How to Calculate Process Mass Intensity (PMI) for Drug Substance: A Guide for Sustainable Pharma Development

Abstract

This article provides a comprehensive guide for researchers, scientists, and drug development professionals on calculating and applying Process Mass Intensity (PMI) for drug substances. It covers the foundational principles of PMI as a key green chemistry metric, detailed methodological steps for calculation across different drug modalities, strategies for troubleshooting and optimizing processes to reduce PMI, and finally, approaches for validating and benchmarking PMI against industry standards. The content synthesizes current tools, best practices, and industry data to equip professionals with the knowledge to enhance the sustainability and efficiency of pharmaceutical development.

Understanding PMI: The Essential Green Metric for Drug Substance

Defining Process Mass Intensity (PMI) and Its Core Formula

Process Mass Intensity (PMI) is a key green chemistry metric used to benchmark the efficiency and environmental impact of manufacturing processes, particularly in the pharmaceutical industry. It provides a quantitative measure of the total mass of materials required to produce a specified mass of a product, thereby driving the development of more sustainable and cost-effective synthetic routes for drug substances [1] [2].

Core Principle and Mathematical Definition

At its core, PMI is a ratio that offers a holistic assessment of the mass requirements of a process, including synthesis, purification, and isolation [3]. It moves beyond traditional metrics like yield or atom economy by accounting for all material inputs, such as solvents, water, reagents, and catalysts [4] [5].

The standard formula for calculating PMI is:

PMI = Total Mass of All Inputs (kg) / Mass of Product (kg)

Where the "Total Mass of All Inputs" encompasses all reactants, reagents, solvents (used in reaction and purification), catalysts, and water used in the process [1] [6] [3]. The output, "Mass of Product," typically refers to the mass of the bulk active pharmaceutical ingredient (API) produced [6]. A lower PMI value indicates a more resource-efficient and environmentally favorable process [5].

Figure 1: The PMI Calculation Formula Flow

PMI Calculation Methodology for Drug Substance Research

For drug development professionals, calculating PMI involves a systematic accounting of all materials consumed in the process up to the isolation of the bulk API.

Data Collection Protocol

The first step is to meticulously record the masses of all materials introduced into the process. This includes:

• Reactants: All starting materials and reagents.
• Solvents: All solvents used in reaction, work-up, and purification stages.
• Catalysts: Homogeneous and heterogeneous catalysts.
• Water: Process water used in aqueous work-ups, crystallizations, or washes [1] [3].

Mass data should be collected from experimental records for laboratory-scale reactions or from batch manufacturing records for pilot and production-scale processes.

Calculation Workflow

The general workflow for determining PMI is as follows:

• Sum all input masses: Sum the masses (in kg) of all the materials used in the process.
• Record product mass: Record the mass (in kg) of the final, isolated bulk API.
• Apply the PMI formula: Divide the total input mass by the product mass.

For complex, multi-step syntheses, the ACS GCI Pharmaceutical Roundtable recommends using a Convergent PMI Calculator, which uses the same fundamental calculation but allows for the input of multiple branches in a convergent synthesis [2].

Step-by-Step Experimental Determination

The following workflow outlines the key stages for experimentally determining PMI during drug substance research:

Figure 2: PMI Experimental Determination Workflow

PMI in Pharmaceutical Development

The pharmaceutical industry has adopted PMI as a key metric to benchmark and drive improvements in API manufacturing sustainability.

Industry Benchmarking

The ACS GCI Pharmaceutical Roundtable conducts regular PMI benchmarking exercises, which have revealed that solvents constitute the largest proportion (approximately 58%) of total material inputs, followed by water (28%) and reactants (8%) [6]. This insight directs optimization efforts towards solvent selection and recycling.

Extensive benchmarking has established typical PMI ranges for different therapeutic modalities, providing critical context for assessing the relative efficiency of a given process.

Table 1: PMI Benchmarks Across Therapeutic Modalities

Therapeutic Modality	Typical PMI Range (kg input/kg API)	Key Factors Influencing PMI
Small Molecule APIs [3]	Median: 168 - 308	Number of synthetic steps, solvent usage, atom economy.
Biologics [3]	Average: ~8,300	Cell culture media, water for injection, purification resins.
Oligonucleotides [3]	Average: ~4,299 (Range: 3,035 - 7,023)	Excess reagents and solvents in solid-phase synthesis, challenging purifications.
Synthetic Peptides [3]	Average: ~13,000	Large excess of solvents and reagents in Solid-Phase Peptide Synthesis (SPPS).

Application in Process Optimization

PMI is used throughout the drug development lifecycle. In early-phase research, PMI predictions can help compare potential synthetic routes before laboratory work begins [1]. As a process moves to manufacturing, PMI tracking quantifies sustainability improvements from route scouting and process optimization, often leading to significant cost savings and waste reduction [1] [2].

Advanced PMI Concepts and Tools

Comparison with Other Green Metrics

PMI provides a more comprehensive evaluation than other common metrics. While atom economy only measures the efficiency of a reaction's design, and chemical yield measures the conversion of the limiting reactant, PMI includes all resource requirements, such as solvents and other non-reagent inputs [3]. It is closely related to the Complete Environmental Factor (cEF), which measures the total waste stream [3].

Evolution towards Manufacturing Mass Intensity

The industry is evolving beyond simple PMI to a broader metric called Manufacturing Mass Intensity (MMI). MMI builds upon PMI by also accounting for other raw materials required for API manufacturing, such as acids, bases, and filtration aids used in upstream processing, providing an even more complete picture of resource use [7].

Calculation and Prediction Tools

The ACS GCI Pharmaceutical Roundtable has developed several publicly available tools to support researchers:

• PMI Calculator: For basic calculations on linear syntheses.
• Convergent PMI Calculator: For complex syntheses with multiple branches.
• PMI Prediction Calculator: Estimates probable PMI ranges for a chemical route prior to laboratory evaluation, enabling early-stage route comparison [1] [2].

The Researcher's Toolkit for PMI Assessment

Table 2: Essential Components for PMI Calculation and Analysis

Tool or Material	Function in PMI Determination
Analytical Balance	Precisely measures masses of input materials and the final, isolated API product.
Reaction Mass Inventory	A standardized log for recording the mass of every reactant, solvent, and reagent used.
Convergent PMI Calculator	Software tool for calculating the overall PMI of complex, multi-branch synthetic routes.
Solvent Recovery System	Equipment to distill and recycle solvents, directly reducing the PMI of a process.
Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) Database	Provides pre-loaded environmental data for a deeper analysis of inputs, used in advanced PMI-LCA tools.
Green Chemistry Solvent Guide	Informs solvent selection to replace hazardous, high-PMI solvents with safer, more efficient alternatives.

The Critical Role of PMI in Sustainable Pharmaceutical Manufacturing

Process Mass Intensity (PMI) has emerged as a critical metric for quantifying the environmental footprint of pharmaceutical manufacturing processes. This technical guide provides a comprehensive framework for calculating and applying PMI in drug substance research, offering detailed methodologies, comparative data analysis, and strategic implementation protocols. By establishing standardized PMI assessment procedures, researchers and drug development professionals can systematically evaluate and improve the sustainability of both chemical and biological manufacturing processes, aligning with growing regulatory pressures and corporate sustainability initiatives. The integration of PMI metrics early in drug development enables significant reductions in material consumption, waste generation, and environmental impact while maintaining product quality and process efficiency.

Process Mass Intensity represents a comprehensive green chemistry metric that measures the total mass of materials used to produce a specified quantity of drug substance. Unlike simple yield calculations, PMI accounts for all inputs including reactants, solvents, reagents, and process aids throughout the synthesis pathway, providing a more complete picture of resource efficiency and environmental impact. In the context of sustainable pharmaceutical manufacturing, PMI serves as a key performance indicator (KPI) for assessing the "greenness" of manufacturing processes, with lower PMI values indicating more efficient and environmentally favorable processes [8].

The pharmaceutical industry faces increasing pressure to improve sustainability due to several converging factors: regulatory requirements from agencies like the FDA and EMA, investor expectations for environmental, social, and governance (ESG) performance, and growing societal demand for environmentally responsible business practices [9] [10]. Within this landscape, PMI has gained prominence as it directly addresses the industry's significant environmental challenges, particularly the high resource consumption and waste generation characteristic of pharmaceutical manufacturing. A comprehensive PMI assessment enables organizations to benchmark processes, identify improvement opportunities, and make data-driven decisions that balance environmental and economic objectives throughout the drug development lifecycle.

PMI Calculation Methodology

Fundamental Calculation Framework

The standard PMI calculation formula provides the foundation for all subsequent analysis and benchmarking activities:

PMI = Total Mass of Materials Input (kg) / Mass of Drug Substance Output (kg)

This calculation encompasses all materials entering the process that do not form part of the final product, including reagents, solvents, catalysts, and process aids. Water may be included or excluded depending on organizational standards, though consistency in application is crucial for comparative analyses [8].

For early-stage research where complete process data may be unavailable, researchers can apply simplified PMI calculations focused specifically on the reaction mass intensity (RMI), which considers only materials directly involved in synthetic steps. However, for comprehensive environmental assessment, the full PMI accounting is essential once process parameters are sufficiently defined.

Advanced PMI Metrics and Variations

Beyond the basic PMI calculation, several specialized metrics provide additional insights for specific applications:

• Simple Process Mass Intensity (PMI): The standard calculation as defined above
• Complete Process Mass Intensity (cPMI): Includes all process inputs including water
• Solvent Mass Intensity (SMI): Focuses specifically on solvent usage, typically the largest contributor to PMI in pharmaceutical manufacturing
• Water Intensity (WI): Quantifies water consumption separately, particularly relevant for biologics manufacturing
• Renewable Mass Intensity (RMI): Measures the proportion of materials from renewable sources

Each variant serves distinct analytical purposes, though the standard PMI remains the primary benchmarking metric for most sustainability assessments in drug substance research.

Comparative PMI Analysis: Batch vs. Continuous Processes

Recent studies have provided quantitative comparisons of PMI across different manufacturing platforms, offering critical benchmarking data for process development decisions. The following table summarizes key findings from comparative assessments of biologics manufacturing:

Table 1: PMI Comparison Between Batch and Continuous Manufacturing Processes for Monoclonal Antibodies

Process Type	Typical PMI Range	Key Influencing Factors	Process Productivity (g DS/L/day)
Traditional Batch	5,000 - 15,000	Bioreactor scale, titers, purification yields	0.5 - 1.5
Intensified Batch	3,000 - 8,000	Process intensification, higher cell densities	1.5 - 3.0
Continuous Processing	4,500 - 12,000	Perfusion rates, integrated continuous purification	2.0 - 5.0+

Analysis of these comparative data reveals that continuous processes can demonstrate PMI values comparable to or slightly better than traditional batch processes, though the relationship is complex and highly dependent on specific process parameters [8]. The significant advantage of continuous processing emerges when considering productivity per unit time, where continuous processes typically achieve multifold higher output of drug substance (DS) from equivalent bioreactor scales, thereby distributing fixed mass inputs across larger product outputs.

Sensitivity analysis further indicates that PMI in continuous biologics processes is most strongly influenced by cell culture media consumption, buffer usage in downstream purification, and single-use consumable utilization. This highlights the importance of a holistic assessment beyond simple PMI comparisons when evaluating overall environmental sustainability.

Experimental Protocols for PMI Assessment

Standardized PMI Data Collection Protocol

Consistent PMI assessment requires rigorous data collection throughout process development. The following protocol establishes minimum requirements for reliable PMI calculation:

Materials and Equipment:

• Analytical balance (precision ±0.1 mg)
• Process documentation system (electronic laboratory notebook preferred)
• Standardized material tracking templates
• Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDS) for all process materials

Procedure:

• Define process boundaries - clearly establish start and end points for assessment (typically from first synthetic step to final purified drug substance)
• Catalog all input materials - document mass or volume of all materials entering the process boundary
• Record drug substance output - measure mass of final drug substance with documented purity
• Calculate individual PMI components - determine contribution of each material category (solvents, reagents, etc.)
• Document process exceptions - note any materials excluded from calculation with justification
• Verify data completeness - ensure all process inputs are accounted for, including catalysts and process aids

This protocol should be applied consistently across comparable processes to ensure valid benchmarking and trend analysis.

Lifecycle Assessment Integration Protocol

While PMI provides valuable material efficiency data, comprehensive sustainability assessment requires integration with additional environmental metrics:

Supplementary Data Collection:

• Energy consumption - document electricity, steam, and other energy inputs throughout manufacturing
• Water consumption - track direct and indirect water usage separately
• Waste streams - characterize and quantify all liquid, solid, and gaseous emissions
• Renewable material inputs - document bio-based or recycled material content

This expanded data collection enables calculation of complementary environmental metrics including carbon footprint, energy intensity, and water footprint, providing a more complete sustainability profile alongside PMI.

Research Reagent Solutions for PMI Optimization

Table 2: Essential Research Reagents and Materials for Sustainable Process Development

Reagent Category	Specific Examples	Function in Process Development	PMI Impact Considerations
Green Solvents	2-MethylTHF, Cyrene, dimethyl isosorbide	Replacement for class 1 and 2 solvents	Reduces solvent-related PMI and environmental toxicity
Catalytic Reagents	Immobilized enzymes, heterogeneous metal catalysts, flow chemistry catalysts	Enable catalytic rather than stoichiometric processes	Reduces reagent PMI through improved efficiency and recovery
Process Analytical Technology	In-line IR/Raman probes, UV/Vis flow cells, particle size analyzers	Real-time monitoring and control of reaction parameters	Optimizes process efficiency, reduces failed batches and associated PMI
Alternative Reagents	Mechanochemical reagents, bio-based starting materials, sustainable chiral auxiliaries	Replace resource-intensive conventional materials	Lower embedded energy and improved renewability profile
Separation Media	Simulated moving bed chromatography, membrane separations, aqueous two-phase systems	Product purification and isolation	Reduces solvent and material consumption in downstream processing

Strategic selection and implementation of these reagent solutions enables significant PMI reduction while maintaining or improving process performance. The most effective PMI optimization strategies typically involve solvent substitution, catalytic process design, and process intensification approaches.

Process Visualization and Workflow

Diagram 1: PMI Assessment Workflow

The systematic workflow for PMI assessment and optimization involves clearly defined stages with iterative improvement cycles. This structured approach ensures comprehensive data collection and analysis while facilitating continuous process enhancement.

Advanced Applications and Industry Trends

PMI in Emerging Therapeutic Modalities

The application of PMI assessment is expanding beyond traditional small molecules to encompass advanced therapeutic medicinal products (ATMPs), including cell and gene therapies, oligonucleotides, and personalized medicines [11]. These novel modalities present unique PMI assessment challenges due to their complex manufacturing processes, low production volumes, and specialized material requirements. For these emerging therapies, PMI calculations must often be adapted to account for biological starting materials, viral vectors, and specialized growth factors that may have significant environmental footprints.

The gene editing sector, in particular, requires specialized PMI assessment approaches due to its reliance on guide RNA, CRISPR components, and delivery systems like lipid nanoparticles (LNPs). The trend toward all-in-one CDMO solutions for these complex therapies highlights the industry's recognition of the need for integrated approaches that can optimize PMI across the entire manufacturing process [11].

Strategic Implications and Future Directions

Leading pharmaceutical organizations are increasingly integrating PMI considerations into strategic decision-making processes, including portfolio management, technology investments, and external partnerships [12]. The forward-looking approach involves:

• Predictive PMI Modeling: Leveraging AI and machine learning to forecast PMI during early development stages based on molecular structure and proposed synthetic routes [9]
• Process Intensification: Implementing continuous manufacturing and integrated processing to dramatically reduce PMI through improved efficiency [8]
• Circ Economy Integration: Developing processes designed for material recovery, reuse, and recycling to minimize net PMI
• Regulatory Alignment: Preparing for anticipated regulatory requirements incorporating environmental assessments in submission packages

These strategic initiatives position organizations to not only improve environmental performance but also achieve significant cost reductions and competitive advantages in an increasingly sustainability-focused market landscape.

