Posts Tagged ‘Ritonavir’

Tautomeric polymorphism.

Thursday, June 1st, 2017

Conformational polymorphism occurs when a compound crystallises in two polymorphs differing only in the relative orientations of flexible groups (e.g. Ritonavir). At the Beilstein conference, Ian Bruno mentioned another type;  tautomeric polymorphism, where a compound can crystallise in two forms differing in the position of acidic protons. Here I explore three such examples.

The term occurs in the title of this article,[1] for a compound known as Omeprazole.

When the bottom structure (the 6-methoxy) is used to search the CSD, two separate series are found. The first of these is UDAVIF (DOI:  10.5517/ccp82qq,  6-Methoxy-2-((4-methoxy-3,5-dimethyl-2-pyridinyl)methylsulfinyl)-1H-benzimidazole). There is no information regarding the absolute configuration of the chiral S-centre. Although the downloaded coordinates show it as R it is probably a racemic mixture. A note added to the structure declares disorder: “Omeprazole exists as solid solutions of the two tautomers. The structure is mixed 5-methoxy/6-methoxy with occupancies 0.078:0.922“, which indicates 7.8% is present as in the upper structure above. 

The second hit is VAYXOI (DOI: 10.5517/ccp82pp, rac-6-Methoxy-2-(((4-methoxy-3,5-dimethyl-2-pyridinyl)methyl)sulfinyl)-1H-benzimidazole) which now contains no disorder; the contaminating 5-methoxy tautomer is no longer present. Perhaps not quite a true tautomeric polymorph, since the 5-methoxy tautomer is never observed in pure form.

This does occur with a second example. DEBFAR[2] represents the keto form on the right which crystallises from methanol, whilst YUYDOL as the enol form on the left crystallises from n-hexane. 

Calculations shed some light on this behaviour. DEBFAR has a computed (DOI: 10.14469/hpc/2591)  dipole moment of 11D, whereas YUYDOL (DOI: 10.14469/hpc/2590) is 2.5D. In chloroform solutions (~half way between the two solvent polarities), the keto form is ~6.1 kcal/mol lower in ΔG than the enol. The crystal packing for the two forms is very different and the differences in this packing must clearly amount to >6.1 kcal/mol to over-ride the lesser stability of DEBFAR in solution.


The final example [3] is illustrated using scheme 2 from that article, one entitled tautomeric species of 4-hydroxynicotinic acid:

The original diagram has two unfortunate bond errors which are NOT reproduced above (and which perhaps are a good topic for discussion in tutorials with students), along with an unusual interpretation of the term tautomerism. The blue arrows above are mine and I suggest the isomerism between the connected species is resonance isomerism, and not tautomerism. So three possible different true tautomers then. Five crystal structures are reported which I list below.

  1. 10.5517/cctswjz (KUXPUP, 4-oxo-1,4-dihydropyridine-3-carboxylic acid, no H2O),  10.5517/ccdc.csd.cc1kfyxv (KUXPUP01 no H2O) and 10.5517/ccdc.csd.cc1kfyzx (KUXPUP02 no H2O)
  2. 10.5517/ccx59s4 (AVEMUK, 4-Oxo-1,4-dihydropyridine-3-carboxylic acid hemihydrate) and  10.5517/ccdc.csd.cc1kfz21 (AVEMUK01)
  3. 10.5517/ccdc.csd.cc1kfz54 (AKIHIN, 4-hydroxypyridin-1-ium-3-carboxylate monohydrate) 
  4. 10.5517/ccdc.csd.cc1kfz10 (AKIHAF, 4-hydroxypyridin-1-ium-3-carboxylate)

KUXPUP and AVEMUK differ only in the presence of one solvent water molecule and both represent tautomer 2 above. AKIHIN and AKIHAF similarly represent tautomer 3 above; both are represented as 3a in the CSD and not as 3b. There are no examples of tautomer 1 in the crystal structure database; it may only exist in the gas phase. So the equilibrium 2 ⇌ 3 is another genuine example of tautomeric polymorphism, with the keto form favoured by more polar solvents, as was noted for the previous example.

