Laura Y Pfund1, Christopher P Price, Jessica J Frick, Adam J Matzger. 1. Department of Chemistry and the Macromolecular Science and Engineering Program, The University of Michigan , 930 North University Avenue, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48109-1055, United States.
Abstract
To investigate the hypothesis that molecules acting as crystallization inhibitors in solution could be transformed into crystallization promoters, additives were synthesized that mimic the pharmaceuticals acetaminophen and mefenamic acid and also possess polymerizable functionality. It was found that, in solution, these additives face-selectively inhibit crystal growth and lead to overall slower crystal appearance. In contrast, when the tailor-made additives were incorporated into an insoluble polymer, the induction time for the onset of crystal formation for both pharmaceuticals was substantially decreased. This approach now allows for the synthesis of tailor-made polymers that decrease the induction time for crystal appearance and may find application in compounds that are resistant to crystallization or in improving the fidelity of heteronucleation approaches to solid form discovery.
To investigate the hypothesis that molecules acting as crystallization inhibitors in solution could be transformed into crystallization promoters, additives were synthesized that mimic the pharmaceuticals acetaminophen and mefenamic acid and also possess polymerizable functionality. It was found that, in solution, these additives face-selectively inhibit crystal growth and lead to overall slower crystal appearance. In contrast, when the tailor-made additives were incorporated into an insoluble polymer, the induction time for the onset of crystal formation for both pharmaceuticals was substantially decreased. This approach now allows for the synthesis of tailor-made polymers that decrease the induction time for crystal appearance and may find application in compounds that are resistant to crystallization or in improving the fidelity of heteronucleation approaches to solid form discovery.
There is often a large
barrier to the formation of an ordered three-dimensional
lattice from an isotropic state. The initial stage of crystallization,
nucleation, can be accelerated if a surface is present to facilitate
the organization of molecules by heteronucleation.[1] Among the various methods utilized for heteronucleation,[2−6] polymer-induced heteronucleation has proven to be a powerful
polymorph discovery method, utilizing hundreds of unique insoluble
polymers as crystallization directors for obtaining novel solid forms.[7−13] It is well established that functional group interactions at the
polymer–crystal interface are responsible for directing and
controlling the nucleation of different crystal phases on specific
polymer heteronucleants.[13−16] However, there are some instances where nucleation
from the polymer surface is very slow, allowing alternative pathways
to compete. In such cases, it is hypothesized that crystallization
is not induced by the polymer heteronucleant because little interaction
between the polymer and compound exists; this precludes efficient
stabilization of nuclei and subsequent growth into macroscopic crystals.
An attractive approach for solving the problem of slow nucleation
from polymer heteronucleants is to generate insoluble polymers that
are designed to possess complementary interactions for a given compound.
To implement this strategy, inspiration was sought from the substantial
body of work available on soluble additives. Tailor-made additives
are typically designed to adsorb onto specific faces of a growing
crystal to slow or block growth perpendicular to that face, often
affecting the morphology and the polymorphism of the target compound.[17−30] If the strong interactions between a tailor-made additive and a
target compound could instead be applied at the surface of an insoluble
polymer, it is hypothesized that the additive will act as a crystallization
promoter. The nucleation rate should be increased because the polymer
possesses functionality complementary to that of the target compound
in solution thereby facilitating heteronucleation. Furthermore,
the morphology of the resulting crystals should not be affected because
an insoluble polymer cannot interact with multiple faces of a growing
crystal.
Results and Discussion
Due to the extensive work on
the effect of tailor-made additives
on the morphology of acetaminophen (ACM) crystals, this compound was
used as an initial target in order to determine if polymers could
be tailored to accelerate nucleation.[31−33] A polymerizable additive, N-hydroxyphenyl methacrylamide, was designed
and synthesized[34] to mimic ACM (Figure 1).[35−38] Whenever designing an inhibitor for a specific compound, the possibility
exists that the particular substitution pattern chosen will preclude
efficient interaction with the target crystal. Therefore, to verify
that N-hydroxyphenyl methacrylamide would act in solution to modify the morphology of the ACM crystals,
crystallizations in the presence of the additive were performed. As
the concentration of the tailor-made additive was increased, the ACM
crystals became more elongated (Figure 2).