Process Mass Intensity has evolved from a niche green chemistry metric to an essential tool for sustainable pharmaceutical manufacturing. By implementing robust PMI calculation methodologies early in drug substance research, organizations can systematically identify improvement opportunities, reduce environmental impact, and create more efficient manufacturing processes. The continuing evolution of PMI assessment—encompassing novel therapeutic modalities, advanced analytical techniques, and strategic business integration—ensures its ongoing relevance in driving sustainability improvements across the pharmaceutical industry. As pressure for environmentally responsible manufacturing intensifies, PMI will undoubtedly play an increasingly central role in shaping the development and commercialization of future medicines.

In the pursuit of sustainable drug substance research, green chemistry metrics provide indispensable tools for quantifying the environmental footprint of synthetic processes. For researchers, scientists, and drug development professionals, selecting the appropriate metric is critical for accurately assessing and improving process sustainability. This guide focuses on four pivotal metrics—Process Mass Intensity (PMI), Atom Economy (AE), complete Environmental Factor (cEF), and Life Cycle Assessment (LCA)—each offering a distinct perspective on efficiency and environmental impact. The American Chemical Society Green Chemistry Institute (ACS GCI) Pharmaceutical Roundtable has endorsed PMI as the key green metric for the pharmaceutical industry, prioritizing its use for driving sustainable process design due to its comprehensive accounting of all material inputs [13]. However, a deep understanding of the strengths and limitations of each metric, summarized in the table below, is essential for their correct application in drug development.

Table 1: Core Green Chemistry Metrics for Drug Substance Research

Metric	Definition	Key Equation	What It Measures	What It Omits	Primary Use Case in Pharma
Process Mass Intensity (PMI)	Total mass of materials used per mass of product [13].	( PMI = \frac{\text{Total Mass of Inputs (kg)}}{\text{Mass of Product (kg)}} )	All reagents, solvents, water, and process aids used in the synthesis [13].	Environmental hazard of the waste; energy-related waste [14].	Industry-standard for benchmarking and optimizing API processes [15].
Atom Economy (AE)	Molecular weight of desired product vs. total molecular weight of reactants [16].	( AE = \frac{\text{MW of Product}}{\sum \text{MW of Reactants}} \times 100\% )	Ideal incorporation of reactant atoms into the final product [16].	Yield, solvents, catalysts, and energy; actual experimental conditions [16].	Early route design for comparing theoretical efficiency of different pathways [17].
complete E-Factor (cEF)	Total waste produced per mass of product, including solvents and water [14].	( cEF = \frac{\text{Total Mass of Waste (kg)}}{\text{Mass of Product (kg)}} )	Everything but the desired product, with no recycling assumed [14].	Nature and environmental impact of the waste stream [14].	Highlighting the total waste burden of a process, particularly for solvent-heavy API syntheses.
Life Cycle Assessment (LCA)	Holistic evaluation of environmental impacts from raw material extraction to disposal [18].	N/A (Multi-criteria assessment)	Global warming potential, eutrophication, toxicity, resource use, etc., across the entire life cycle [19].	Requires extensive data; can be complex and time-consuming [15].	Strategic decision-making for comparing overall environmental footprint of different feedstocks or technologies [19].

Detailed Metric Analysis and Calculation Protocols

Process Mass Intensity (PMI): The Industry Benchmark

PMI has emerged as the preferred mass-based metric in the pharmaceutical industry because it provides a direct measure of overall resource efficiency [13]. Its calculation requires a comprehensive inventory of all materials entering the process.

Experimental Protocol for Calculating PMI:

• Define the System Boundary: Typically, this is a "gate-to-gate" analysis covering all steps from the input of the defined starting material to the isolation of the purified Active Pharmaceutical Ingredient (API).
• Record Mass Inputs: For a given batch or process cycle, meticulously record the masses (in kg) of all inputs. This must include:
  • Starting Materials & Reagents
  • Solvents (including those for reaction, work-up, and purification)
  • Catalysts
  • Water
  • Process Aids (e.g., filtering agents, drying agents)
• Record Mass Output: Weigh the final, isolated, and dried API (in kg).
• Calculate PMI: Sum all input masses from step 2 and divide by the output mass from step 3.

Example Calculation: Consider a single-step synthesis to produce 0.5 kg of a drug substance:

• Inputs: Starting Material (1.2 kg), Reagent (0.8 kg), Solvent A (5.0 kg), Solvent B (3.0 kg), Water (4.0 kg), Catalyst (0.1 kg).
• Total Mass of Inputs = 1.2 + 0.8 + 5.0 + 3.0 + 4.0 + 0.1 = 14.1 kg
• Mass of Product = 0.5 kg
• PMI = 14.1 kg / 0.5 kg = 28.2 kg/kg

The ACS GCI Pharmaceutical Roundtable has developed specialized tools, such as the Biopharma PMI Calculator, to standardize this calculation for biologic drug substances, underscoring PMI's role in industry-wide benchmarking [20].

Atom Economy (AE) and complete E-Factor (cEF)

Atom Economy (AE) is a theoretical metric developed by Barry Trost that reveals the maximum potential efficiency of a reaction [16] [17]. It is calculated solely from the stoichiometry and molecular weights of the reaction, assuming 100% yield and perfect selectivity.

Experimental Protocol for Calculating Atom Economy:

• Identify the Balanced Reaction Equation: Write the equation for the specific chemical transformation.
• Sum Molecular Weights of Reactants: Add the molecular weights of all stoichiometric reactants.
• Calculate AE: Divide the molecular weight of the desired product by the total from step 2 and multiply by 100.

Example Calculation: For the classic bromination of butanol: ( \text{H}3\text{C}-\text{CH}2-\text{CH}2-\text{CH}2-\text{OH} + \text{NaBr} + \text{H}2\text{SO}4 \rightarrow \text{H}3\text{C}-\text{CH}2-\text{CH}2-\text{CH}2-\text{Br} + \text{NaHSO}4 + \text{H}2\text{O} )

• MW of desired product (butyl bromide) = 137 g/mol
• Sum of MW of reactants = (74 + 103 + 98) g/mol = 275 g/mol
• AE = (137 / 275) * 100% = 49.8% [17]

complete E-Factor (cEF), pioneered by Roger Sheldon, quantifies the actual waste generated by a process [14]. The "complete" variant includes all materials used, counting solvents and water without assuming any recycling.

Experimental Protocol for Calculating cEF:

• Follow PMI Input Recording: Use the same comprehensive mass inventory as for PMI calculation.
• Calculate Total Waste: Total Mass of Waste = Total Mass of Inputs - Mass of Product
• Calculate cEF: Divide the Total Mass of Waste by the Mass of Product.

Example Calculation: Using the same process data from the PMI example above:

• Total Mass of Inputs = 14.1 kg
• Mass of Product = 0.5 kg
• Total Mass of Waste = 14.1 kg - 0.5 kg = 13.6 kg
• cEF = 13.6 kg / 0.5 kg = 27.2 kg/kg

Note that PMI = cEF + 1, demonstrating their fundamental relationship.

Life Cycle Assessment (LCA): The Systems Approach

LCA is a comprehensive, standardized methodology (ISO 14040/14044) that moves beyond simple mass balance to evaluate a wide range of environmental impacts over the entire life of a product [18] [19].

Experimental Protocol for Streamlined (Cradle-to-Gate) LCA:

• Goal and Scope Definition: Define the purpose and the system boundaries. For API research, a "cradle-to-gate" approach (from raw material extraction to the finished API at the factory gate) is most common [18]. Establish the functional unit (e.g., 1 kg of purified API).
• Life Cycle Inventory (LCI): Compile a detailed inventory of all energy and material flows. This includes not only reaction inputs but also the upstream burdens of producing those inputs (e.g., the energy to manufacture a solvent or the agriculture to grow a biomass feedstock) [19]. Database like Ecoinvent are often used.
• Life Cycle Impact Assessment (LCIA): Translate the inventory data into multiple environmental impact categories, such as:
  • Global Warming Potential (GWP)
  • Water Consumption
  • Human Toxicity Potential
  • Ecotoxicity Potential
  • Abiotic Resource Depletion [19]
• Interpretation: Analyze the results to identify environmental "hotspots," assess trade-offs, and support decision-making.

To bridge the gap between simple PMI and a full LCA, the Streamlined PMI-LCA Tool has been developed. It combines the ease of PMI with cradle-to-gate environmental impact data for common chemical inputs, allowing for rapid assessment during process development without the burden of a full LCA [15].

Decision Framework and Research Toolkit

Selecting the Right Metric

The choice of metric depends on the stage of drug development and the specific question being asked. The following diagram illustrates the typical application of these metrics throughout the API development lifecycle.

The Scientist's Toolkit for Green Metrics Calculation

Implementing these metrics requires both methodological knowledge and the right tools. The following table lists essential resources for researchers.

Table 2: Essential Reagent Solutions and Tools for Green Metric Analysis

Tool / Resource	Type/Function	Application in Drug Substance Research
ACS GCI Biopharma PMI Calculator [20]	Standardized Metric Tool	Provides a common method for collecting mass data and calculating PMI for biologic drug substances, enabling objective comparison.
Solvent Selection Guides [14]	Hazard Assessment Tool	Traffic-light guides (Green/Amber/Red) developed in-house by pharmaceutical companies to promote substitution of hazardous solvents with safer alternatives.
Streamlined PMI-LCA Tool [15]	Hybrid Environmental Tool	Combines PMI data with cradle-to-gate environmental impact data of raw materials to enable rapid, data-informed process development choices.
Life Cycle Inventory Databases (e.g., Ecoinvent) [19]	Data Resource	Provide the underlying data on energy, material, and emission flows needed to conduct a rigorous Life Cycle Assessment.
Green Aspiration Level (iGAL 2.0) [14]	Benchmarking Tool	An industry benchmark based on average waste generated per kg of API in commercial processes, used to set meaningful sustainability goals.

For drug development professionals, a nuanced understanding of PMI, AE, cEF, and LCA is fundamental to advancing sustainable manufacturing. PMI stands as the indispensable, practical workhorse for daily process optimization and benchmarking within the pharmaceutical industry. However, its true power is unlocked when used in concert with other metrics: AE for early route scouting, cEF for emphasizing waste generation, and LCA for strategic, comprehensive environmental decision-making. By integrating these tools appropriately throughout the development lifecycle, from initial synthesis conception to commercial production, researchers can systematically design, select, and optimize drug substance processes that are not only efficient and cost-effective but also inherently greener and more sustainable.

In the realm of drug substance research, defining the system boundary is a critical first step in conducting any meaningful environmental assessment. A system boundary determines which processes and life cycle stages are included in an evaluation of environmental impact, thereby establishing the scope and limitations of the study. For researchers and scientists working in pharmaceutical development, this boundary definition directly influences how Process Mass Intensity (PMI) is calculated and interpreted. PMI, defined as the total mass of materials used to produce a specified mass of product, serves as a key metric for benchmarking green chemistry and engineering performance within the industry [2]. The selection between Gate-to-Gate and Cradle-to-Gate boundaries represents a fundamental decision point that balances comprehensiveness against practical data constraints, each offering distinct advantages for different stages of drug development and sustainability reporting.

Core Concepts and Definitions

Gate-to-Gate System Boundary

A Gate-to-Gate assessment represents a highly focused approach that examines only a single value-added process or a specific sequence of operations within a larger production chain. In pharmaceutical contexts, this typically means analyzing only the activities that occur within a specific manufacturing facility or research laboratory. This boundary is particularly useful for modeling information in a reusable way, as it can be easily integrated into broader Life Cycle Assessment studies to represent that single process [21]. For drug substance research, a Gate-to-Gate approach might focus exclusively on the chemical synthesis step, purification process, or formulation operation, deliberately excluding upstream supply chain impacts and downstream distribution consequences.

Cradle-to-Gate System Boundary

A Cradle-to-Gate assessment encompasses a more extensive scope, analyzing the partial life cycle of a product from resource extraction (the "cradle") through manufacturing and processing until the product leaves the factory gates. This approach includes all production stages, including the extraction, processing, and distribution of raw materials, as well as the complete manufacturing process of the product itself [22] [21]. For pharmaceutical researchers, this means accounting not only for the chemical synthesis performed in-house but also for the environmental burdens associated with producing the starting materials, reagents, solvents, and catalysts used in the process. Cradle-to-Gate is particularly valuable when conveying environmental information down the value chain, as your production stages are often the only ones for which you have reliable and precise data measured in your facility [21].

Relationship to Other LCA Boundaries

It is important to recognize how these system boundaries relate to other common LCA approaches:

• Cradle-to-Grave: This comprehensive scope analyzes the complete life cycle from raw material extraction through disposal or recycling, providing the fullest picture of a product's environmental impact [22] [21]. While beyond the immediate scope of most drug substance research, it represents the ideal for complete environmental accounting.

• Cradle-to-Cradle: This approach emphasizes circularity by designing products with potential future life cycles in mind, focusing on closed-loop end-of-life options where new products are created from waste streams [22] [23].

Comparative Analysis of System Boundaries

The selection between Gate-to-Gate and Cradle-to-Gate boundaries involves careful consideration of multiple factors, each with distinct implications for PMI calculation in pharmaceutical research.

Table 1: Comparative Analysis of Gate-to-Gate vs. Cradle-to-Gate System Boundaries

Aspect	Gate-to-Gate	Cradle-to-Gate
Scope Definition	Single process or facility [21]	Resource extraction to factory gate [22] [21]
Data Requirements	Internal process data only	Internal data plus upstream supply chain data
PMI Calculation Complexity	Lower	Moderate to High
Primary Applications in Pharma	Internal process optimization [21]	Environmental Product Declarations (EPDs) [22]; Supplier evaluations [22]
Value Chain Communication	Limited applicability	High value for B2B communication [21]
Strategic Decision Support	Process-specific improvements	Holistic sustainability strategy

Table 2: PMI Calculation Implications Under Different System Boundaries

Calculation Factor	Gate-to-Gate	Cradle-to-Gate
Starting Materials	Included (as purchased)	Included plus their production impacts
Solvents & Reagents	Mass accounted directly	Mass accounted plus upstream manufacturing
Catalysts	Mass accounted directly	Mass accounted plus upstream manufacturing
Energy Consumption	Direct facility energy only	Energy plus fuel production/extraction
Water Usage	Direct facility water only	Water plus treatment/distribution
Transportation	Typically excluded	Included for raw material delivery
Packaging Materials	Often excluded	Typically included

Practical Application in Drug Substance Research

Calculating Process Mass Intensity (PMI)

Process Mass Intensity is calculated using the following formula, though the inputs vary significantly based on the selected system boundary:

PMI = Total Mass of Materials Used in the Process (kg) / Mass of Product (kg) [2]

The ACS GCI Pharmaceutical Roundtable has developed PMI calculators to assist researchers in determining this metric accurately, including tools that accommodate convergent synthesis pathways common in complex pharmaceutical manufacturing [2]. For drug substance research, the "mass of product" typically refers to the mass of the Active Pharmaceutical Ingredient (API) or specified drug substance.

Methodologies for Boundary-Specific PMI Calculation

Gate-to-Gate PMI Protocol

• Define the Process Limits: Clearly identify the specific unit operations or chemical transformations included in the assessment (e.g., from intermediate compound A to final API).

• Inventory Direct Inputs: Account for all materials that physically enter the defined process, including:

  • Starting materials and intermediates
  • Reagents, catalysts, and solvents
  • Process materials (filter aids, chromatography media)

• Exclude Upstream Impacts: Do not include the production mass of inputs—only their direct mass as they enter the process boundary.

• Calculate: Apply the PMI formula using only the inventoried masses.

Cradle-to-Gate PMI Protocol

• Define the Process Limits: Identify all stages from raw material extraction through final API isolation and purification.

• Inventory Direct and Indirect Inputs: Account for:

  • Direct material inputs (as in Gate-to-Gate)
  • Upstream materials needed to produce direct inputs (e.g., feedstocks for solvent production)
  • Materials for energy production and transportation

• Apply Life Cycle Inventory Data: Utilize databases and supplier information to quantify upstream material requirements.

• Calculate: Apply the PMI formula to the comprehensive inventory of direct and indirect masses.

