolecule responsible for a specific physiological activity that is the target of binding for a particular drug or other ligand.

Binary complex residence time

The amount of time that a ligand resides on a given receptor after binding. Note that this is the definition of residence time used in this article; the term residence time has additional, unrelated meanings (for example, tissue residence time and so on) in other aspects of pharmacology.


The concentration of a substance that results in a 50% effect on some measure of biochemical function or substance–target binding interaction.

Receptor–ligand complex

(RL). The binary complex between a given receptor and a given ligand. Drug–target complexes are referred to throughout this review as receptor–ligand complexes, regardless of the specific chemical and biochemical nature of the binding partners (for example, enzyme–inhibitor complexes, G-protein coupled-receptor– antagonist complexes, ribosome–antibiotic complexes and so on). In cases of two-step binding mechanisms, RL refers to the initial encounter complex between the receptor and the ligand. In the review an example of a two-step binding mechanism is presented in which the receptor is an enzyme and the ligand is an inhibitor. In such a case the RL complex is more specifically referred to as EI.


A very high-affinity binary complex between a receptor (for example, an enzyme) and ligand (for example, an enzyme inhibitor) that usually results from isomerization of the receptor (that is, a conformational change) subsequent to initial binding of the ligand to the receptor. In the case of enzyme inhibitors, the initial encounter complex between the enzyme and inhibitor is referred to as EI and the subsequent high-affinity complex is referred to as EI*. See Refs 5,36 for further information.

Structure–activity relationship

(SAR). This term refers to the relationship between the molecular structure of a ligand and its affinity and/or effect on a specific receptor.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Copeland, R., Pompliano, D. & Meek, T. Drug–target residence time and its implications for lead optimization. Nat Rev Drug Discov 5, 730–739 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1038/nrd2082

Download citation

Further reading


Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing