Predictable disorder versus polymorphism in the rationalization of structural diversity: A multidisciplinary study of eniluracil

Crystal Growth and Design

Volumn 8, Issue 9, 2008, Pages 3474-3481

  Copley, Royston C B ^a   Barnett, Sarah A ^b,d   Karamertzanis, Panagiotis G ^b   Harris, Kenneth D M ^c   Kariuki, Benson M ^c   Xu, Mingcan ^c   Nickels, E Anne ^a,e   Lancaster, Robert W ^b   Price, Sarah L ^b  

^a GLAXOSMITHKLINE   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

^c CARDIFF UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

^d DIAMOND LIGHT SOURCE LTD   (United Kingdom)

^e UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 56549097994     PISSN: 15287483     EISSN: 15287505     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1021/cg800517h     Document Type: Article

References (62)

1. Bernstein, J. Polymorphism in Molecular Crystals; Clarendon Press: Oxford, 2002.
2. Britain, H. G. Polymorphism in Pharmaceutical Solids; Marcel Dekker AG: Basel, Switzerland, 2005; Vol. 95.
3. Davey, R. J. Chem.Commun. 2003, 1463-1467.
4. Bernstein, J. Chem.Commun. 2005, 5007-5012.
5. Dunitz, J. D. Acta Crystallogr., Sect. B 1995, 51, 619-631.
6. Threlfall, T. L. Analyst 1995, 120, 2435-2460.
7. Desiraju, G. R. Cryst. Growth Des. 2008, 8, 3-5.
8. van de Streck, J.; Motherwell, S. Acta Crystallogr., Sect.B 2005, 61, 504-510.
9. Allen, F. H.; Taylor, R. Chem. Soc. Rev. 2004, 33, 463-475.
10. de Gelder, R.; Wehrens, R.; Hageman, J. A. J. Comput. Chem. 2001, 22, 273-289.
11. Gavezzotti, A. J. Pharm. Sci. 2007, 96, 2232-2241.
12. Adherex Technologies Inc Eniluracil; http://www.adherex.com/products/ eniluracil, 2007.
13. Seek, K.; Riemer, S.; Kates, R.; Ullrich, T.; Lutz, V.; Harbeck, N.; Schmitt, M.; Kiechle, M.; Diasio, R.; Gross, E. Clin. Cancer Res. 2005, 11, 5886-5892.
14. 1. Structure solution was carried out directly from the powder X-ray diffraction data using the direct-space genetic algorithm (GA) technique (b-d), incorporated in an early version of the program EAGER (e). The structure solution involved a single rigid molecule of eniluracil in the asymmetric unit. The best structure solution obtained in the GA calculation was taken as the starting structural model for Rietveld refinement using the program GSAS (f) (final refined unit cell: a = 7.1969(8) Å, b = 6.8189(6) Å, c = 5.8633(7) Å, β = 92.957(6)°). It was noted that there is selective broadening of some peaks in the powder X-ray diffraction pattern, which strongly alludes to the existence of stacking disorder of the sheets in the structure (the broadening is particularly prominent for the peak at 20 = 23.9°, which is indexed as (102) and corresponds to the planes of the sheets in the refined structure). No attempt was made to cany out Rietveld refinements for disordered structural models. (a) Psallidas, K.; Kariuki, B. M.; Harris, K. D. M.; Lancaster, R. W. Research Project Report Submitted to Glaxo Wellcome (23 April, 1999).
15. (b) Kariuki, B. M.; Serrano-González, H.; Johnston, R. L.; Harris, K. D. M. Chem. Phys. Lett. 1997, 280, 189.
16. (c) Harris, K. D. M.; Johnston, R. L.; Kariuki, B. M. Acta Crystallogr. 1998, A54, 632.