Decision Framework for Boundary Selection

The following workflow diagram illustrates the decision process for selecting the appropriate system boundary for PMI calculation in drug substance research:

Essential Research Reagent Solutions for PMI Assessment

The accurate calculation of PMI requires careful accounting of all material inputs used in pharmaceutical processes. The following table details key reagent categories and their functions in drug substance research:

Table 3: Key Research Reagent Categories for PMI Assessment in Drug Substance Development

Reagent Category	Primary Function	PMI Considerations
Solvents	Reaction medium, purification, extraction	Typically constitutes largest mass contribution; recovery and recycling significantly impact PMI
Catalysts	Accelerate reaction rates, improve selectivity	Low mass but potentially high upstream impacts; metal catalysts require special accounting
Reagents	Facilitate chemical transformations	Include oxidizing/reducing agents, acids/bases; stoichiometry and atom economy affect PMI
Starting Materials & Intermediates	Building blocks for API construction	Molecular complexity influences synthetic step count and overall mass efficiency
Purification Materials	Isolation and purification of products	Chromatography media, filter aids, crystallization solvents contribute significantly to PMI
Work-up Materials	Quenching, extraction, phase separation	Aqueous solutions, acids, bases; often overlooked in preliminary assessments

The strategic selection between Gate-to-Gate and Cradle-to-Gate system boundaries represents a fundamental decision point in pharmaceutical environmental assessment that directly influences how Process Mass Intensity is calculated and interpreted. Gate-to-Gate assessments offer a focused approach for internal process optimization and early-stage development where data availability may be limited. In contrast, Cradle-to-Gate analyses provide a more comprehensive perspective essential for supplier evaluations, Environmental Product Declarations, and meaningful sustainability reporting. For drug development professionals, the optimal approach often involves starting with Gate-to-Gate assessments during early research phases and progressively expanding to Cradle-to-Gate boundaries as compounds advance toward commercialization. This graduated approach balances practical constraints with the increasing need for comprehensive environmental accounting, ultimately supporting the pharmaceutical industry's progress toward more sustainable manufacturing processes.

In the global pharmaceutical industry, the drive towards sustainable manufacturing is critically supported by the adoption of green chemistry principles. The ACS Green Chemistry Institute Pharmaceutical Roundtable (GCIPR) has established itself as the leading organization dedicated to catalyzing the implementation of green chemistry and engineering to improve the environmental footprint of manufacturing medicines [24]. A cornerstone of this effort is the development and promotion of the Process Mass Intensity (PMI) metric, a standardized key green mass-based metric for measuring the resource usage impact of a synthetic chemistry process [25]. For researchers and drug development professionals, PMI provides a crucial measure of sustainability, calculated as the total mass of raw materials input required to produce a unit mass of the desired product [25]. Unlike simple yield calculations, PMI offers a holistic view of process efficiency, accounting for all materials, including solvents, reagents, and water, thereby enabling objective benchmarking and guiding the development of more sustainable synthetic processes [20] [25].

Calculating PMI in Pharmaceutical Development

The PMI Formula and Its Components

The fundamental formula for calculating Process Mass Intensity is defined as:

PMI = Total Mass of Raw Materials Input (kg) / Mass of Product (kg) [25]

This calculation provides a direct measure of the efficiency of a synthetic process. A lower PMI value indicates a more efficient and environmentally favorable process, as it signifies that less total mass is required to produce a given amount of the Active Pharmaceutical Ingredient (API). To accurately calculate PMI, the total mass input should include all reagents, solvents, and catalysts used in the reaction and subsequent work-up and purification stages. The mass of water used can be reported separately [25]. This comprehensive accounting allows scientists to move beyond traditional metrics like chemical yield and atom economy, and instead, assess the total resource consumption of a process.

Practical Calculation and Benchmarking

For multi-step syntheses, the PMI calculation must account for the cumulative mass inputs across all steps. The ACS GCIPR provides a PMI calculator tool that enables organic chemists to quickly determine the PMI from raw material inputs and final product yield [25]. This calculator accommodates multi-step convergent syntheses and provides a breakdown of the contributions from solvents, reagents, and water [25]. To support goal-setting and measure progress, the ACS GCIPR has gathered industry-wide PMI data to provide benchmarking data for various therapeutic classes, including small molecules, oligonucleotides, peptides, and monoclonal antibodies [25]. For biologics manufacturing, a specific Biopharma PMI metric has been established, providing a standard method for collecting mass data on the amount of water, raw material, and consumables used to produce 1 kg of biologic drug substance (API) [20]. This metric uses common parameters to define biologics manufacturing, enabling industry-wide benchmarking and objective process comparisons [20].

Table 1: PMI Benchmarking Across Therapeutic Modalities

Therapeutic Modality	Key PMI Considerations	Industry Benchmarking Status
Small Molecule APIs	Total mass of all starting materials, reagents, and solvents across synthetic steps.	Comprehensive benchmarking data available [25].
Monoclonal Antibodies (mAbs)	Mass of water, raw materials, and consumables per kg of drug substance [20].	Standardized metric established [20] [25].
Oligonucleotides	Cumulative mass inputs across synthesis, work-up, and purification.	Benchmarking data available [25].
Peptides	Comparison between traditional SPPS and novel fermentation platforms [26].	Benchmarking data available [25].

Advanced PMI Tools: Prediction and Analysis

To enable green-by-design thinking early in process development, the ACS GCIPR has introduced a PMI prediction tool [25]. This application provides a simple and accessible means of predicting the mass efficiency of proposed synthetic routes before extensive laboratory work is conducted. The tool is built from a dataset of nearly two thousand multi-kilo reactions provided by pharmaceutical, biotech, and manufacturing companies via the ACS GCIPR, supplemented with data extracted from the literature [25]. By defining a sequence of reactions and their corresponding reaction types, researchers can estimate a plausible PMI for any proposed or unoptimized organic chemistry route. This virtual screening capability allows chemists to focus their resources on the most promising synthetic approaches from a sustainability perspective, embedding green chemistry principles at the earliest stages of process design.

Integrating PMI into a Broader Sustainability Framework

The SELECT Criteria for Comprehensive Route Selection

While PMI is a vital metric, the ACS GCIPR advocates for its use within a broader framework for evaluating chemical processes. The SELECT criteria provide a holistic set of principles for route selection, ensuring that environmental performance is balanced with other critical factors [27]. The SELECT acronym encompasses:

• Safety: Removal or minimization of reactive hazards, toxicity, and hazardous reagents/solvents [27].
• Environmental: Removal or minimization of reagents/solvents harmful to the environment; consideration of the volume and nature of waste [27].
• Legal: Ensuring no infringement of existing intellectual property [27].
• Economics: Minimizing the cost of goods or meeting cost of goods targets [27].
• Control: Meeting quality specifications; ensuring the process is controlled, validated, and has a consistent impurity profile [27].
• Throughput: Availability of raw materials; manufacturing time; maximized space-time yield [27].

The biggest impact a chemist can have on the economic and environmental performance of a manufacturing process occurs during the selection of the optimum synthetic route [27]. The SELECT criteria ensure that this decision is made with a comprehensive view of sustainability and practicality.

Complementary Tools for Green Chemistry Implementation

The ACS GCIPR has developed additional tools that work in concert with PMI assessment to advance sustainability:

• Solvent Selection Guide: An interactive tool that permits solvent selection based on Principal Component Analysis (PCA) of solvents' physical properties, helping chemists identify greener alternatives [25].
• Reagent Guides: A comprehensive collection of guides for over 19 transformations, assisting chemists in selecting sustainable reagents based on atom efficiency, toxicology, safety, and waste products [25].
• Biocatalysis Guide: A simple guide to the most used enzyme classes, enabling chemists to incorporate biocatalytic transformations into retrosynthetic analysis [25].

Diagram 1: Integrated Workflow for Sustainable Process Design. This diagram illustrates the iterative framework for developing pharmaceutical manufacturing processes, combining the SELECT criteria with PMI prediction and measurement.

Case Studies and Experimental Protocols

Case Study: Merck - ADC Drug-Linker Manufacturing

A Merck team received the 2025 Peter J. Dunn Award for their work in developing a sustainable manufacturing process for a complex Antibody-Drug Conjugate (ADC) drug-linker [26].

• Original Process Challenges: The initial 20-step synthetic sequence had long lead times, with a major bottleneck in the final purification that limited production to less than 100 g per month [26].
• Improved Synthetic Strategy: The team developed a synthesis from a widely available natural product, reducing seven potent steps down to three [26].
• PMI and Sustainability Outcomes: The new process achieved an approximate 75% reduction in Process Mass Intensity (PMI) and decreased energy-intensive chromatography time by >99% compared to the original route [26]. This breakthrough eliminated the production bottleneck, enabling increased supply of the medicine to patients.

Case Study: Corteva - Agrochemical Manufacturing

Corteva was awarded for their sustainably-designed manufacturing process for Adavelt active from renewable feedstocks [26].

• Process Optimization: The team developed a process that eliminated three protecting groups, four steps, the use of precious metals, and replaced undesirable reagents with greener alternatives [26].
• Renewable Feedstock Integration: The process incorporates three renewable feedstocks (furfural, alanine, and ethyl lactate), increasing the renewable carbon content of the active ingredient to 41% compared to the first-generation process [26].
• Waste Reduction: The manufacturing process achieved a 92% reduction in waste generation while delivering a cost-effective solution for farmers [26].

Table 2: Research Reagent Solutions for Sustainable Process Development

Tool Category	Specific Tool Name	Function in PMI Reduction & Sustainable Design
Solvent Selection	ACS GCIPR Interactive Solvent Guide [25]	Identifies solvents with preferable environmental, health, and safety profiles based on physical properties and PCA analysis.
Reagent Selection	ACS GCIPR Reagent Guides [25]	Provides evaluated reagents for >19 transformations based on atom efficiency, toxicity, safety, and waste products.
Process Optimization	Algorithmic Process Optimization (APO) [26]	Uses Bayesian Optimization and active learning to locate global optima in complex operational spaces, minimizing material use.
Analytical Chemistry	Walk-Up Automated Reaction Profiling (WARP) [26]	Provides automated reaction monitoring to improve yields, shorten reaction times, and reduce environmental impact.

Experimental Protocol: PMI Calculation for Multi-Step Synthesis

For researchers implementing PMI calculations in drug substance research, the following methodological protocol is recommended:

• Define System Boundaries: Clearly establish the synthetic steps to be included in the calculation, from starting materials to the final isolated and purified API.

• Compile Mass Inventory: For each step, record the masses of all input materials:

  • Starting materials and reagents
  • Solvents (for reaction, work-up, and purification)
  • Catalysts
  • Consumables used in purification (e.g., chromatography media)

• Account for Convergent Syntheses: For convergent syntheses, calculate the PMI for each branch separately before combining them in the final step.

• Apply the PMI Formula: Use the formula PMI = Total Mass Input / Mass of Product for the entire sequence.

• Utilize Available Tools: Implement the ACS GCIPR PMI calculator to streamline calculations and obtain breakdowns by solvent, reagent, and water contributions [25].

• Benchmark Results: Compare calculated PMI values against industry benchmarks for the relevant therapeutic modality [25].

The ACS GCI Pharmaceutical Roundtable's framework, with PMI as its cornerstone metric, provides the pharmaceutical industry with a standardized, actionable approach to quantify and improve the sustainability of drug substance manufacturing. When integrated with the broader SELECT criteria and supporting tools for solvent and reagent selection, PMI transitions from a simple metric to a powerful driver of green-by-design innovation. The documented successes from industry leaders demonstrate that this framework enables substantial improvements in resource efficiency, waste reduction, and overall process sustainability while maintaining economic viability. For researchers and drug development professionals, adopting this comprehensive framework represents an essential strategy for advancing both environmental stewardship and the development of more efficient pharmaceutical manufacturing processes.

A Step-by-Step Guide to Calculating PMI for Your Drug Substance

Process Mass Intensity (PMI) is a key metric for measuring the environmental efficiency and sustainability of bio/pharmaceutical manufacturing processes. It is defined as the total mass of materials used to produce a specified mass of the desired product [28]. Unlike other industries, such as oil refining which has an average PMI of approximately 1.1, the pharmaceutical industry typically exhibits PMI values ranging from 26 to well over 100, and can exceed 500 for earlier-phase projects due to rapid development timelines and a primary focus on safety [28]. A lower PMI signifies a more efficient process, directly resulting in reduced raw material consumption, lower production costs, less waste generation, and a diminished environmental footprint [28]. Calculating PMI begins with the fundamental and critical step of systematically gathering accurate mass data for all input materials.

Defining the Scope of Input Materials

For a comprehensive and accurate PMI calculation, it is essential to gather mass data for every material that enters the process and is not present in the final active pharmaceutical ingredient (API). This includes all substances used in the reaction, workup, and purification stages [28]. The data collection must be exhaustive to ensure the integrity of the final PMI value. The table below categorizes the typical materials whose masses must be accounted for.

Table 1: Categorization of Input Materials for PMI Calculation

Material Category	Description	Examples
Starting Materials & Intermediates	Raw chemicals that are incorporated into the molecular structure of the final drug substance.	Key organic building blocks, advanced intermediates.
Reagents	Substances that enable a chemical reaction but are not necessarily incorporated into the final product.	Acids, bases, catalysts, coupling agents, reducing/oxidizing agents.
Solvents	Substances used to dissolve reactants, facilitate reaction, extraction, or purification.	Water, Dichloromethane (DCM), Methanol, Ethanol, Tetrahydrofuran (THF), Acetone.
Auxiliary Materials	Materials used in purification and isolation that do not become part of the chemical structure.	Chromatography silica gel, filter aids, crystallization solvents.

Methodology for Data Collection and Management

Experimental Protocol for Mass Data Generation

The collection of mass data must be an integral part of the experimental procedure. The following protocol ensures consistency and reliability:

• Tare Weighing: Record the mass of all empty, clean containers before adding any materials.
• Gross Weighing: Record the mass of the container with the material added.
• Net Mass Calculation: Calculate the net mass of each material by subtracting the tare mass from the gross mass. This calculation should be performed and recorded at the point of use.
• Unit Consistency: Ensure all mass measurements are recorded using a consistent unit, typically grams (g) or kilograms (kg), across all experiments.
• Real-Time Recording: Data should be recorded directly into a laboratory notebook or electronic data capture system at the time of the experiment to prevent transcription errors or memory lapses.

Data Integrity and Lifecycle Management

The raw mass data collected constitutes the foundational raw data for the PMI calculation. Protecting the integrity of this raw data is crucial for regulatory compliance and proving that operations are managed correctly [29]. The data lifecycle involves several key stages:

• Capture: The initial measurement and recording of mass data, whether on paper or electronically [29].
• Processing/Transformation: The data is used in calculations (e.g., net mass, total PMI). Any transformations must be verified for accuracy [29].
• Storage: Raw data and calculated results must be stored in a secure environment, with controls to prevent unauthorized alteration. For electronic records, this includes periodic backups and validation of storage systems [29].
• Retention: Data must be retained according to a predefined schedule to meet good manufacturing practice (cGMP) and traceability requirements [29].

Data Presentation and PMI Calculation

Structuring the Mass Data Table

Presenting the collected mass data in a clear, concise, and self-explanatory table is a cornerstone of effective communication in scientific research [30] [31]. A well-organized table allows readers to quickly grasp the data and its significance [32]. The following table provides a standardized template for summarizing input masses from a single experimental run or batch.

Table 2: Example Data Table for Input Masses in an API Synthesis

Material Name	Role in Process	Mass Used (g)	Purity (%)	Adjusted Mass (g)
Compound A	Starting Material	15.50	98.5	15.27
Compound B	Reagent	22.10	95.0	20.99
Sodium Hydroxide	Catalyst	2.05	99.9	2.05
Dichloromethane	Solvent	250.00	100.0	250.00
Deionized Water	Solvent	150.00	100.0	150.00
Hexane	Solvent	100.00	100.0	100.00
Silica Gel	Purification	45.00	100.0	45.00
Total Mass Input		584.65		583.31

Calculating Process Mass Intensity

The PMI is calculated using the masses from the data table and the mass of the final, purified product. The formula is:

PMI = Total Mass of Input Materials (g) / Mass of Drug Substance (API) Product (g)

Using the example data from Table 2:

• Total Adjusted Mass Input = 583.31 g
• Assume Mass of Isolated API Product = 19.5 g
• PMI = 583.31 g / 19.5 g = 29.9

This result means that 29.9 grams of input materials were required to produce 1 gram of the final drug substance. This value serves as a benchmark for further process optimization.

