Compound Aggregation in Drug Discovery: Implementing a Practical NMR Assay for Medicinal Chemists
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The pharmaceutical industry has recognized that many drug-like molecules can self-aggregate in aqueous media and have physicochemical properties that skew experimental results and decisions. Herein, we introduce the use of a simple NMR strategy for detecting the formation of aggregates using dilution experiments that can be performed on equipment prevalent in most synthetic chemistry departments. We show that (1)H NMR resonances are sensitive to large molecular-size entities and to smaller multimers and mixtures of species. Practical details are provided for sample preparation and for determining the concentrations of single molecule, aggregate entities, and precipitate. The critical concentrations above which aggregation begins can be found and were corroborated by comparisons with light scattering techniques. Disaggregation can also be monitored using detergents. This NMR assay should serve as a practical and readily available tool for medicinal chemists to better characterize how their compounds behave in aqueous media and influence drug design decisions.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it