With this last article,[3] comprehensive calculations at a good level were reported, including modelling the periodic cell using the Crystal program and including corrections such as BSSE (basis set superposition error) and dispersion terms. I was hopeful that this might lead me to something as simple as the computed dipole moments of the (isolated) species (as I reported above for the previous system), but these were not mentioned in the text of the article. Unfortunately, the supporting information also had no details of any such calculations, which left me frustrated again at how difficult it can be in (it has to be said) the vast majority of articles which report calculations to get details of such calculations. 

Tautomeric polymorphism remains a very rare phenomenon. SciFinder for example only has 19 references citing it (2 of which are to conference talks). Perhaps the most intriguing[4] claims that 2-thiobarbituric acid has the richest collection of tautomeric polymorphs with five. Since no calculations are reported there, I might try these out and report back here.

Postscript:  Here is some analysis of 2-thiobarbituric.

  1. THBARB (DOI 10.5517/cctbxcd, 10.5517/cctbxfg  and 10.5517/cctbxgh) are three polymorphs of  the keto tautomer, the isolated molecule having a small calculated dipole moment (DOI: 10.14469/hpc/2632).
  2. PABNAJ (DOI: 10.5517/cctbxbc) is a polymorph in the enol form, with a much larger calculated dipole moment (DOI: 10.14469/hpc/2633)
  3. PABNIR (DOI: 10.5517/cctbxdf) is a mixed polymorph with one enol paired with one keto form. 

The relative free-energies of the isolated molecules are 0.0 (keto) and 9.0 (enol). The keto-enol pair is 0.4 kcal/mol more stable than the isolated components. This again shows the effect that crystal packing can have on the relative energies and also shows that a  simple inspection of the dipole moment may cast light on the polymorphism.

 

References

  1. P.M. Bhatt, and G.R. Desiraju, "Tautomeric polymorphism in omeprazole", Chemical Communications, pp. 2057, 2007. https://doi.org/10.1039/b700506g
  2. Y. Akama, M. Shiro, T. Ueda, and M. Kajitani, "Keto and Enol Tautomers of 4-Benzoyl-3-methyl-1-phenyl-5(2H)-pyrazolone", Acta Crystallographica Section C Crystal Structure Communications, vol. 51, pp. 1310-1314, 1995. https://doi.org/10.1107/s0108270194007389
  3. S. Long, M. Zhang, P. Zhou, F. Yu, S. Parkin, and T. Li, "Tautomeric Polymorphism of 4-Hydroxynicotinic Acid", Crystal Growth & Design, vol. 16, pp. 2573-2580, 2016. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.cgd.5b01639
  4. M. Chierotti, L. Ferrero, N. Garino, R. Gobetto, L. Pellegrino, D. Braga, F. Grepioni, and L. Maini, "The Richest Collection of Tautomeric Polymorphs: The Case of 2‐Thiobarbituric Acid", Chemistry – A European Journal, vol. 16, pp. 4347-4358, 2010. https://doi.org/10.1002/chem.200902485

Tags:, , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Chemical IT, crystal_structure_mining | No Comments »

Ritonavir: a look at a famous example of conformational polymorphism.

Monday, January 2nd, 2017

Here is an inside peek at another one of Derek Lowe’s 250 milestones in chemistry, the polymorphism of Ritonavir.[1] The story in a nutshell concerns one of a pharma company’s worst nightmares; a drug which has been successfully brought to market unexpectedly “changes” after a few years on market to a less effective form (or to use the drug term, formulation). This can happen via a phenomenon known as polymorphism, where the crystalline structure of a molecule can have more than one form. In this case, form I was formulated into soluble tablets for oral intake. During later manufacturing, a new less-soluble form appeared and “within weeks this new polymorph began to appear throughout both the bulk drug and formulation areas“[1]

The structure of the original form I is shown below (3D DOI: 10.5517/CCRVC75). The compound has three HN-CO peptide linkages, all of which are in the stereoelectronically favoured s-cis form, with a dihedral angle of 180° across the H-N and C=O vectors.