Workflow Visualization for Data Gathering and PMI Calculation

The following diagram illustrates the logical workflow for gathering input data and calculating PMI, highlighting its role in a continuous improvement cycle.

The Scientist's Toolkit: Essential Research Reagent Solutions

The following table details key materials and reagents commonly used in drug substance research and their primary functions, which directly influence the masses collected for PMI calculation.

Table 3: Key Research Reagent Solutions and Their Functions

Reagent/Material	Primary Function in Synthesis
Coupling Agents (e.g., HATU, EDC·HCl)	Facilitate the formation of amide bonds between carboxylic acids and amines, a common reaction in API synthesis.
Catalysts (e.g., Pd/C, Pd(PPh₃)₄)	Increase reaction rate and selectivity for key transformations like cross-coupling reactions and hydrogenations.
Protecting Groups (e.g., Boc, Cbz, Fmoc)	Temporarily mask the reactivity of specific functional groups (e.g., amines, alcohols) to prevent side reactions.
Chiral Reagents & Catalysts	Used to induce stereoselectivity, ensuring the production of the correct enantiomer of a chiral drug molecule.
Chromatography Media (e.g., Silica Gel, C18)	Essential for the purification of intermediates and the final API by normal-phase or reverse-phase chromatography.
Solvents (e.g., DMF, THF, Acetonitrile, DCM)	Serve as the reaction medium, facilitate temperature control, and are used in extraction and crystallization.

Strategic Importance and Implementation

Integrating PMI tracking from the earliest stages of development is a critical strategic consideration. Process route scouting and development typically occur during Phase I clinical trials, and it can be exceptionally difficult and costly to change a process once it has been validated for later-phase trials [28]. Therefore, the principles of PMI reduction should be embedded in the research culture from the outset. Successful implementation involves collecting PMI data from numerous production batches, analyzing the practices of the most efficient teams, and establishing PMI reduction as a key performance indicator (KPI) for process development teams [28]. The diligent gathering of input mass data, as outlined in this guide, provides the foundational evidence required to drive this continuous improvement, leading to more sustainable and economically viable pharmaceutical processes.

Process Mass Intensity (PMI) is a pivotal metric for benchmarking the efficiency and environmental sustainability of pharmaceutical processes. It provides a standardized method for quantifying the total mass of materials required to produce a specified mass of a drug substance, typically the Active Pharmaceutical Ingredient (API) [20] [1]. Unlike other metrics, PMI accounts for all material inputs, including reactants, reagents, solvents, catalysts, and water used in the reaction and purification stages [1]. The drive to adopt PMI across the industry is rooted in its ability to focus attention on the main drivers of process inefficiency, cost, and environmental, safety, and health impact [2]. By offering an objective means to compare processes, PMI empowers scientists and engineers in both academia and industry to develop more cost-effective and sustainable manufacturing routes for complex organic molecules and biologics [2].

Framed within the broader thesis of calculating PMI for drug substance research, this guide details the precise application of the PMI formula. It is designed to enable researchers, scientists, and drug development professionals to consistently perform this calculation, thereby facilitating process optimization, meaningful benchmarking, and a quantifiable contribution to greener manufacturing principles.

The PMI Formula and Core Components

The Fundamental Calculation

The PMI formula is intentionally straightforward, ensuring its consistent application across different processes and development stages. It is defined as follows [6] [1]:

PMI = Total Mass of Materials Input (kg) / Mass of Drug Substance (API) Output (kg)

Where:

• Total Mass of Materials Input is the sum of all masses entering the process to produce a single batch of the drug substance. This encompasses reactants, reagents, solvents (used in both reaction and purification), catalysts, and process water [1].
• Mass of Drug Substance (API) Output is the mass of the final, isolated bulk active pharmaceutical ingredient.

A lower PMI value indicates a more efficient and less resource-intensive process. A PMI of 1 represents an ideal, mass-less process where the mass of the product equals the total mass of all inputs, which is theoretically unattainable but serves as a benchmark for improvement.

Categorizing Material Inputs for Detailed Analysis

For a more granular analysis that pinpoints areas for improvement, material inputs should be categorized. A benchmark analysis by the ACS GCI Pharmaceutical Roundtable revealed a typical mass distribution for pharmaceutical manufacturing, which can guide this categorization [6]:

Material Category	Typical Contribution to Total Input Mass	Examples
Solvents	~58%	Water, methanol, toluene, ethyl acetate, heptane [6]
Water	~28%	Process water used in extraction, washing, or diafiltration [6]
Reactants & Reagents	~8%	Starting materials, catalysts, acids, bases, reducing/oxidizing agents [6]
Others (Consumables)	~6%	Chromatography resins, filtration membranes, process aids

This breakdown highlights that solvents and water constitute the vast majority of mass input in traditional processes, making them primary targets for optimization efforts, such as solvent substitution or recycling.

Practical Methodology for PMI Calculation

Data Collection Protocol

Accurate PMI calculation hinges on rigorous data collection. The following protocol ensures consistency and reliability:

• Define Process Boundaries: Clearly establish the start and end points of the process being assessed (e.g., from the first chemical step to the isolated final API).
• Inventory All Materials: For a single batch, record the mass of every raw material, solvent, reagent, and consumable charged into the process. This includes materials used in quenching, workup, purification, and isolation.
• Record API Output: Precisely measure the mass of the final, dried API obtained from the batch.
• Document Process Conditions: Note key parameters such as yield, purity, and the development stage (e.g., discovery, preclinical, clinical, commercial), as PMI typically decreases as a process is optimized [2].

Calculation Workflow

The logical flow for determining and analyzing PMI, from data gathering to application, can be visualized as follows:

Worked Calculation Example

Consider a simplified chemical reaction step to produce an intermediate:

• Inputs:
  • Starting Material A: 1.5 kg
  • Reagent B: 0.8 kg
  • Solvent (Toluene): 12.0 kg
  • Water (for wash): 5.0 kg
• Output:
  • Isolated Intermediate: 1.7 kg

Total Mass Input = 1.5 + 0.8 + 12.0 + 5.0 = 19.3 kg

PMI = 19.3 kg / 1.7 kg ≈ 11.4

This means 11.4 kg of materials were used to produce 1 kg of the intermediate.

Advanced PMI Considerations and Tools

PMI for Convergent and Multi-Step Syntheses

For complex drug substances, synthesis often involves multiple linear or convergent steps. The original PMI calculator was enhanced to accommodate this complexity with the Convergent PMI Calculator [2]. This tool uses the same fundamental calculation but allows for multiple branches in a synthesis, enabling a more accurate assessment of overall process efficiency from early intermediates to the final API [2] [6].

The calculation workflow for a convergent synthesis, where two or more branches are synthesized separately and then combined, differs from a simple linear one.

In this model, the PMI for each branch is calculated separately, and the inputs from all branches are summed for the final coupling step to calculate the total PMI.

PMI in Biologics Manufacturing

The PMI concept is also applied to biologics manufacture, such as the production of monoclonal antibodies (mAbs). The Biopharma PMI metric provides a standard method for collecting mass data on the amount of water, raw materials, and consumables used to produce 1 kg of biologic drug substance [20]. It is important to note that for biologics, a comprehensive sustainability assessment requires metrics beyond PMI, such as energy consumption, which is a significant driver of the environmental footprint [8].

Essential Research Reagent Solutions and Tools

Successful PMI tracking and reduction rely on the effective use of specific reagents and tools. The following table details key resources referenced in the search results.

Research Reagent / Tool	Function in PMI Analysis
ACS GCI PMI Calculator	A standardized tool to quickly determine the PMI value by accounting for raw material inputs against API output [2] [6].
Convergent PMI Calculator	An enhanced tool that accommodates multiple branches for single-step or convergent synthesis, maintaining the core PMI methodology [2] [1].
Diafiltration Systems	A purification technology used in biologics (e.g., mAb formulation) to remove impurities and exchange buffers, contributing to solvent and water mass input [20].
Green Chemistry Innovation Scorecard (iGAL)	Provides a relative process greenness score by focusing on waste, allowing comparisons between different processes and their waste reductions [1].
Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) Tools	Used to create a more comprehensive benchmark of the drug manufacturing footprint by including pre-loaded LCA data on solvents and assessing environmental trade-offs [6].

Applying the PMI formula is a critical, standardized step in quantifying the efficiency and sustainability of drug substance research and manufacturing. By systematically collecting mass data for all inputs and dividing by the mass of the API output, researchers obtain a powerful, comparable metric. Utilizing available calculators and categorizing inputs further enhances the utility of PMI, turning it from a simple number into a diagnostic tool that guides process optimization. As the industry moves toward more sustainable practices, the rigorous application of PMI calculation serves as a foundation for reducing environmental impact, lowering costs, and meeting the green chemistry principles championed by leading organizations like the ACS GCI Pharmaceutical Roundtable.

Process Mass Intensity (PMI) has emerged as a critical metric for benchmarking the sustainability and efficiency of pharmaceutical manufacturing processes. Developed by the ACS Green Chemistry Institute Pharmaceutical Roundtable (ACS GCI PR), PMI provides researchers and process chemists with a standardized methodology to quantify the total mass of materials required to produce a unit mass of an active pharmaceutical ingredient (API). This technical guide explores the fundamental principles of PMI calculation, practical implementation of ACS GCI PR's calculator tools, and integration of these metrics into drug substance research and development. By adopting a standardized approach to PMI assessment, pharmaceutical scientists can objectively compare processes, identify areas for improvement, and drive innovation toward more sustainable manufacturing paradigms across both small molecule and biologic therapeutics.

Process Mass Intensity (PMI) represents a comprehensive green chemistry metric that enables pharmaceutical scientists to benchmark the environmental footprint and efficiency of API synthesis routes. PMI is defined as the total mass of materials input into a manufacturing process divided by the mass of bulk API output, providing a clear measurement of resource utilization efficiency [1]. The ACS GCI Pharmaceutical Roundtable pioneered PMI as a standardized metric to address growing concerns about sustainability, cost management, and environmental impact in pharmaceutical manufacturing [2].

The fundamental PMI calculation follows a straightforward formula: PMI = Total Mass of Inputs (kg) / Mass of API (kg) [6]. This encompasses all materials consumed in the process, including reactants, reagents, solvents, catalysts, and process aids. Unlike isolated yield calculations that focus solely on the theoretical conversion of reactants to products, PMI accounts for the complete material footprint, making it particularly valuable for identifying opportunities to reduce solvent usage and purification waste—two significant contributors to process mass in pharmaceutical manufacturing [2] [6].

The implementation of PMI tracking has revealed critical insights into pharmaceutical manufacturing efficiency. Benchmarking exercises across Roundtable member companies demonstrated that solvents constitute approximately 58% of process inputs, water accounts for 28%, while reactants represent only 8% of total mass [6]. This distribution highlights why PMI has become an indispensable tool for focusing optimization efforts on the most significant sources of process inefficiency.

The ACS GCI PR PMI Calculator Tool Suite

The ACS GCI PR has developed a comprehensive suite of calculation tools to address the evolving needs of pharmaceutical researchers at various stages of process development. These tools provide standardized methodologies for PMI calculation while accommodating the complexity of modern API synthesis.

Table: ACS GCI PR PMI Calculator Portfolio

Tool Name	Primary Application	Key Features	Development Timeline
Process Mass Intensity Calculator	Linear synthesis processes	Basic PMI calculation for single-pathway syntheses	Initial public release 2011 [6]
Convergent PMI Calculator	Complex synthesis with multiple branches	Accommodates convergent synthesis pathways; maintains core calculation methodology	Enhanced version released 2014 [2] [6]
PMI Prediction Calculator	Early-stage route selection	Predicts probable PMI ranges using historical data and Monte Carlo simulations	Developed later for predictive analytics [33] [1]
Biopharma PMI Calculator	Biological drug substance manufacturing	Quantifies water, raw materials, and consumables per kg of biologic API	Addresses unique needs of biologics manufacturing [20] [33]
PMI-LCA Tool	Environmental impact assessment	Integrates life cycle inventory data with PMI calculations	Incorporates ecoinvent dataset for LCIA [33] [6]

The original PMI Calculator, released to the public in 2011, established the foundational methodology for material efficiency assessment in pharmaceutical processes [6]. This tool was subsequently enhanced with the Convergent PMI Calculator in 2014 to accommodate the computational complexity of convergent syntheses, where multiple synthetic pathways merge in later stages to form the final API [2]. The expansion continued with specialized tools including the Biopharma PMI Calculator for biologics manufacturing and the PMI Prediction Calculator that enables researchers to estimate process efficiency before laboratory evaluation [20] [1].

These tools are industrially validated through extensive benchmarking exercises conducted by Roundtable member companies since 2008 [2]. The continuing evolution of PMI tools reflects the pharmaceutical industry's commitment to green chemistry principles and sustainable engineering practices, with each tool designed to address specific challenges in process development and assessment.

Step-by-Step Methodology for PMI Calculation

Input Parameter Identification and Collection

The foundation of accurate PMI calculation lies in the comprehensive identification and quantification of all material inputs throughout the synthetic process. Researchers must account for every substance introduced into the process, organized by the following categories:

• Reactants and Reagents: All starting materials, intermediates, and chemical agents that participate in the chemical transformation toward the API. This includes stoichiometric reagents, catalysts, and coupling agents that facilitate the desired reactions [1].

• Solvents: All solvents used in reaction media, workup procedures, purification steps, and isolation processes. This encompasses both reaction solvents and those used in extraction, washing, chromatography, and crystallization operations [2] [33].

• Process Materials: Consumables including filtering aids, chromatography media, and purification agents that contact the process stream but may not participate directly in chemical reactions [20].

• Water: All process water used in aqueous reactions, extractions, precipitations, and rinsing procedures. The significant proportion of water in biopharmaceutical processes (28% of inputs according to benchmarking studies) necessitates careful tracking [6].

For biopharmaceutical processes, the Biopharma PMI Calculator expands these categories to include cell culture media, buffers, and specialized consumables unique to biologics manufacturing [20] [34]. Documentation should specify mass quantities for each input using consistent units (typically kilograms) to ensure calculation accuracy.

Calculation Workflow and Tool Selection

The selection of an appropriate PMI calculator depends on the synthesis architecture and development stage. The following decision pathway guides researchers in tool selection and implementation:

Diagram: PMI Calculator Selection Workflow. This flowchart illustrates the decision pathway for selecting the appropriate ACS GCI PR calculator tool based on synthesis architecture and development stage.

The calculation methodology follows a consistent approach across tools, with variations to accommodate different synthesis complexities:

• Basic PMI Calculation: For linear syntheses, researchers input the mass quantities for all process materials and the final API output. The calculator computes: PMI = Total Input Mass / API Mass [6].

• Convergent Synthesis Calculation: When handling convergent syntheses, the tool requires mass inputs for each branch of the synthesis, automatically calculating intermediate PMI values before combining them for the final PMI determination [2].

• Biopharma PMI Calculation: For biological APIs, the calculator incorporates unique process parameters including bioreactor volumes, purification column loading, and buffer exchanges to compute the total mass intensity specific to biologics manufacturing [20].

• Predictive PMI Modeling: In early development stages where complete mass data is unavailable, the prediction tool utilizes historical benchmarking data from similar processes across multiple pharmaceutical companies to estimate probable PMI ranges through Monte Carlo simulations [33] [1].

Data Interpretation and Application

Once calculated, PMI values provide actionable intelligence for process optimization. The following table illustrates benchmark PMI values across different development phases, enabling researchers to contextualize their results:

Table: PMI Benchmarking Across Development Phases

Process Phase	Typical PMI Range	Key Influencing Factors	Optimization Opportunities
Discovery & Early Development	>1,000 kg/kg	High solvent usage; Limited process optimization; Linear sequences with protecting groups	Route scouting; Solvent selection; Functionality mapping
Process Development	200-500 kg/kg	Solvent reduction; Improved catalysts; Process intensification	Convergent synthesis; Recycling protocols; Alternative reagents
Optimized Commercial Process	50-150 kg/kg	Integrated waste management; Catalyst recovery; Solvent recycling systems	Continuous manufacturing; Process integration; Green chemistry innovations

Interpretation of PMI results should extend beyond the numerical value to consider the composition of the mass inputs. As solvent usage constitutes the majority (58%) of process mass in typical pharmaceutical manufacturing, researchers should pay particular attention to solvent selection and recovery opportunities [6]. The ACS GCI PR Solvent Selection Tool provides complementary guidance for choosing solvents with improved environmental, health, and safety profiles while minimizing mass intensity [33].

