4.1 Article

Melting points of one- and two-component molecular crystals as effective characteristics for rational design of pharmaceutical systems

出版社

INT UNION CRYSTALLOGRAPHY
DOI: 10.1107/S2052520620007362

关键词

two-component molecular crystals; melting points; correlation equation; polymorphism; co-crystals with different stoichiometry; co-crystals with different enantiomers; parameter efficacy

资金

  1. Russian Science Foundation [19-13-00017]
  2. Russian Science Foundation [19-13-00017] Funding Source: Russian Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Based on the review of the literature results the database of the fusion temperatures of two-component molecular crystals (1947 co-crystals) and individual components thereof was built up. To improve the design of co-crystals with predictable melting temperatures, the correlation equations connecting co-crystals and individual components melting points were deduced. These correlations were discovered for 18 co-crystals of different stoichiometric compositions. The correlation coefficients were analysed, and the conclusions about the main/determinative and slave components of a co-crystal were made. The comparative analysis of the melting points of co-crystals composed from the same components but with different stoichiometry showed a co-crystal melting temperature growth when increasing the content of a high-melting component. The differences in the melting temperatures were determined and discussed for the following: (a) monotropic polymorphic forms, (b) two-component crystals with the same composition and different stoichiometry, and (c) two-component crystals based on racemates and enantiomers. The database analysis revealed the active pharmaceutical ingredients (APIs) and co-formers (CFs) more particularly used for co-crystal design. The approach based on an efficacy parameter allowing the prediction of co-crystals with melting points lower than those of individual compounds was developed.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.1
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据