Click for 3D

To show how favourable this s-cis form is, here is a search of the Cambridge structural database for acyclic HN-C=O bonds; of the ~8200 examples, only 5 have an s-trans torsion of ~180°. It is I feel statistically not entirely correct to convert this ratio of K=1640 to a free energy, but if one does, then at 298K, RTlnK works out to 4.4 kcal/mol. Note also that two compounds show an angle of ~90° (artefacts?).

The new type-II form that emerged has only two s-cis peptide linkages, and the third has isomerised to this higher energy s-trans form (3D DOI: 10.5517/CCRVC97)

Click for 3D

This has various knock-on effects on the conformation of the actual molecule itself.

  1. The cis-trans isomerisation of a peptide or amide bond is a relatively high energy process, since the C=N bond order is higher than 1. For example, in the 1H NMR spectrum of N,N-dimethyl formamide at room temperature, one can famously observe two methyl resonances and it is only at higher temperatures that the two signals coalesce due to more rapid rotation about the C=N bond.
  2. A pedant might query whether this isomerism is correctly termed a conformational or a configurational change? High-energy rotations that result in cis/trans isomerisms are normally referred to as a configurational changes, whereas low energy rotations about e.g. single bonds are known as conformational changes (thus the conformational changes in cyclohexane). There is a grey region such as this one, where the boundary between the two terms is encountered. 
  3. This isomerism has the knock-on effect of inducing a much lower energy rotation of a C-C single bond (on the left hand side of the representations above), rotating from a dihedral angle of +193 in form I to +51 in form II.
  4. More minor affects are seen in the conformation of the central benzyl group and the S/N heterocyclic ring on the right hand side.
  5. All these low energy conformational effects occur because a better hydrogen bonding network can then be set up in the crystal lattice, something not easily predictable  from the diagrams of the single molecules shown above.
  6. Overall, the free energy of the lattice is lower, despite the higher energy of the s-trans peptide bond. 
  7. Clearly, the dynamics of crystallisation initially favoured form I (despite the higher energy of the crystallised outcome), but if a tiny seed of form II is present (or perhaps other impurities) this can dramatically (but unpredictably) change these crystallisation dynamics.

I suspect that since 1998 when this story unfolded, all new drugs in which one or more s-cis peptide bonds are present have caused anxiety. In the system above for example, one might ask whether cis/trans isomerisation of instead either of the other two peptide bonds present might have similar results? Or hypothesize whether inhibiting the associated rotation of the C-C single bond noted above by appropriate “tethering” might prevent form I from converting to form II. Since 1998, I am sure trying to predict the solid form of an organic molecule from its isolated structure using computational methods has dramatically increased, although I have not found in SciFinder any reported instances of such modelling for Ritonavir itself.[2] Perhaps, if such a method were found, it might be too commercially valuable to share?

References

  1. J. Bauer, S. Spanton, R. Henry, J. Quick, W. Dziki, W. Porter, and J. Morris, "Ritonavir: An Extraordinary Example of Conformational Polymorphism", Pharmaceutical Research, vol. 18, pp. 859-866, 2001. https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1011052932607
  2. S.R. Chemburkar, J. Bauer, K. Deming, H. Spiwek, K. Patel, J. Morris, R. Henry, S. Spanton, W. Dziki, W. Porter, J. Quick, P. Bauer, J. Donaubauer, B.A. Narayanan, M. Soldani, D. Riley, and K. McFarland, "Dealing with the Impact of Ritonavir Polymorphs on the Late Stages of Bulk Drug Process Development", Organic Process Research & Development, vol. 4, pp. 413-417, 2000. https://doi.org/10.1021/op000023y

Tags:, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Interesting chemistry | No Comments »