For comprehensive sustainability assessment, researchers can utilize the PMI-LCA Tool that integrates traditional PMI calculation with life cycle assessment data, enabling evaluation of environmental impacts beyond mass efficiency [33]. This combined approach allows for identification of potential trade-offs between mass reduction and other environmental indicators such as energy consumption and global warming potential.

Advanced Applications in Drug Substance Research

Comparative Process Assessment and Optimization

PMI calculation enables objective comparison of alternative synthetic routes and process conditions during development. By calculating PMI for competing routes at comparable development stages, researchers can identify fundamental efficiency advantages before committing significant resources to process optimization. The Convergent PMI Calculator specifically facilitates this analysis by accommodating the architectural complexity of modern API syntheses, where multiple fragments are prepared independently before combination in final coupling steps [2].

The implementation of PMI tracking has revealed that significant efficiency gains are achievable through strategic route design. For example, the adoption of convergent rather than linear synthetic strategies typically reduces PMI by minimizing the compounding of yield losses through successive steps [2]. Additionally, the identification and replacement of mass-intensive unit operations (such as chromatography with crystallization) can dramatically reduce overall process mass intensity [1].

Biopharmaceutical Process Evaluation

The Biopharma PMI Calculator addresses the unique requirements of biological API manufacturing, where traditional small molecule PMI calculations may not adequately capture process efficiency. This specialized tool incorporates critical process parameters specific to biologics manufacturing, including:

• Cell Culture Components: Media, nutrients, and supplements consumed during upstream processing.
• Purification Consumables: Chromatography resins, filtration membranes, and separation modules.
• Buffer Exchanges: Solvents and solutions used in diafiltration and concentration steps [20].

The application of PMI metrics in biopharmaceutical development has enabled direct comparison between traditional stainless steel and single-use technologies, providing data-driven insights into the sustainability trade-offs of different manufacturing platforms [20]. This standardized approach to biologics manufacturing efficiency has established a common framework for transparent evaluation of process improvements across the industry.

Sustainability Integration through Life Cycle Assessment

The progression from basic PMI calculation to integrated PMI-LCA represents the evolution of sustainability assessment in pharmaceutical manufacturing. While PMI focuses on mass efficiency, the PMI-LCA Tool incorporates environmental impact assessment across multiple categories, including:

• Global Warming Potential: Carbon dioxide equivalents from energy and material production
• Water Consumption: Direct and indirect water usage throughout the supply chain
• Resource Depletion: Consumption of non-renewable resources
• Ecotoxicity: Potential environmental impacts of emitted substances [33]

This integrated approach prevents the suboptimization that can occur when focusing solely on mass reduction without considering the broader environmental implications of material choices. For example, a process with slightly higher PMI might demonstrate superior environmental performance if it utilizes solvents with favorable life cycle impacts compared to alternatives with lower mass but higher energy production requirements [33] [6].

Table: Research Reagent Solutions for PMI Optimization

Tool/Resource	Function	Application in PMI Reduction
ACS GCI PR Solvent Selection Tool	Interactive solvent selection based on multiple properties	Identifies alternative solvents with improved EHS profiles and potential for mass reduction [33]
Reagent Guides	Venn diagrams comparing scalability, utility, and greenness of reagents for >25 transformations	Enables selection of efficient reagents that minimize downstream purification requirements [33]
Biocatalysis Guide	Directory of commonly used enzyme classes for pharmaceutical synthesis	Facilitates implementation of biocatalytic steps with typically higher selectivity and milder conditions [33]
Acid-Base Selection Tool	Filterable database of 200+ acids and bases with EHS scoring	Identifies safer, more efficient acids and bases for stoichiometric and catalytic applications [33]
Green Chemistry Innovation Scorecard (iGAL)	Calculator providing relative process greenness score based on waste mass	Complements PMI by focusing on waste reduction and sustainable chemistry principles [1]

The toolkit extends beyond calculation tools to include strategic resources that enable researchers to address the root causes of high process mass intensity. The Solvent Selection Guide, for instance, helps researchers identify alternative solvents that can reduce overall mass while improving safety profiles [33]. Similarly, the Reagent Guides facilitate the selection of transformation agents that minimize byproduct formation and purification requirements, thereby reducing the cumulative mass of materials needed to obtain pure API [33].

The integration of these resources creates a comprehensive framework for sustainable process design. By combining PMI calculation with green chemistry tools, researchers can systematically identify improvement opportunities, evaluate alternatives, and track progress toward sustainability goals throughout the development lifecycle.

The ACS GCI PR PMI Calculator suite provides pharmaceutical researchers with a standardized, scientifically rigorous methodology for quantifying and improving the material efficiency of API manufacturing processes. By implementing PMI tracking throughout development, scientists can objectively compare synthetic routes, identify mass-intensive process steps, and make data-driven decisions that advance both environmental sustainability and economic objectives. The continued evolution of PMI tools—from basic mass calculation to predictive analytics and life cycle integration—demonstrates the pharmaceutical industry's commitment to green chemistry principles and sustainable engineering practices. As the industry faces increasing pressure to improve efficiency and reduce environmental impact, the adoption of PMI metrics will remain essential for measuring progress and driving innovation in drug substance research and development.

Process Mass Intensity (PMI) has emerged as a fundamental metric for benchmarking the sustainability and efficiency of pharmaceutical manufacturing processes. Defined as the total mass of materials used to produce a given mass of product, PMI provides a comprehensive assessment of resource utilization by accounting for all reactants, reagents, solvents, and catalysts employed in a process [1]. The American Chemical Society Green Chemistry Institute Pharmaceutical Roundtable (ACS GCIPR) has championed PMI as a key performance indicator to drive innovation in process chemistry, focusing attention on the main drivers of process inefficiency, cost, and environmental impact [2]. The pharmaceutical industry has progressively developed more sophisticated PMI calculation tools, evolving from simple calculators to convergent PMI calculators and predictive models that accommodate the complex realities of modern drug substance synthesis [2].

The calculation of PMI follows a straightforward formula: PMI = Total Mass of Materials (kg) / Mass of Product (kg). This simplicity belies its powerful applications in cross-process comparisons, sustainability benchmarking, and guiding process optimization efforts. For drug substance research, understanding and accurately calculating PMI across different therapeutic modalities—small molecules, peptides, and biologics—is crucial for developing cost-effective and environmentally sustainable manufacturing processes. This technical guide provides detailed methodologies for adapting PMI calculations to each modality, supported by experimental protocols, comparative data analysis, and practical implementation tools.

PMI Calculation Fundamentals and Core Principles

Definition and Standard Calculation Methodology

Process Mass Intensity represents the total mass of resources required to produce a unit mass of a desired product. The standard PMI calculation encompasses all materials introduced into the manufacturing process, including starting materials, reagents, solvents, catalysts, and process aids. The formula is expressed as:

PMI = Total Mass of Materials (kg) / Mass of Product (kg)

A PMI value of 1 represents an ideal, theoretically perfect process where all input materials are incorporated into the final product without any waste generation. In practice, pharmaceutical processes typically exhibit significantly higher PMI values due to solvents, stoichiometric reagents, purification requirements, and process losses. The inverse of PMI, multiplied by 100, gives the overall process atom economy [1].

The ACS GCI Pharmaceutical Roundtable has developed standardized calculators to ensure consistent PMI determination across the industry. These tools enable researchers to quickly determine PMI values by accounting for raw material inputs relative to bulk API output [2]. The convergent PMI calculator extends this functionality to accommodate complex synthesis pathways with multiple branches, whether for single-step or convergent synthesis approaches [2].

Key Components and Material Accounting

Accurate PMI calculation requires comprehensive accounting of all material inputs throughout the synthetic process:

• Reactants and Starting Materials: All raw materials that contribute atoms to the final product structure.
• Reagents and Catalysts: Stoichiometric and catalytic substances that facilitate chemical transformations but may not incorporate into the final product.
• Solvents: Reaction solvents, work-up solvents, crystallization solvents, and purification solvents.
• Process Aids: Filter aids, chromatography media, and other materials that facilitate processing but don't participate chemically.

Materials typically excluded from PMI calculations include water, process gases (unless they react), and energy carriers. However, for biologics manufacturing where water usage is substantial, specialized PMI approaches have been developed that include water in the assessment [20].

PMI Calculation for Small Molecules

Small Molecule Synthesis Characteristics

Small molecule synthesis represents the most established domain for PMI assessment, with well-defined calculation methodologies. Small molecule APIs typically involve multi-step synthetic routes with molecular weights under 1000 Da, characterized by convergent or linear synthetic strategies, crystall isolation and purification at multiple stages, and extensive use of organic solvents throughout the process. The ACS GCI PR PMI Calculator provides the standard framework for small molecule PMI determination, enabling researchers to account for material inputs across complex synthetic routes [2].

For small molecules, PMI values typically range from 50 to over 500, depending on the synthetic route complexity, number of synthetic steps, and optimization status. Early-phase clinical candidates often exhibit higher PMI values, which decrease through process optimization and route refinement as compounds advance toward commercial manufacturing. The convergent PMI calculator specifically addresses the need to accurately calculate PMI for complex small molecules synthesized via convergent approaches, where multiple fragments are prepared separately then combined in final coupling steps [2].

Experimental Protocol for Small Molecule PMI Determination

Materials and Equipment:

• Analytical balance (0.1 mg precision)
• Laboratory notebook or electronic data capture system
• ACS GCI PR PMI Calculator or equivalent spreadsheet tool
• All synthetic reagents, solvents, and starting materials

Procedure:

• Define Synthetic Route: Document all synthetic steps from starting materials to final API, including intermediates, purification steps, and isolated compounds.

• Record Material Inputs: For each synthetic step, accurately weigh and record all material inputs, including:

  • Starting materials and intermediates
  • Reagents and catalysts
  • Reaction solvents
  • Work-up and purification solvents
  • Chromatography media and other process aids

• Determine Product Output: Record the mass of each isolated intermediate and final API after purification and drying.

• Calculate Step PMI: For each synthetic step, calculate step PMI using the formula: Step PMI = (Total mass inputs for step) / (Mass of product isolated)

• Calculate Overall PMI: Sum all material inputs across the entire synthetic sequence and divide by the mass of final API obtained: Overall PMI = (Σ All material inputs) / (Mass of final API)

• Document Assumptions: Note any recovered/recycled solvents, analytical samples removed, or materials not included in the calculation.

Data Interpretation:

• Identify steps with particularly high PMI contributions
• Benchmark against industry standards for similar synthetic transformations
• Use PMI analysis to guide process optimization efforts

PMI Calculation for Peptides

Peptide Synthesis Modalities and PMI Implications

Peptide synthesis presents unique challenges for PMI assessment due to the predominance of iterative synthesis methods and significant solvent consumption. The three primary peptide synthesis approaches exhibit distinct PMI characteristics:

• Classical Solution-Phase Peptide Synthesis (CSPS): Involves coupling amino acids in solution with isolation and purification after each step. While scalable, CSPS typically generates higher PMI due to extensive purification requirements at each step [35].

• Solid-Phase Peptide Synthesis (SPPS): The most common peptide synthesis method, utilizing insoluble polymeric supports to enable iterative amino acid coupling with simple filtration between steps. SPPS offers operational efficiency but typically exhibits high PMI values ranging from 6,000 to 30,000 kg/kg due to large excesses of reagents and extensive solvent washing [35] [36].

• Liquid-Phase Peptide Synthesis (LPPS): Employs soluble polymer supports that enable solution-phase chemistry with precipitation-based purification. LPPS typically demonstrates superior PMI performance compared to SPPS, with reported values approximately 345 kg/kg at laboratory scale, due to stoichiometric reagent usage and reduced solvent consumption [35] [36].

Experimental Protocol for Peptide Synthesis PMI Analysis

Materials and Equipment:

• Resin support (for SPPS) or soluble polymer tag (for LPPS)
• Protected amino acids in stoichiometric excess (SPPS) or stoichiometric ratios (LPPS)
• Coupling reagents (HATU, HBTU, DIC, etc.)
• Deprotection reagents (TFA for cleavage, piperidine for Fmoc removal)
• Solvents (DMF, NMP, DCM, ether for precipitation)
• Peptide synthesis vessel or automated synthesizer
• Lyophilizer for final product isolation

Procedure for SPPS PMI Determination:

• Weigh Initial Resin: Record the exact mass of dry resin before synthesis.
• Document Coupling Cycles: For each amino acid coupling cycle, record:
  • Mass of protected amino acid used
  • Mass of coupling reagents
  • Volume and mass of solvent used for coupling and washing
• Record Deprotection Steps: Mass and volume of deprotection reagents and associated solvents.
• Final Cleavage and Isolation: Record mass of cleavage cocktail, volume of precipitation solvent, and mass of crude peptide obtained.
• Purification: Document solvents and chromatography media used for purification, and mass of final purified peptide.
• Calculate Total Input Mass: Sum all reagents, amino acids, solvents, and resin support.
• Determine PMI: Divide total input mass by mass of final purified peptide.

LPPS Modified Protocol:

• Replace resin with soluble polymer tag
• Use stoichiometric amino acid ratios
• Employ precipitation rather than filtration for purification
• Account for tag mass in calculations

Data Analysis:

• Compare PMI across different synthesis strategies
• Identify high PMI steps for optimization
• Benchmark against industry standards: SPPS (6,000-30,000), LPPS (~345) [36]

PMI Calculation for Biologics

Biologics Manufacturing and PMI Considerations

Biologics manufacturing, including monoclonal antibodies, fusion proteins, and enzymes, introduces unique considerations for PMI assessment. The Biopharma PMI metric provides a standardized method for collecting mass data on the amount of water, raw materials, and consumables used to produce 1 kg of biologic drug substance [20]. Unlike small molecules and peptides, biologics manufacturing involves complex biological systems, extensive water usage, and significant single-use technologies in modern facilities.

Key characteristics influencing biologics PMI include:

• Upstream Process Intensity: Cell culture media consumption and supplementation
• Downstream Processing: Multiple purification steps including chromatography, ultrafiltration, and viral inactivation
• Water for Injection (WFI): Substantial amounts used throughout the process
• Single-Use Technologies: Disposable bioreactors, bags, and connectors
• Buffer and Solution Preparation: Large volumes of custom-formulated solutions

Recent studies comparing continuous and batch manufacturing processes for monoclonal antibodies have revealed that continuous processes can demonstrate similar PMI values to batch processes, though PMI alone may not fully capture sustainability improvements in biologics manufacturing [8] [37].

Experimental Protocol for Biologics PMI Assessment

Materials and Equipment:

• Cell culture media and supplements
• Bioreactor system (stainless steel or single-use)
• Purification chromatography systems and resins
• Ultrafiltration/diafiltration systems
• Buffer preparation equipment
• Analytical equipment for titer and quality attribute determination

Procedure:

• Upstream Process Material Accounting:
  • Record mass of cell culture media, feeds, and supplements
  • Document mass of inoculum expansion media
  • Account for buffer masses used in bioreactor preparation

• Harvest and Recovery Material Inputs:

  • Record mass of harvest filtration aids and depth filters
  • Document buffer masses used in clarification

• Downstream Purification Material Tracking:

  • Record mass of chromatography resins and buffers
  • Document mass of viral inactivation and removal reagents
  • Account for ultrafiltration/diafiltration buffer masses

• Drug Substance Formulation:

  • Record mass of formulation buffers and excipients
  • Document fill-finish materials if applicable

• Water Usage Tracking:

  • Include mass of Water for Injection (WFI) used throughout process
  • Account for water used in buffer and media preparation
  • Include water used for equipment cleaning (if not single-use)

• Calculate Biologics PMI:

  • Sum all material inputs including water, raw materials, and consumables
  • Determine mass of final drug substance (typically in kg)
  • Apply standard PMI formula: Total Mass Input / Drug Substance Mass

Special Considerations:

• Include single-use technology mass allocation based on fractional use
• Account for column resin lifetime in multi-cycle operations
• Document water usage separately for specialized reporting

Comparative PMI Analysis Across Modalities

Quantitative PMI Comparison

Table 1 provides a comprehensive comparison of typical PMI ranges across therapeutic modalities, synthesis methods, and process types, enabling researchers to benchmark their processes against industry standards.