17. (d) Kariuki, B. M.; Psallidas, K.; Harris, K. D. M.; Johnston, R. L.; Lancaster, R. W.; Staniforth, S. E.; Cooper, S. M. Chem. Commun. 1999, 1677.
18. (e) Habershon, S.; Zhou, Z.; Turner, G. W.; Kariuki, B. M.; Cheung, E. Y.; Hanson, A. J.; Tedesco, E.; Johnston, R. L., Harris, K. D. M. EAGER - A Computer Program for Direct-Space Structure Solution from Powder X-ray diffraction Data, Cardiff University and University of Birmingham.
19. (f) Larson, A. C.; Von Dreele, R. B. GSAS, Los Alamos Laboratory Report No. LA-UR-86-748; Los Alamos National Laboratory: Los Alamos, NM, 1987.
20. 1/c, but the atomic coordinates of this structure are not available. Although the unit cell is very similar to that of structure 1, and we can reproduce the published packing diagrams using ak56 or one ordered component of 1, the difference in space group setting implies a different packing of the nonpolar ribbons. Our discussions with the authors show that it is now impossible to determine whether this is a genuine difference. Sacchetti, M.; Varlashkin, P. G.; Long, S. T.; Lancaster, R. W. J. Pharm. Sci. 2001, 90, 1049-1055.
21. SAINT+, version 6.45; Bruker AXS Inc.: Madison, WI, 2003.
22. Sheldrick, G. M. SADABS, version 2.10; Bruker AXS Inc.: Madison, WI, 2003.
23. Sheldrick, G. M. SHELXTL, version 6.10, UNIX; Bruker AXS Inc.: Madison, WI, 2001.
24. SHELXTL, version 6.10 XP; Bruker AXS Inc.: Madison, WI, 2000.
25. Macrae, C. F.; Edgington, P. R.; McCabe, P.; Pidcock, E.; Shields, G. P.; Taylor, R.; Towler, M.; De Streck, J. J. Appl. Crystallogr. 2006, 39, 453-457.
26. GAUSSIAN 98, version A6; Frisch, M. J. et al. Gaussian Inc.: Pittsburgh, 1998.
27. Holden, J. R.; Du, Z. Y.; Ammon, H. L. J. Comput. Chem. 1993, 14, 422-437.
28. Price, S. L.; Willock, D. J.; Leslie, M.; Day, G. M. DMAREL 3.02, 2001.
29. Willock, D. J.; Price, S. L.; Leslie, M.; Callow, C. R. A. J. Comput. Chem. 1995, 16, 628-647.
30. Stone, A. J.; Alderton, M. Mol. Phys. 1985, 56, 1047-1064.
31. Stone, A. J. The Theory of Intermolecular Forces, 1st ed.; Clarendon Press: Oxford, 1996.
32. Buckingham, A. D.; Fowler, P. W.; Stone, A. J. Int. Rev. Phys. Chem. 1986, 5, 107-114.
33. Hurst, G. J. B.; Fowler, P. W.; Stone, A. J.; Buckingham, A. D Int. J. Quantum Chem. 1986, 29, 1223-1239.
34. Price, S. L J. Chem. Soc. Faraday Trans. 1996, 92, 2997-3008.
35. Cox, S. R.; Hsu, L. Y.; Williams, D. E. Acta Crystallogr., Sect A 1981, 37, 293-301.
36. Williams, D. E.; Cox, S. R. Acta Crystallogr., Sect. B 1984, 40, 404-417.
37. Coombes, D. S.; Price, S. L.; Willock, D. J.; Leslie, M. J. Phys. Chem. 1996, 100, 7352-7360.
38. Day, G. M.; Price, S. L.; Leslie, M. J. Phys. Chem. B 2003, 107, 10919-10933.
39. Stemglanz, H.; Bugg, C. E. Blochim. Biophys. Acta 1975, 378, 1-11.
40. Hempel, A.; Lane, B. G.; Camerman, N. Acta Crystallogr., Sect. C 1997, 53, 1707-1709.
41. Copley, R. C. B.; Deprez, L. S.; Lewis, T. C.; Price, S. L. CrystEngComm 2005, 7, 421-428.
42. Ozeki, K.; Sakabe, N.; Tanaka, J. Acta Crystallogr., Sect. B 1969, 25, 1038-1045.
43. Portalone, G.; Bencivenni, L.; Colapietro, M.; Pieretti, A.; Ramondo, F. Acta Chem. Scand. 1999, 53, 57-68.
44. Chern, J. W.; Wise, D. S.; Butler, W.; Townsend, L. B. J. Org. Chem. 1988, 53, 5622-5628.