In spite of this dramatic change in the morphology of the crystals,
all were confirmed to be the monoclinic polymorph of ACM by Raman
spectroscopy (see Supporting Information). Having determined that N-hydroxyphenyl methacrylamide
face-selectively interacts with ACM crystals in solution, the additive
was subsequently incorporated into polymers to determine if it possessed
the ability to promote crystallization when immobilized. To explore
the effect of the concentration of the tailor-made additive present
in the polymer heteronucleant on the crystallization rate of the pharmaceutical,
binary copolymers were prepared. The requisite properties for the
second monomeric component are poor water solubility, a lack of hydrogen-bonding
functionality, and a reactivity ratio similar to the additive such
that random copolymers would be generated. Thus, three copolymers
with styrene and increasing ratios of the tailor-made additive (1,
5, and 10 mol% of additive to total polymer) were synthesized in addition
to pure polystyrene (see Supporting Information). In each case the polymer was found to be insoluble in water by
UV–vis absorbance spectroscopy implicating a heterogeneous
mechanism[39,40] for influencing crystallization (see Supporting Information). Crystallizations of
ACM in the presence of the three tailor-made additive copolymers and
polystyrene as well as in the absence of polymer were carried out
in aqueous solution with each crystallization condition performed
eight times in triplicate (see Supporting Information). In order to determine the induction time for crystal appearance
the crystallizations were checked by optical microscopy every 15 min.
On average, the induction time for crystal appearance of ACM in the
absence of the synthesized polymers occurred in >6000 min, whereas
in the presence of polystyrene this time decreased to 1100 min. These
observations are consistent with a decreased induction period resulting
from heterogeneous nucleation. More substantial though was the decrease
in the induction time for the appearance of crystals in the presence
of polymers with incorporated N-hydroxyphenyl methacrylamide.
On average crystallizations in the presence of the 1, 5, and 10 mol% N-hydroxyphenyl methacrylamide/styrene copolymers occurred
in 243 ± 7, 189 ± 10, and 151 ± 8 min, respectively
(times are shown with the standard error) (Figure 3). These results are consistent with the proposition that
a soluble tailor-made additive that modifies morphology in solution
acts as a crystallization promoter when incorporated into an insoluble
polymer.
Figure 1
Comparison
of the structure of acetaminophen (left) to the tailor-made
additive, N-hydroxyphenyl methacrylamide (right).
Figure 2
Morphology of acetaminophen crystals grown in
the presence of N-hydroxyphenyl methacrylamide: (a)
no additive, (b) 1 mM
additive, (c) 3 mM additive, and (d) 6 mM additive.
Figure 3
Induction time for crystal appearance for acetaminophen
crystallized
in the presence of N-hydroxyphenyl methacrylamide/styrene
copolymers. The percentages indicated next to each line represent
the molar percent of the tailor-made additive in the polymer.
Comparison
of the structure of acetaminophen (left) to the tailor-made
additive, N-hydroxyphenyl methacrylamide (right).Morphology of acetaminophen crystals grown in
the presence of N-hydroxyphenyl methacrylamide: (a)
no additive, (b) 1 mM
additive, (c) 3 mM additive, and (d) 6 mM additive.Induction time for crystal appearance for acetaminophen
crystallized
in the presence of N-hydroxyphenyl methacrylamide/styrenecopolymers. The percentages indicated next to each line represent
the molar percent of the tailor-made additive in the polymer.If the strategy of immobilizing
a tailor-made additive in a polymer
to create a crystallization promoter is generally applicable, then
other ACM mimics should yield similar results. To explore this hypothesis,
another tailor-made additive, p-acetamidostyrene,
was synthesized.[34] This tailor-made additive
possesses similar amide functionality to that of ACM but also bears
a vinyl group for integration into a polymer. Acetaminophen was initially
crystallized with p-acetamidostyrene in solution
to determine if the additive could affect the morphology of the resulting
crystals. Crystals of the monoclinic form of ACM became increasingly
elongated as the concentration of the additive was raised from 1 to
6 mM (see Supporting Information). With
successful demonstration of face-selective growth inhibition, p-acetamidostyrene was subsequently incorporated into polymers
to yield three copolymers with increasing ratios of the tailor-made
additive to styrene (1, 5, and 10 mol% of tailor-made additive relative
to the total polymer). The crystallizations were conducted and monitored
in the same manner as the N-hydroxyphenyl methacrylamide/styrenecopolymer system described above. The induction time for crystal appearance
was significantly decreased in the presence of the p-acetamidostyrene/styrene copolymers. For crystallizations in the
presence of the 10 mol% p-acetamidostyrene/styrenecopolymer, crystals appear on average within an hour, one hundredth
of the time needed for crystallization to occur in the absence of
polymer (Figure 4). Despite this drastic change
in the induction time for the appearance of crystals, the morphology
of the ACM crystals was not affected by the presence of the tailor-made
copolymers (Figure 5). This trend of decreasing
induction times can be attributed to an increase in the incorporation
of the tailor-made monomer in the copolymers, leading to more efficient
organization of molecules on the polymer surface and thus faster heteronucleation.
Figure 4
Induction
time for crystal appearance for acetaminophen crystallized
in the presence of p-acetamidostyrene/styrene copolymers.