Table 1: Comparative PMI Values Across Therapeutic Modalities

Modality	Synthesis/Manufacturing Method	Typical PMI Range (kg/kg)	Key Drivers
Small Molecules	Linear synthetic routes	50-500	Step count, solvent usage, chromatography
Small Molecules	Convergent synthetic routes	25-200	Convergence efficiency, intermediate isolation
Peptides	Solid-Phase Peptide Synthesis (SPPS)	6,000-30,000 [36]	Resin washing, excess reagents, solvent consumption
Peptides	Liquid-Phase Peptide Synthesis (LPPS)	~345 (lab scale) [36]	Stoichiometric reagents, precipitation efficiency
Peptides	Hybrid SPPS-Solution	1,000-10,000	Fragment coupling efficiency, purification methods
Biologics	Batch Manufacturing	Varies by product	Media consumption, purification yield, water usage
Biologics	Continuous Manufacturing	Similar to batch [8]	Productivity, consumable utilization, buffer efficiency

Sustainability Assessment Beyond PMI

While PMI provides valuable material efficiency benchmarking, comprehensive sustainability assessment requires additional metrics, particularly for biologics manufacturing. Studies comparing continuous and batch manufacturing processes have demonstrated that processes with similar PMI values may have significantly different environmental impacts when factors like energy consumption and productivity are considered [8] [37]. A higher PMI continuous process might demonstrate superior overall sustainability compared to a lower PMI batch process if it achieves multifold higher productivity per unit time, resulting in lower overall energy consumption per unit of drug substance produced [37].

This highlights the importance of complementing PMI analysis with additional sustainability metrics, including:

• Energy Intensity: Total energy consumption per kg product
• Water Intensity: Particularly relevant for biologics manufacturing
• Green Chemistry Principles: Assessment of waste hazard and process safety
• Life Cycle Assessment (LCA): Comprehensive environmental impact evaluation

Implementation Framework for Drug Substance Research

PMI Calculation Workflow

The following workflow provides a systematic approach for implementing PMI calculations across different modalities in drug substance research:

Research Reagent Solutions for PMI Assessment

Table 2: Essential Research Reagents and Tools for PMI Determination

Reagent/Tool	Function in PMI Assessment	Modality Application
ACS GCI PR PMI Calculator	Standardized PMI calculation	Small Molecules, Peptides
ACS GCI PR Convergent PMI Calculator	PMI for convergent syntheses	Small Molecules, Peptides
Biopharma PMI Calculator	Specialized biologics assessment	Biologics
Laboratory Balance (0.1 mg precision)	Accurate mass measurement	All Modalities
Electronic Laboratory Notebook	Comprehensive data recording	All Modalities
Resin Supports	Solid-phase synthesis matrix	Peptides (SPPS)
Soluble Polymer Tags	Liquid-phase synthesis support	Peptides (LPPS)
Protected Amino Acids	Peptide building blocks	Peptides
Chromatography Resins	Purification media	All Modalities
Single-Use Bioreactors	Cell culture processing	Biologics

Optimization Strategies by Modality

Small Molecules:

• Route redesign to reduce step count
• Solvent selection and recovery systems
• Catalytic vs. stoichiometric reagents
• Convergent vs. linear synthesis strategies

Peptides:

• Method selection (SPPS vs. LPPS vs. hybrid)
• Reduced reagent excesses
• Solvent minimization through process intensification
• Alternative purification strategies

Biologics:

• Process intensification approaches
• Media and buffer optimization
• Single-use technology implementation
• Continuous manufacturing adoption

Adapting PMI calculations for different therapeutic modalities requires both standardized approaches and modality-specific considerations. Small molecules benefit from established PMI calculation tools and convergent synthesis strategies. Peptides demonstrate dramatic PMI variations depending on synthesis methodology, with LPPS offering significant advantages over traditional SPPS. Biologics require specialized PMI assessment that accounts for water usage and single-use technologies, with the understanding that PMI alone may not fully capture sustainability improvements in continuous manufacturing processes.

By implementing the methodologies, experimental protocols, and comparative frameworks presented in this technical guide, drug substance researchers can consistently calculate, benchmark, and optimize PMI across all therapeutic modalities, driving more sustainable and efficient pharmaceutical manufacturing.

In the biopharmaceutical industry, Process Mass Intensity (PMI) has emerged as a key metric for benchmarking the sustainability and efficiency of manufacturing processes. PMI provides a standardized method for quantifying the total mass of materials required to produce a unit mass of a drug substance, offering a direct measure of resource utilization [20]. For monoclonal antibody (mAb) production—a rapidly growing class of biotherapeutics—PMI is particularly relevant due to the resource-intensive nature of biologics manufacturing [38]. The American Chemical Society Green Chemistry Institute Pharmaceutical Roundtable (ACS GCI-PR) has developed specific PMI metrics and calculators to enable industry-wide benchmarking and objective comparison of processes [2] [20].

The fundamental formula for PMI is defined as the total mass of inputs entering the process divided by the mass of the final drug substance (API) produced [2]. This calculation encompasses all materials used in the manufacturing process, including water, raw materials, and consumables. In biopharmaceutical applications, PMI values are typically over 10 times higher than those for small-molecule active pharmaceutical ingredients, with water use accounting for more than 90% of the total PMI in bioprocessing [38]. This stark difference underscores the critical importance of PMI analysis for improving the environmental footprint of biologics manufacturing.

Methodology for PMI Calculation

PMI Formula and Core Components

The standard PMI calculation follows a straightforward formula that belies the complexity of its components:

PMI = Total Mass of Inputs (kg) / Mass of Drug Substance (API) Output (kg) [2]

For monoclonal antibody processes, the Biopharma PMI Calculator developed by the ACS GCI-PR provides a standardized framework for collecting mass data on the amount of water, raw material, and consumables used to produce 1 kg of biologic drug substance [20]. This metric uses common parameters to define biologics manufacturing, enabling consistent industry-wide benchmarking and increased transparency during process development.

When calculating PMI for mAb processes, the following input categories must be accounted for:

• Water: Including water for injection (WFI) and purified water used in media, buffers, and cleaning
• Cell Culture Media: Nutrients and growth factors for cell cultivation
• Buffers and Solutions: For pH control and downstream processing
• Chromatography Resins: Affinity, ion-exchange, and other separation media
• Filters and Membranes: For clarification, sterilization, and diafiltration
• Single-Use Bioprocess Containers: Bags, tubing, and connectors
• Cleaning and Sanitization Agents: CIP/SIP solutions

Experimental Protocol for Data Collection

A standardized experimental approach is essential for generating comparable PMI data:

• Define System Boundaries: Establish clear boundaries for the process being evaluated (e.g., upstream only, downstream only, or integrated process)

• Catalog Input Materials: Create a comprehensive inventory of all materials entering the process, recording quantities with precise measurements

• Measure Output: Accurately determine the mass of the final drug substance (API) produced, using qualified analytical methods

• Account for Process Steps: Track material usage through each unit operation:

  • Upstream: Inoculum expansion, production bioreactor
  • Downstream: Harvest, capture chromatography, polishing steps, viral inactivation, formulation

• Calculate PMI: Apply the PMI formula to the compiled data

• Validate Results: Cross-check calculations and repeat for multiple batches to ensure consistency

For convergent processes involving multiple synthesis branches, the Convergent PMI Calculator accommodates these complexities while maintaining the same fundamental calculation principles [2].

Diagram 1: PMI Calculation Workflow

Comparative PMI Analysis: Batch vs. Continuous Processes

PMI Comparison Framework

Recent studies have evaluated the PMI of continuous manufacturing processes compared to traditional batch processes for monoclonal antibodies. Surprisingly, research indicates that the PMI of continuous manufacturing processes is comparable to that of batch processes when considering direct material usage [8]. However, this straightforward comparison fails to capture the full sustainability picture, as continuous processes often achieve significantly higher productivity per unit time, leading to potential environmental benefits beyond the PMI metric alone.

To illustrate this comparison, the following table summarizes key findings from studies analyzing batch versus continuous mAb production:

Table 1: PMI and Productivity Comparison: Batch vs. Continuous Processes

Process Parameter	Intensified Fed-Batch Process	Continuous Process	Reference
Typical PMI Range	Comparable to continuous	Comparable to batch	[8]
Bioreactor Productivity	~0.2 g/L/day	~1 g/L/day	[38]
Facility Time Requirement	Higher	Lower (multifold reduction)	[38]
Electricity Consumption	Higher per unit DS produced	Lower per unit DS produced	[8]
Environmental Impact Assessment	Less attractive when considering time factors	More favorable due to higher productivity	[38]

Limitations of PMI as a Standalone Metric

While PMI provides valuable insights into material usage efficiency, it does not account for critical factors such as energy consumption, which is a key driver of sustainability for biologics manufacturing [8]. A higher PMI continuous process compared to a lower PMI batch process operating at the same bioreactor scale might still demonstrate better overall environmental performance because the productivity (in g of drug substance) per unit time is multifold higher for the continuous process [8]. This higher productivity translates to reduced overall energy consumption per unit of drug substance produced, potentially making the continuous process more environmentally sustainable despite similar PMI values.

This limitation highlights the need for additional metrics and models to assess the overall sustainability of biologics processes, including factors such as:

• Energy consumption per kg of API
• Water usage intensity
• Greenhouse gas emissions
• Waste generation
• Overall environmental footprint

Advanced PMI Applications in Process Development

Techno-Economic Analysis with PMI

Recent techno-economic analyses have incorporated PMI as a key performance indicator (KPI) when evaluating novel bioprocessing technologies. These studies demonstrate how PMI interacts with other critical metrics such as Cost of Goods (COG) and productivity to provide a comprehensive assessment of process efficiency [39].

For example, studies comparing membrane chromatography with traditional resin-based chromatography in mAb production have revealed that membrane continuous platforms show benefits in both Cost of Goods and Process Mass Intensity [39]. The shorter residence time of membrane platforms compared to resins positions them as a viable alternative for single-use capture chromatography, with the added advantage of greater flexibility to changes in throughput—an essential feature for integrating capture into fully continuous processes [39].

Table 2: Key Performance Indicators in Bioprocess Evaluation

Performance Indicator	Definition	Significance in Process Evaluation
Process Mass Intensity (PMI)	Total mass inputs / mass API output	Measures material use efficiency and environmental impact
Cost of Goods (COG)	Total production cost per unit output	Evaluates economic viability
Productivity	Output per unit time and volume	Assesses facility utilization efficiency
Capacity Utilization (CU)	Efficiency of media volume usage	Measures resource utilization effectiveness
Net Present Value (NPV)	Project economic viability	Determines financial attractiveness of investment

Sensitivity Analysis for PMI Optimization

Global sensitivity analysis methods provide powerful tools for identifying parameters that most significantly impact PMI and other key performance indicators. These techniques allow researchers to assess the impact of parametric uncertainty and variability on model estimates, aiding model optimization by identifying parameters requiring calibration [40].

Unlike one-at-a-time (OAT) sensitivity analyses that change a single parameter while holding others fixed, global sensitivity analysis (GSA) methods offer a more comprehensive assessment by accounting for changes in all uncertain or variable parameters simultaneously [40]. While computationally more intensive, GSA provides a broader understanding of how variations across multiple parameters collectively influence process outputs, enabling more robust PMI optimization.

The Scientist's Toolkit: Essential Research Reagent Solutions

Table 3: Key Research Reagent Solutions for mAb Process Development

Reagent/Category	Function in mAb Process	PMI Relevance
Chromatography Resins (e.g., MabSelect PrismA)	Product capture and purification via affinity chromatography	Major contributor to material costs and waste generation
Membrane Chromatography (e.g., Purexa PrA)	Advection-controlled capture process enabling higher throughput	Potential for reduced PMI through increased productivity
Cell Culture Media	Nutrient source for cell growth and mAb production	Significant component of input mass in upstream processing
Filtration Membranes	Clarification, sterilization, and diafiltration	Single-use components contributing to consumable mass
Buffer Components	pH control and chromatography conditions	High volume usage impacts water and raw material inputs
Single-Use Bioreactors	Cell cultivation with reduced cleaning requirements	Reduce water and energy use but contribute to solid waste

While PMI serves as a valuable benchmarking metric for material use efficiency in mAb processes, it represents only one dimension of sustainability assessment. The most effective evaluation of bioprocess sustainability integrates PMI with other environmental impact indicators, including energy consumption, greenhouse gas emissions, and water usage [8] [38]. Process intensification strategies such as perfusion cultures, spent media recycling, and continuous processing show significant promise for driving substantial improvements in overall sustainability performance beyond PMI reduction alone [8] [38].

Future developments in PMI calculation and application will likely include more sophisticated modeling approaches that incorporate sensitivity analysis and uncertainty quantification [40], life cycle assessment integration [20], and standardized methodologies for cross-platform comparison. As the biopharmaceutical industry continues to prioritize sustainability, PMI will remain a cornerstone metric for guiding process development decisions toward more efficient and environmentally responsible mAb manufacturing.

Process Mass Intensity (PMI) has emerged as a critical metric for benchmarking the sustainability and efficiency of pharmaceutical manufacturing processes. This technical guide explores advanced applications of the Convergent PMI Calculator developed by the ACS GCI Pharmaceutical Roundtable for complex synthetic routes. PMI represents the total mass of materials used to produce a unit mass of active pharmaceutical ingredient (API), providing scientists and engineers with a standardized method to quantify process efficiency and environmental impact. The Convergent PMI Calculator extends this capability to accommodate multi-branch synthetic pathways, enabling researchers to make informed decisions during route selection and process optimization in drug substance research.

Process Mass Intensity (PMI) is defined as the total mass of materials used in a process to produce a specified mass of product, calculated as PMI = Total Mass Input (kg) / Mass of Product (kg) [1] [6]. This metric has become the pharmaceutical industry standard for measuring process greenness because it accounts for all materials entering the process, including reactants, reagents, solvents, catalysts, and water. The ACS GCI Pharmaceutical Roundtable developed PMI as a comprehensive metric to drive more sustainable processes by focusing attention on the main drivers of process inefficiency, cost, and environmental impact [2].

The fundamental PMI equation reveals that lower PMI values indicate more efficient processes. A PMI of 1 represents an ideal theoretical limit where all inputs are incorporated into the final product with no waste. In practice, pharmaceutical processes typically have much higher PMI values, creating significant opportunity for improvement. The Convergent PMI Calculator specifically addresses the challenge of calculating PMI for complex synthetic routes where multiple synthesis branches converge, providing researchers with accurate assessment tools for modern pharmaceutical development [6] [2].

The Convergent PMI Calculator: Core Methodology

Calculation Framework

The Convergent PMI Calculator maintains the same fundamental calculation methodology as the standard PMI calculator but introduces specialized functionality for handling convergent syntheses. The calculator uses mass balance principles to account for all input materials across multiple synthetic branches and convergence points [2]. The core PMI calculation remains:

PMI = Total Mass of Input Materials / Mass of API

For convergent syntheses, the calculator aggregates inputs from all branches, including divergent synthetic pathways that eventually converge to form the final API. This enables accurate assessment of complex medicinal chemistry routes common in modern pharmaceutical development [6].

