Elucidating an Amorphous Form Stabilization Mechanism for Tenapanor Hydrochloride: Crystal Structure Analysis Using X-ray Diffraction, NMR Crystallography, and Molecular Modeling
Bibliographic record
Abstract
By the combined use of powder and single-crystal X-ray diffraction, solid-state NMR, and molecular modeling, the crystal structures of two systems containing the unusually large tenapanor drug molecule have been determined: the free form, ANHY, and a dihydrochloride salt form, 2HCl . Dynamic nuclear polarization (DNP) assisted solid-state NMR (SSNMR) crystallography investigations were found essential for the final assignment and were used to validate the crystal structure of ANHY . From a structural informatics analysis of ANHY and 2HCl, conformational ring differences in one part of the molecule were observed which influence the relative orientation of a methyl group on a ring nitrogen and thereby impact the crystallizability of the dihydrochloride salt. From quantum chemistry calculations, the dynamics between different ring conformations in tenapanor is predicted to be fast. Addition of HCl to tenapanor results in general in a mixture of protonated ring conformers and hence a statistical mix of diastereoisomers which builds up the amorphous form, a-2HCl . This was qualitatively verified by 13 C CP/MAS NMR investigations of the amorphous form. Thus, to form any significant amount of the crystalline material 2HCl, which originates from the minor (i.e., energetically less stable) ring conformations, one needs to involve nitrogen deprotonation to allow exchange between the minor and major conformations of ANHY in solution. Thus, by controlling the solution pH value to well below the p K a of ANHY, the equilibrium between ANHY and 2HCl can be controlled and by this mechanism the crystallization of 2HCl can be avoided and the amorphous form of the dichloride salt can therefore be stabilized.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".