45. Lewis, T. C.; Tocher, D. A.; Price, S. L. Cryst. Growth Des. 2005, 5, 983-993.
46. Dunitz, J. D.; Schweizer, W. B. CrystEngComm 2007, 9, 266-269.
47. van Eijck, B. P.; Kroon, J. J. Phys. Chem. B 1997, 101, 1096-1100.
48. Chisholm, J. A.; Motherwell, S. J. Appl. Crystallogr. 2005, 38, 228-231.
49. Since crystal structure determination from X-ray diffraction data gives an averaged representation of the actual structure over all unit cells in the crystal, we cannot deduce a priori whether the structure comprises: (a) ordered domains containing only orientation A and ordered domains containing only orientation B, or (b) a situation in which, in each region of the crystal, each individual molecule has a statistical probability of having orientation A or B. In case (b), the disorder exists at the molecular level and, in principle, the orientation of a given molecule may be uncorrelated with the orientations of its neighbours and can be dynamic or static. For case (a), the molecules in the ordered domains have a well-defined set of interactions with their neighbours (analogous to a conventional ordered crystal structure), whereas for case (b), a range of different local intermolecular environments may exist, depending on the orientation of a given molecule and the set of orientations of its neighbors. Robinson, J. M. A.; Kariuki, B. M.; Harris, K. D. M.; Philp, D. J. Chem. Soc., Perkin Trans. 1998, 2, 2459.
50. Violuric acid monohydrate does show this close C=O⋯O=C interaction of 2.779 Å in a symmetric ribbon structure, but this is stabilized by a water hydrogen bonding motif. Nichol, G. S.; Clegg, W. Acta Crystallogr., Sect. E 2005, 61, O3788-O3790.
51. Harding, M. M. J. Synchrotron Radiat. 1996, 3, 250-259.
52. van de Streek, J.; de Gelder, R. CalculateSimilarity: A Program to Calculate the Similarity of Two Crystal Structures; Cambridge Crystallographic Data Centre: Cambridge, UK, 2005.
53. Meejoo, S.; Kariuki, B. M.; Kitchin, S. J.; Cheung, E. Y.; Albesa-Jove, D.; Harris, K. D. M. Helv. Chim. Acta 2003, 86, 1467-1477.
54. Tremayne, M.; Grice, L.; Pyatt, J. C.; Seaton, C. C.; Kariuki, B. M.; Tsui, H. H. Y.; Price, S. L.; Cherryman, J. C. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2004, 126, 7071-7081.
55. Ouvrard, C.; Price, S. L. Cryst. Growth Des. 2004, 4, 1119-1127.
56. Vishweshwar, P.; McMahon, J. A.; Oliveira, M.; Peterson, M. L.; Zaworotko, M. J. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2005, 127, 16802-16803.
57. Bond, A. D.; Boese, R.; Desiraju, G. R. Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. 2007, 46, 618-622.
58. Carlucci, L.; Gavezzotti, A. Chem. Eur. J. 2005, 11, 271-279.
59. Barnett, S. A.; Hulme, A. T.; Issa, N.; Lewis, T. C.; Price, L. S.; Tocher, D. A.; Price, S. L. New J. Chem. 2008, doi: 10.1039/b806763e.
60. Torrisi, A.; Leech, C. K.; Shankland, K.; David, W. I. F.; Ibberson, R. M.; Benet-Buchholz, J.; Boese, R.; Leslie, M.; Catlow, C. R. A.; Price, S. L. J. Phys. Chem. B 2008, 12, 3746-3758.
61. Winkel, K.; Hage, W.; Loerting, T.; Price, S. L.; Mayer, E. J. Am Chem. Soc. 2007, 129, 13863-13871.
62. Spek, A. L. PLATON, A Multipurpose Crystallographic Tool; Utrecht University: Utrecht, The Netherlands, 2003.