Workflow Implementation

The following diagram illustrates the systematic workflow for implementing the Convergent PMI Calculator in complex syntheses:

Key Advantages for Complex Syntheses

The Convergent PMI Calculator offers several distinct advantages for complex pharmaceutical syntheses:

• Branch-Specific Analysis: Enables identification of which synthetic branch contributes most significantly to overall PMI, allowing targeted optimization efforts [2]
• Material Tracking: Maintains comprehensive accounting of all input materials across complex synthetic pathways, preventing underestimation of PMI in multi-step processes [6]
• Scenario Comparison: Facilitates direct comparison of alternative convergent routes using standardized methodology, enabling data-driven decision making in route selection [1]
• Benchmarking: Provides consistent framework for comparing process efficiency against industry benchmarks and internal targets [2]

Experimental Protocol for PMI Assessment

Data Collection Methodology

Accurate PMI calculation requires systematic data collection throughout the synthetic process. The following protocol ensures comprehensive assessment:

• Material Inventory: Document all mass inputs at each synthetic step, including reactants, reagents, solvents, catalysts, and process aids [1]
• Branch Identification: Clearly map synthetic pathway topology, identifying all convergent points and branch junctions
• Intermediate Tracking: Record masses and yields for all isolated intermediates within each synthetic branch
• Solvent Accounting: Include all solvent masses used in reactions, workups, purifications, and isolations
• API Characterization: Precisely measure final API mass with confirmed quality attributes

Calculator Implementation

Execute the Convergent PMI Calculator using this standardized procedure:

• Input Branch Structure: Define the synthetic tree structure within the calculator interface, specifying convergence points [2]
• Enter Mass Data: Input all mass data for each step in every branch, ensuring consistent units (typically kg)
• Validate Completeness: Verify all process materials are accounted for, with particular attention to solvent volumes and workup materials
• Execute Calculation: Run the PMI calculation algorithm to generate branch-specific and overall PMI values
• Interpret Results: Analyze output to identify high-PMI steps and branches for optimization focus

Data Presentation and Analysis

PMI Component Analysis

The table below illustrates a typical PMI breakdown for a convergent pharmaceutical synthesis, demonstrating how material inputs contribute to the overall metric:

Table 1: PMI Component Analysis for a Representative Convergent API Synthesis

Component	Mass (kg)	PMI Contribution	Percentage of Total PMI
Solvents	58	58.0	58%
Water	28	28.0	28%
Reactants	8	8.0	8%
Reagents & Catalysts	6	6.0	6%
Total Input	100	100.0	100%
API Output	1	-	-

Data source: ACS GCI Pharmaceutical Roundtable benchmarking [6]

PMI Tool Comparison

The ACS GCI Pharmaceutical Roundtable has developed a suite of PMI tools to address different development needs:

Table 2: Comparison of ACS GCI PMI Calculation Tools

Tool Name	Primary Function	Application Stage	Key Features
Simple PMI Calculator	Basic PMI calculation	Early development	Single linear synthesis, rapid assessment [2]
Convergent PMI Calculator	PMI for complex routes	Route scouting & optimization	Multiple branches, convergent synthesis [6] [2]
PMI Prediction Calculator	PMI estimation	Target identification & early design	Monte Carlo simulation, predictive analytics [1] [33]
PMI-LCA Tool	Environmental impact assessment	Process development & optimization	Life cycle assessment integration [33]
Biopharma PMI Calculator	Biologics manufacturing	Biologics development	Biologics-specific parameters [20] [33]

The Scientist's Toolkit: Essential Research Reagent Solutions

The following table details key reagent solutions and their functions in sustainable process development:

Table 3: Research Reagent Solutions for Sustainable Pharmaceutical Synthesis

Tool/Resource	Function	Application in PMI Reduction
ACS GCI PR Reagent Guides	Selection of greener reagents for common transformations	Identifies efficient reagents with better atom economy and reduced waste [33]
Solvent Selection Tool	Interactive solvent selection based on multiple properties	Enables substitution of problematic solvents with greener alternatives [33]
Biocatalysis Guide	Guide to implementing enzyme-catalyzed transformations	Provides access to highly selective reactions under mild conditions [33]
Acid-Base Selection Tool	Database of sustainable acids and bases with filtering capability	Facilitates choice of efficient catalysts with better EHS profiles [33]
Green Chemistry Innovation Scorecard (iGAL)	Statistical waste assessment for API manufacturing	Benchmarks process greenness against industry data [1] [33]

Advanced Application: Route Selection Case Study

Comparative Synthesis Strategy Analysis

The following diagram illustrates how the Convergent PMI Calculator enables direct comparison of alternative synthetic strategies for the same target molecule:

Interpretation of Results

The case study demonstrates how convergent synthesis strategies typically yield superior PMI values compared to linear approaches. The Convergent PMI Calculator quantifies this advantage by accurately accounting for material usage across all branches, enabling researchers to:

• Identify Optimization Priorities: Pinpoint specific steps and branches with disproportionally high PMI contributions
• Evaluate Trade-offs: Balance PMI improvements against other critical factors such as development time, regulatory considerations, and implementation cost
• Support Decision Making: Provide quantitative data for route selection committees and portfolio management

Integration with Sustainable Development Goals

The Convergent PMI Calculator supports the pharmaceutical industry's progress toward United Nations Sustainable Development Goals, particularly Goal 12 (Responsible Consumption and Production) [1]. By enabling precise measurement and reduction of material consumption throughout API synthesis, this tool helps organizations:

• Minimize Waste Generation: Directly correlate process efficiency with waste reduction
• Reduce Environmental Impact: Lower the environmental footprint of pharmaceutical manufacturing
• Improve Resource Efficiency: Optimize utilization of finite resources throughout the supply chain
• Enable Transparency: Provide standardized metrics for sustainability reporting and stakeholder communication

The Convergent PMI Calculator represents an essential tool for modern drug substance research, providing scientists and engineers with robust methodology for assessing and improving the sustainability of complex pharmaceutical syntheses. By enabling accurate PMI calculation for convergent synthetic routes, this tool supports data-driven decision making in route selection, process optimization, and environmental impact reduction. As the pharmaceutical industry continues to advance green chemistry principles, the Convergent PMI Calculator will play an increasingly important role in balancing therapeutic innovation with environmental responsibility.

Interpreting, Troubleshooting, and Strategies for PMI Reduction

Process Mass Intensity (PMI) is a key green chemistry metric used to benchmark the efficiency and environmental impact of pharmaceutical manufacturing processes. It is defined as the total mass of materials used to produce a unit mass of a drug substance or active pharmaceutical ingredient (API). PMI provides a comprehensive assessment of process efficiency by accounting for all raw material inputs, including reactants, reagents, catalysts, and solvents, relative to the final API output. The fundamental formula for PMI is straightforward: PMI = Total Mass of Input Materials (kg) / Mass of Product (kg). A lower PMI value indicates a more efficient and environmentally favorable process, as it signifies less waste generation and better resource utilization.

The American Chemical Society Green Chemistry Institute Pharmaceutical Roundtable (ACS GCIPR) has championed PMI as a standardized metric to drive sustainable practices across the industry. PMI benchmarking exercises conducted since 2008 have enabled pharmaceutical companies to identify inefficiencies, reduce costs, and minimize environmental, safety, and health impacts across drug development pipelines. Unlike simpler metrics such as yield or atom economy, PMI offers a holistic view of process efficiency by encompassing all materials used in manufacturing, making it particularly valuable for comparing processes across different therapeutic modalities and development stages.

PMI Calculation Methodologies and System Boundaries

Standardized Calculation Approaches

The accurate calculation of PMI requires careful definition of system boundaries and consistent accounting of all input materials. The ACS GCIPR has developed specialized calculators to standardize this process across different synthesis types. For traditional linear or convergent syntheses of small molecules, the Process Mass Intensity Calculator provides a straightforward method to account for raw material inputs on the basis of bulk API output [2]. For more complex synthetic routes involving multiple branches that converge, the Convergent PMI Calculator uses the same fundamental calculations but accommodates the structural complexity of convergent syntheses [2] [33].

The most basic system boundary employed in PMI calculation is the gate-to-gate approach, which considers only materials directly used within the manufacturing facility. However, recent research emphasizes that this narrow boundary may insufficiently capture the full environmental impact. Cradle-to-gate system boundaries, which incorporate upstream value chain impacts of raw materials, provide a more comprehensive assessment. Eichwald et al. (2025) demonstrated that expanding system boundaries from gate-to-gate to cradle-to-gate strengthens correlations with environmental impact assessments for most impact categories [41].

Experimental Protocol for PMI Determination

A standardized experimental protocol for PMI determination involves several critical steps. First, researchers must document all input masses for starting materials, reagents, solvents, and catalysts used in each synthetic step. This includes materials used in workup, purification, and isolation procedures. Second, precisely measure the final API mass after complete purification and drying. Third, calculate total input mass by summing all documented inputs. Finally, apply the PMI formula by dividing total input mass by final product mass.

For processes involving convergent syntheses, the calculation must account for the mass inputs from all branches simultaneously. The Convergent PMI Calculator facilitates this by allowing multiple input streams that merge at defined synthesis points. When comparing PMI values across processes, it is essential to maintain consistent system boundaries and clearly report whether water and process aids are included in the calculations. The ACS GCIPR recommends excluding water from PMI calculations to enable more meaningful comparisons of synthetic efficiency, though water usage should be tracked separately as an important environmental metric [33].

PMI Benchmarking Across Therapeutic Modalities

Comparative Analysis of PMI Ranges

The PMI values for pharmaceutical manufacturing processes vary significantly across therapeutic modalities due to differences in molecular complexity, synthesis methods, and purification requirements. The table below summarizes typical PMI ranges for small molecules, peptides, and biologics based on current industry data.

Table 1: Typical PMI Ranges Across Therapeutic Modalities

Therapeutic Modality	Typical PMI Range	Key Influencing Factors	Representative Examples
Small Molecules	50 - 400	Route complexity, number of steps, chiral centers	MK-7264: PMI improved from 366 to 88 during development [15]
Synthetic Peptides	1,000 - 10,000+	Length, sequence complexity, purification method	Commercial peptides: Wide range depending on synthesis technology [42]
Biologics	1,000 - 50,000	Expression system, titer, purification complexity	Monoclonal antibodies, vaccines, cell therapies [43]

Small Molecule PMI Benchmarks

Small molecule APIs typically demonstrate the lowest PMI values among the three modalities, though they still exhibit significant variation based on synthetic complexity. A comprehensive analysis of 64 bulk active pharmaceutical manufacturing processes encompassing 703 steps across 12 companies revealed substantial opportunities for PMI reduction through green chemistry innovations [33]. The development of MK-7264, a small molecule API, exemplifies this potential for improvement, with PMI reduction from 366 to 88 over the course of process development [15]. This 76% reduction demonstrates how route optimization, solvent selection, and catalyst efficiency can dramatically improve process mass efficiency.

For small molecules, typical commercial processes often achieve PMI values between 50 and 200, with higher values occurring in early development or for highly complex molecules with multiple chiral centers. The ACS GCIPR benchmarking data indicates that solvents typically contribute 80-90% of the total PMI in small molecule manufacturing, highlighting why solvent selection and recovery represent the most significant opportunities for PMI reduction [2].

Peptide PMI Benchmarks

Synthetic peptide manufacturing processes exhibit considerably higher PMI values compared to small molecules, primarily due to the extensive use of solvents and coupling reagents in solid-phase peptide synthesis (SPPS). The stepwise nature of peptide synthesis, requiring repeated deprotection, coupling, and washing cycles, generates substantial solvent waste. A recent holistic analysis of current peptide manufacturing processes revealed PMI values ranging from 1,000 for simpler peptides to over 10,000 for complex sequences [42].

The primary factors influencing peptide PMI include peptide length, sequence complexity, and purification methodology. Longer peptides require more synthetic cycles and reagents, while sequences with challenging secondary structures or aggregation tendencies may necessitate lower concentrations and increased solvent usage. Purification via reversed-phase HPLC typically contributes significantly to the overall PMI due to large volumes of acetonitrile and water required. Emerging technologies, including hybrid solid-solution phase approaches and continuous flow synthesis, show promise for reducing peptide PMI by improving coupling efficiency and enabling solvent recycling.

Biologics PMI Benchmarks

Biologics manufacturing, including monoclonal antibodies, vaccines, and cell and gene therapies, demonstrates the highest PMI values among pharmaceutical modalities. The biologics contract manufacturing market, projected to grow from USD 23.8 billion in 2025 to USD 55.0 billion by 2035, reflects the increasing importance of these therapeutics [43]. Biologics PMI values typically range from 1,000 to 50,000, with extreme values occurring for advanced therapies with low titers or complex purification requirements.

The ACS GCIPR has developed a Biopharma PMI Calculator specifically designed to address the unique considerations of biological drug substance manufacturing [33]. This tool catalogs the amount of water, raw materials, and consumables used per kg of biological API, enabling industry-wide benchmarking. For biologics, the key PMI drivers include expression system selection (mammalian vs. microbial), cell culture titer, and purification train complexity. Mammalian cell culture systems typically exhibit higher PMI values than microbial systems due to lower volumetric productivity and more complex media requirements. Downstream processing, particularly chromatographic purification steps, contributes significantly to overall PMI through buffer consumption and resin lifetime considerations.

Advanced PMI Tools and Implementation Strategies

Table 2: Essential PMI Research Tools and Resources

Tool/Resource	Primary Function	Application Context
PMI Calculator	Basic PMI calculation for linear syntheses	Small molecule route scouting [2]
Convergent PMI Calculator	PMI calculation for convergent syntheses	Complex molecules with multiple branches [33]
Streamlined PMI-LCA Tool	Combines PMI with cradle-to-gate environmental footprint	Environmental impact assessment of synthetic routes [15]
PMI Prediction Calculator	Predicts PMI ranges for proposed routes	Early development before laboratory evaluation [33]
Biopharma PMI Calculator	PMI calculation for biological APIs	Biologics process development [33]
Solvent Selection Tool	Identifies greener solvent alternatives	Solvent optimization for PMI reduction [33]

PMI Optimization Workflow

The following diagram illustrates a systematic workflow for PMI assessment and optimization throughout the drug development lifecycle:

Integrated PMI and Environmental Assessment

The relationship between PMI, system boundaries, and environmental impacts creates a complex assessment framework that requires careful consideration:

PMI benchmarking provides invaluable insights for drug substance researchers seeking to develop efficient, sustainable manufacturing processes. The typical PMI ranges for small molecules (50-400), peptides (1,000-10,000+), and biologics (1,000-50,000) establish expected baselines that can guide process development targets. As the pharmaceutical industry continues to emphasize sustainability, PMI has evolved from a simple mass-based metric to an integrated component of comprehensive environmental assessment.

Future PMI methodology development will likely focus on standardizing cradle-to-gate system boundaries to enable more meaningful comparisons across materials and processes. The research by Eichwald et al. (2025) demonstrates that expanding system boundaries strengthens the correlation between mass-based metrics and environmental impacts, though the relationship remains imperfect due to the multi-criteria nature of sustainability [41]. The ongoing transition toward streamlined life cycle assessment tools that combine PMI with environmental footprint data represents the next frontier in green chemistry metrics [15].

For drug development professionals, implementing regular PMI tracking throughout process development enables data-driven decisions that balance economic, environmental, and quality objectives. The available toolkit of PMI calculators, prediction tools, and sustainability metrics continues to expand, providing researchers with robust methodologies for benchmarking their results against industry standards and driving continuous improvement in pharmaceutical manufacturing.

Identifying the Major Contributors to High PMI in Your Process

Process Mass Intensity (PMI) is a key metric of sustainability and efficiency in pharmaceutical research and development. It is defined as the total mass of materials used to produce a unit mass of the final drug substance. A lower PMI signifies a more efficient, cost-effective, and environmentally friendly process. The calculation for PMI is straightforward: PMI = Total Mass of Inputs (kg) / Mass of Product (kg). The ideal PMI is 1, indicating that all input materials are incorporated into the final product, though this is never achieved in practice. Inefficient processes in the drug discovery and early development phases can lead to a high PMI, creating significant economic and environmental burdens that can persist throughout the product lifecycle. Identifying and mitigating the major contributors to high PMI is, therefore, a critical objective for modern process chemists.

This guide provides a structured framework for researchers to diagnose the root causes of high PMI within their drug substance processes. By integrating systematic analysis with targeted experimental protocols, we will outline how to quantify waste streams, pinpoint inefficiencies, and implement corrective strategies. The focus is on a holistic approach that considers not only chemical reaction efficiency but also the often-overlooked contributions from workup, purification, and auxiliary materials.

A Framework for Calculating and Diagnosing High PMI

A systematic approach to calculating PMI and diagnosing inefficiencies is fundamental to process improvement. This involves meticulous data collection and a component-wise breakdown of the total mass input.