The percentages indicated next to each line represent the molar percent
of the tailor-made additive in the polymer.
Figure 5
Morphology of acetaminophen crystals grown in the presence of 10
mol% p-acetamidostyrene/styrene.
Induction
time for crystal appearance for acetaminophen crystallized
in the presence of p-acetamidostyrene/styrene copolymers.
The percentages indicated next to each line represent the molar percent
of the tailor-made additive in the polymer.Morphology of acetaminophen crystals grown in the presence of 10
mol% p-acetamidostyrene/styrene.In order to expand the capabilities of this method to crystallizations
in organic solvents and eliminate any issues due to polymer solubility,
cross-linked tailor-made polymers were also explored as crystallization
promoters. The anti-inflammatory compound mefenamic acid was utilized
as an initial target compound. A tailor-made additive, 2-((4-vinylphenyl)amino)benzoic
acid, was synthesized, which is structurally similar to mefenamic
acid but bears a vinyl group to enable polymerization (Figure 6; see Supporting Information).[41] Mefenamic acid was initially crystallized
with 2-((4-vinylphenyl)amino)benzoic acid in solution to determine
if the additive would affect the morphology of the resulting crystals
(1, 5, and 10 mol% relative to the total amount of mefenamic acid).
As the concentration of the tailor-made additive was increased, the
mefenamic acid crystals became increasingly elongated and the induction
time for crystal appearance was significantly increased (see Supporting Information). However, with the highest
amount of the tailor-made additive the crystal growth was inhibited
so strongly that the crystals, although still blade-like, lacked a
distinct morphology. Despite this drastic change in the morphology,
all of the crystals were confirmed to be form I of mefenamic acid
by Raman spectroscopy (see Supporting Information). Having determined that 2-((4-vinylphenyl)amino)benzoic acid face-selectively
interacts with mefenamic acid crystals in solution, the tailor-made
additive was copolymerized with divinylbenzene (DVB), in increasing
molar ratios, to create cross-linked copolymers (see Supporting Information). Similar to the ACM studies each crystallization
condition was performed eight times in triplicate. In order to determine
the induction time for crystal appearance, the crystallizations were
monitored by time-lapse photography (photos were taken every 60 s).
The induction time for the appearance of crystals was considerably
decreased for crystallizations in the presence of the 2-((4-vinylphenyl)amino)benzoic
acid/DVB copolymers, and the copolymer with the highest incorporation
of the tailor-made additive yielded a 10-fold decrease in induction
time for crystal appearance (Figure 7; see Supporting Information). To determine if the
observed decrease in the induction period primarily stemmed from changes
in the surface energy of the tailored copolymers, the induction time
for crystal appearance was determined for four copolymers: the 10
mol% 2-((4-vinylphenyl)amino)benzoic acid/DVB copolymer with an advancing
water contact angle (CA) of 63.4°, the 1 mol% 2-((4-vinylphenyl)amino)benzoic
acid/DVB copolymer (CA = 86.7°), the 10 mol% hydroxyethyl methacrylate/DVBcopolymer (CA = 32.2°), and 1 mol% hydroxyethyl methacrylate/DVBcopolymer (CA = 60.3°). The two copolymers with similar surface
energies, the 10 mol% 2-((4-vinylphenyl)amino)benzoic acid/DVB copolymer
and the 1 mol% hydroxyethyl methacrylate/DVB copolymer, did not exhibit
similar induction times for crystal appearance. This result demonstrates
that the decrease in the induction time is not dictated by surface
energy alone (see Supporting Information).
Figure 6
Comparison of the structure of mefenamic acid (left) to the tailor-made
additive, 2-((4-vinylphenyl)amino)benzoic acid (right).
Figure 7
Induction time for crystal appearance for mefenamic acid
crystallized
in the presence of 2-((4-vinylphenyl)amino)benzoic acid/DVB copolymers.
The percentages indicated next to each line represent the molar percent
of the tailor-made additive in the polymer.
Comparison of the structure of mefenamic acid (left) to the tailor-made
additive, 2-((4-vinylphenyl)amino)benzoic acid (right).Induction time for crystal appearance for mefenamic acid
crystallized
in the presence of 2-((4-vinylphenyl)amino)benzoic acid/DVB copolymers.
