How Many Cocrystals Are We Missing? Assessing Two Crystal Engineering Approaches to Pharmaceutical Cocrystal Screening

  • Chiara Cappuccino
  • , David Cusack
  • , James Flanagan
  • , Carl Harrison
  • , Cillian Holohan
  • , Monica Lestari
  • , Gareth Walsh
  • , Matteo Lusi

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

Drug development may include extensive screening for crystalline forms of active pharmaceutical ingredients. Crystal engineering aims to apply supramolecular knowledge to simplify such a task. The failure of such a strategy may result in overlooking potentially interesting compounds. Here, the advantages of such a knowledge-based approach is compared to a systematic crystallization screening for pharmaceutical cocrystals. This work indicates that a screening simply based on known synthons and their relative frequency as reported in the database is as effective as a random screening exercise, potentially missing 25% of the successful cocrystallization. Readily available computational methods perform better, enabling the identification of all of the observed cocrystals with a reduction of 24% of the experimental attempts.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1390-1397
Number of pages8
JournalCrystal Growth and Design
Volume22
Issue number2
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2 Feb 2022

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'How Many Cocrystals Are We Missing? Assessing Two Crystal Engineering Approaches to Pharmaceutical Cocrystal Screening'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this