The percentages indicated next to each line represent the molar percent
of the tailor-made additive in the polymer.Although the molecular-level events leading to the induction
of
crystal growth from polymer surfaces cannot be directly observed,
rate acceleration can arise either from the polymer stabilizing subcritically
sized nuclei of the target compound in solution or through organization
of molecules on the polymer surface leading to aggregates of critical
dimensions. In either case, it is hypothesized that the face-selectivity
of crystal growth results from preferential interaction with the surface
of pre-nuclear aggregates mediated by intermolecular interactions
between the polymer and the forming nucleus.[14,15] In order to determine how the tailored copolymers are interacting
with the target compound, ACM was crystallized on three distinct types
of polymer films: polystyrene, the 10 mol% N-hydroxyphenyl
methacrylamide/styrene copolymer, and the 10 mol% p-acetamidostyrene/styrene copolymer. The resulting crystals were
then analyzed for preferred growth orientation by face indexing via
single-crystal X-ray diffractometry. Crystals grown from the 10 mol% p-acetamidostyrene/styrene and 10 mol% N-hydroxyphenyl methacrylamide/styrene copolymer films both exhibited
preferred orientation along the (001) face of form I (monoclinic)
of ACM (Figure 8; see Supporting
Information). For the monoclinic form of ACM the hydroxyl and
the amide carbonyl functionalities are oriented perpendicular to the
(001) face, suggesting that the tailored copolymers may be preferentially
interacting with these groups through hydrogen bonding. Conversely,
ACM was found to be oriented along the (10–1) face on the polystyrene
films (Figure 9; see Supporting
Information). For the monoclinic form of ACM the benzene rings
and amide N–H functionalities are present perpendicular to
this face, meaning that polystyrene may be interacting with the ACM
molecules through π–π interactions.
Figure 8
Acetaminophen crystals
grown in the presence of the 10 mol% p-acetamidostyrene/styrene
copolymer film.
Figure 9
Acetaminophen crystals
grown in the presence of the polystyrene
film.
Acetaminophen crystals
grown in the presence of the 10 mol% p-acetamidostyrene/styrenecopolymer film.Acetaminophen crystals
grown in the presence of the polystyrene
film.In order to determine if there
was any preferential interaction
between the functionality on the tailor-made copolymer surface and
the mefenamic acid molecules in solution, mefenamic acid was crystallized
on polymer films comprised of the 10 mol% 2-((4-vinylphenyl)amino)benzoic
acid/DVB copolymer. Powder X-ray diffraction (PXRD) analysis of the
crystals present on the tailor-made copolymer films revealed that
there are two reflections at 6.3° (100) and 12.7° (200);
these correspond to mefenamic acid form I crystals oriented along
{100} (see Supporting Information). In
form I, carboxylic acid groups are oriented perpendicular to the (100)
face,[42] suggesting that the tailor-made
copolymer is preferentially interacting with these groups through
hydrogen bonding.[14,15] An intriguing question that can
test the proposed mechanism of interaction is if adsorption occurs
in the same orientation when an additive is in solution as when it
is anchored to a polymer. In order to test this, mefenamic acid crystals
grown in the presence of 2-((4-vinylphenyl)amino)benzoic acid in solution
were indexed. It was found that the additive in solution was in fact
adsorbing onto the (100) face, showing that the mechanism of interaction
is not changed when the additive is incorporated into a polymer (see Supporting Information).
Conclusions
The
studies outlined here demonstrate that tailor-made additives,
which alter crystal morphology in solution, can be incorporated into
insoluble polymers to promote crystallization. This approach has the
potential to impact a problem of considerable importance in the pharmaceutical
industry: the emergence of compounds which, for purely kinetic reasons,
under all growth conditions are resistant to crystallization.[43] This can severely complicate purification and
form identification. In these cases, tailoring substrates to decrease
the time needed for crystals to appear is an attractive approach for
creating appropriate seed crystals; studies examining this approach
are currently underway.
Authors: A Ulman; J F Kang; Y Shnidman; S Liao; R Jordan; G Y Choi; J Zaccaro; A S Myerson; M Rafailovich; J Sokolov; C Fleischer Journal: J Biotechnol Date: 2000-09 Impact factor: 3.307
Authors: Matthew L Peterson; Sherry L Morissette; Chris McNulty; Andrew Goldsweig; Paul Shaw; Martin LeQuesne; Julie Monagle; Nicolas Encina; Joseph Marchionna; Alasdair Johnson; Javier Gonzalez-Zugasti; Anthony V Lemmo; Stephen J Ellis; Michael J Cima; Orn Almarsson Journal: J Am Chem Soc Date: 2002-09-18 Impact factor: 15.419
Authors: Praveen K Thallapally; Ram K R Jetti; Amy K Katz; H L Carrell; Kuldeep Singh; Kakali Lahiri; Sambasivarao Kotha; Roland Boese; Gautam R Desiraju Journal: Angew Chem Int Ed Engl Date: 2004-02-20 Impact factor: 15.336
Authors: Jeffrey D Rimer; Zhihua An; Zina Zhu; Michael H Lee; David S Goldfarb; Jeffrey A Wesson; Michael D Ward Journal: Science Date: 2010-10-15 Impact factor: 47.728