Comprehensive PMI Calculation and Data Collection

The first step is to account for every material entering the process. This includes not only reactants and solvents but also catalysts, workup reagents, and purification materials. The data should be collected on a per-step basis and then aggregated for the entire synthetic sequence. The following table outlines the standard categories for mass input tracking.

Table 1: Components for PMI Calculation

Mass Input Category	Description & Examples	Contribution to PMI
Solvents	Reaction, extraction, and wash solvents (e.g., DMF, THF, dichloromethane, water).	Typically the largest contributor, often >50% of total PMI.
Reagents & Reactants	Starting materials, reagents, catalysts, and ligands.	Determined by atom economy and stoichiometric excess.
Auxiliary Materials	Materials for purification (e.g., silica gel, chromatography solvents, crystallization solvents, filters).	A major, often hidden, source of mass intensity.
Water & Acids/Bases	Aqueous solutions used in workup and quenching.	Can be substantial, especially in processes requiring pH adjustments.

To visualize the diagnostic workflow for tackling high PMI, the following diagram outlines the logical progression from data collection to targeted action.

Major Contributors to High PMI: Analysis and Experimental Protocols

Once the high-PMI steps are identified, a deeper investigation into the specific contributors is necessary. The following sections detail the most common culprits and methodologies for their analysis.

Solvent Usage and Recovery

Solvent consumption is frequently the dominant factor in PMI. Inefficient solvent use manifests in high volumes for reactions, extractions, and particularly in chromatography.

• Experimental Protocol for Assessing Solvent Impact:
  • Quantify Usage: For each unit operation (reaction, extraction, wash, crystallization, chromatography), accurately record the type and volume of solvent used.
  • Benchmark Volumes: Compare reaction and workup solvent volumes against established industry benchmarks or internal best practices. A common target is to aim for a reaction concentration of ≥0.1 M for early-phase and ≥0.2 M for late-phase processes.
  • Chromatography Audit: Document the mass of silica gel and total volume of eluent used per gram of purified product. This single step can account for over 80% of the total PMI in a research-scale process.
  • Recycling Feasibility Test: Distill recovered solvents (e.g., from filtrates or rotary evaporator receivers) and analyze them via GC-MS and Karl Fischer titration to assess purity and water content. Test their performance in the intended process step versus virgin solvent.

Poor Atom Economy and Stoichiometry

Reactions with inherently low atom economy or those that rely on large excesses of reagents generate significant molecular waste.

• Experimental Protocol for Analyzing Reaction Mass Efficiency:
  • Calculate Atom Economy: For the core transformation, calculate the theoretical atom economy using the formula: Atom Economy = (MW of Product / Σ MW of Reactants) × 100%.
  • Determine Actual Excess: Precisely measure the exact masses of all reagents and reactants used, noting their purity. Calculate the stoichiometric excess for each component.
  • Kinetic Profiling: To justify excesses, perform a reaction kinetic study. Monitor the consumption of the limiting reagent and the formation of product and key impurities over time using techniques like HPLC or NMR. This data can determine the minimal excess required for complete conversion and acceptable impurity levels.

Inefficient Workup and Purification

The workup and purification stages are often where significant mass is added with little value. Troublesome physical properties of intermediates, such as poor particle characteristics, can exacerbate these inefficiencies. For instance, a fine particle size can lead to challenging filtration, increasing solvent wash volumes and processing time [44].

• Experimental Protocol for Purification Efficiency:
  • Chromatography Analysis: If chromatography is used, calculate the E-factor for Purification (Mass of Silica + Mass of Eluent) / Mass of Product. This number is often startlingly high.
  • Crystallization Screening: Systematically screen antisolvents, cooling rates, and seeding strategies to improve yield, purity, and particle properties, thereby reducing the need for supplemental purification.
  • Alternative Techniques: Experiment with alternative purification techniques such as extraction, washing, or trituration that may generate less waste than column chromatography.

The Scientist's Toolkit: Key Reagent Solutions for PMI Investigation

Effectively diagnosing and addressing high PMI requires a suite of analytical and physical tools. The table below lists essential reagents and materials used in the experiments described in this guide.

Table 2: Key Research Reagent Solutions for PMI Analysis

Reagent/Material	Function in PMI Investigation
Analytical Standards	High-purity compounds for developing and validating HPLC/GC methods to accurately quantify reaction components and impurities.
Deuterated Solvents	For NMR spectroscopy, enabling kinetic profiling and reaction monitoring to optimize stoichiometry and minimize reagent excess.
Silica Gel for Chromatography	A major contributor to PMI; used in experiments to find minimal effective mass for purification or to be replaced by alternative methods.
Solvents (Various Purities)	Include HPLC-grade for analysis, and technical-grade for process development. Used in solvent replacement and recycling studies.
Crystallization Screen Kits	Pre-formulated kits of solvents and antisolvents to rapidly identify optimal crystallization conditions for high-yield purification.

Strategies for PMI Reduction and Process intensification

After identifying the major contributors, the focus shifts to implementing reduction strategies. Process intensification, which aims to make processes more efficient and compact, is key.

• Solvent Selection and Replacement: Prioritize the use of safer, biodegradable solvents (e.g., ethanol, 2-methyl-THF, acetone) over hazardous ones (e.g., DMF, DCM, THF). Use solvent selection guides. Implement solvent recycling protocols to drastically reduce net consumption.
• Reaction Optimization and Catalysis: Employ catalytic reactions (e.g., catalytic hydrogenation, cross-couplings) instead of stoichiometric ones. Use the kinetic data from Protocol 3.2 to minimize reagent excess. Explore one-pot multi-step syntheses to avoid intermediate isolation and purification.
• Purification Transformation: The single most impactful change is often to replace column chromatography with crystallization or precipitation. Develop processes where the crude reaction mixture can be directly carried forward or purified via a simple aqueous workup and crystallization.
• Particle Engineering: Controlling particle size distribution is critical for efficient solid-liquid separations like filtration and centrifugation [45] [44]. Optimal particle size can reduce solvent wash volumes and improve drying efficiency, thereby lowering PMI. Techniques like laser diffraction and dynamic light scattering are vital for this characterization [46].

A high PMI is a symptom of an under-optimized process. By adopting a rigorous, data-driven approach to calculate PMI at a granular level, researchers can move from simply observing the problem to diagnosing its root causes. The major contributors—excessive solvent use, poor atom economy, and inefficient purification—can be systematically addressed through targeted experimental protocols. Integrating sustainability and efficiency metrics like PMI from the earliest stages of drug substance research is no longer optional but a core competency for modern pharmaceutical scientists, leading to more economical, scalable, and environmentally responsible processes.

In the pursuit of sustainable and economically viable pharmaceutical processes, Process Mass Intensity (PMI) has emerged as a key metric for evaluating environmental impact and efficiency. PMI is calculated as the total mass of materials used in a process divided by the mass of the final drug substance produced. A lower PMI indicates a more efficient and less wasteful process. Among the most influential factors governing PMI are solvent selection, reagent stoichiometry, and catalyst use, which collectively determine the mass efficiency, waste generation, and overall sustainability of Active Pharmaceutical Ingredient (API) synthesis. This guide provides a technical framework for optimizing these critical levers, enabling researchers and process chemists to design synthetic routes with significantly improved PMI profiles. The systematic application of these optimization strategies is essential for meeting both environmental responsibilities and the stringent economic demands of modern drug development.

Solvent Selection and Optimization

The Role of Solvents in PMI

Solvents typically constitute the largest proportion of mass in API synthesis, often accounting for 50-80% of the total process mass [47]. Consequently, solvent selection and management present the most significant opportunity for PMI reduction. Beyond their primary function as reaction media, solvents impact crystallization, purification, isolation, and drying operations, each contributing to the overall mass balance. The ideal solvent system facilitates high reaction yields while minimizing volume, enabling efficient recovery, and reducing waste disposal. Modern solvent optimization must balance performance, safety, environmental, and regulatory considerations to achieve sustainable process designs.

Systematic Solvent Selection Methodologies

A structured approach to solvent selection integrates multiple criteria to identify optimal options. The following workflow provides a systematic methodology:

• Define Process Requirements: Identify specific needs for each unit operation (reaction, crystallization, washing, etc.), including solubility parameters, polarity, boiling point, and compatibility with reaction components.
• Apply Environmental and Safety Screening: Filter solvents using established guidelines (e.g., ICH Q3C, ACS Green Chemistry), prioritizing solvents with favorable environmental, health, and safety (EHS) profiles [47].
• Evaluate Physical Properties: Assess key properties affecting unit operations, including viscosity for filtration, relative density for washing efficiency, and enthalpy of vaporization for drying [47].
• Predict Performance: Use predictive tools (e.g., COSMO-RS, thermodynamic models) to forecast solubility, reaction rates, and purification efficiency [47].
• Experimental Validation: Conduct targeted experiments to verify predictions and optimize conditions, focusing on maximizing yield and purity while minimizing solvent volume.

Table: Key Properties for Solvent Selection and Their Impact on Process Efficiency

Property	Process Impact	Ideal Characteristics
Solvency Power	Reaction rate, yield, crystallization efficiency	High solute solubility, compatible polarity
Boiling Point	Removal, recovery, swap operations	Moderate (50-150°C) for easy separation
Relative Density	Washing efficiency, cake stability	Comparable to mother liquor to prevent layer inversion [47]
Viscosity	Filtration rate, washing effectiveness	Low viscosity for efficient capillary penetration [47]
Enthalpy of Vaporization	Drying energy requirements	Low value for reduced energy consumption [47]
Environmental Impact	Waste handling, EHS compliance	Low toxicity, high recyclability, green credentials

Advanced Approaches: Solvent Swap and Recovery Operations

In multi-step syntheses, different unit operations often require different solvent properties. Solvent swap—replacing the original solvent with one more suitable for the next step—is a common but mass-intensive operation. Batch distillation is a typical method, with two primary operational procedures [48]:

• "Put-Take" Procedure: The original solvent is partially removed by distillation, followed by addition of fresh swap solvent. This cycle repeats until the original solvent concentration meets specifications.
• "Constant Volume" Procedure: After initial solvent reduction, the volume in the still is maintained constant by continuously adding fresh swap solvent while distilling off the mixture.

The "constant volume" method generally reduces swap solvent consumption, thereby improving PMI [48]. Successful implementation requires a sufficient boiling point difference between solvents (typically >20°C) and the absence of azeotrope formation.

Implementation of Green Solvent Technologies

The pharmaceutical industry is increasingly adopting sustainable solvent technologies. Bio-derived solvents (e.g., Cyrene), ionic liquids, and deep eutectic solvents are gaining traction due to their low volatility, recyclability, and favorable environmental profiles [49]. Furthermore, computer-aided molecular design (CAMD) tools enable the systematic design of novel solvents tailored to specific process requirements, optimizing both performance and sustainability.

Figure 1: Systematic Solvent Selection Workflow

Reagent Stoichiometry Optimization

Stoichiometry Fundamentals and PMI Impact

Reagent stoichiometry directly influences PMI through its effect on atom economy, yield, and purification requirements. Excess reagents increase material consumption and generate additional waste, negatively impacting PMI. Traditional One-Factor-at-a-Time (OFAT) approaches often fail to identify true optima due to complex interactions between factors [50]. Modern optimization employs statistical and computational methods to model these interactions and identify balanced stoichiometric conditions that maximize efficiency while maintaining reaction performance.

Design of Experiments (DoE) for Stoichiometry Optimization

DoE is a powerful statistical methodology for efficiently exploring the effect of multiple factors and their interactions on reaction outcomes. Unlike OFAT, which varies one factor while holding others constant, DoE systematically varies all factors according to a predefined plan, enabling the construction of a mathematical model describing the relationship between inputs and outputs [50].

A typical DoE workflow for stoichiometry optimization includes:

• Screening Design: Identify which factors (reagent equivalents, catalyst loading, temperature, etc.) have significant effects on critical responses (yield, purity, etc.).
• Optimization Design: Refine the levels of significant factors to locate the optimum region. Response Surface Methodology (RSM) is commonly used.
• Robustness Testing: Verify that the optimum conditions are insensitive to small variations in factor levels.

Table: Example DoE Matrix and Results for a Model SNAr Reaction [50]

Experiment	Residence Time (min)	Temperature (°C)	Pyrrolidine (equiv.)	Yield of 7 (%)
1	0.5	30	2	45
2	3.5	30	2	52
3	0.5	70	2	61
4	3.5	70	2	67
5	0.5	30	10	58
6	3.5	30	10	63
7	0.5	70	10	77
8	3.5	70	10	82
9 (C)	2.0	50	6	75
10 (C)	2.0	50	6	76
11 (C)	2.0	50	6	74

Kinetic Modeling for Stoichiometry Determination

For complex reaction networks, understanding the underlying kinetics is essential for stoichiometry optimization. Optimization-based simultaneous modelling integrates time-resolved concentration data to identify reaction stoichiometries and kinetic parameters concurrently [51]. This approach involves:

• Data Collection: Measuring concentration profiles of reactants, intermediates, and products over time.
• Model Postulation: Defining a set of potential reaction pathways and corresponding rate expressions.
• Parameter Estimation: Using mixed-integer programming or similar techniques to identify the model that best fits the experimental data while balancing complexity and accuracy [51].
• Optimization: Using the validated model to calculate reagent stoichiometries and addition profiles that maximize yield and selectivity while minimizing waste.

This method is particularly valuable for minimizing impurities and ensuring high purity with minimal purification efforts, directly reducing PMI.

Catalyst Selection and Optimization

Catalyst Impact on Process Efficiency

Catalysts reduce PMI by increasing reaction rates, improving yields, enabling milder conditions, and enhancing selectivity. The development of efficient, stable, and recyclable catalytic systems is crucial for sustainable API synthesis. The choice between homogeneous and heterogeneous catalysts involves trade-offs: homogeneous catalysts often offer higher activity and selectivity, while heterogeneous catalysts provide easier separation and reuse [52] [53].

Heterogeneous Catalysis in API Synthesis

Heterogeneous catalysts are particularly advantageous for PMI reduction due to their recyclability and simplified separation. Their solid nature allows for easy filtration from the reaction mixture, enabling multiple reuses and minimizing catalyst waste. This is especially valuable in multi-step syntheses, where catalyst removal prevents interference with subsequent steps and product contamination.

Case studies demonstrate their successful application:

• In the synthesis of benzimidazole derivatives, magnetically recoverable nanocatalysts (e.g., Fe₃O₄@SiO₂/collagen) and polymer-supported catalysts (e.g., Rh@PS) enable efficient construction of pharmacologically important scaffolds with straightforward recovery and reuse [52].
• In the initial steps of oseltamivir synthesis from quinic acid, solid sulfonic acid catalysts (e.g., Amberlyst IR-15, Deloxan ASP I/9, SAC-13) effectively catalyze acetalization, achieving yields of 86-91%, comparable to homogeneous p-toluenesulfonic acid but with potential for recycling [53].

Table: Comparison of Catalyst Types for PMI Reduction

Characteristic	Homogeneous Catalysts	Heterogeneous Catalysts
Activity	Typically high	Variable, often lower
Separation	Difficult, mass-intensive	Easy filtration
Recyclability	Limited	Excellent
Ligand Design	Straightforward	Complex
Product Contamination	Possible metal leaching	Minimal with stable catalysts
PMI Impact	Higher due to difficult separation	Lower due to easy recovery and reuse

Advanced Optimization via Machine Learning

Machine Learning (ML) represents a transformative approach for optimizing complex catalytic systems. Bayesian Optimization is particularly effective for navigating high-dimensional spaces (e.g., catalyst, ligand, solvent, temperature combinations) with minimal experimentation [54].

The ML-driven optimization workflow (e.g., the Minerva framework) involves [54]:

• Initial Sampling: Using algorithmically diverse sampling (e.g., Sobol sequences) to gather initial data points across the experimental space.
• Model Training: Training a probabilistic model (e.g., Gaussian Process) to predict reaction outcomes and uncertainties for all possible conditions.
• Acquisition Function: Guiding the selection of the next experiments by balancing exploration (testing uncertain regions) and exploitation (improving promising conditions).
• Iterative Refinement: Repeating the cycle until convergence to the optimum.

This approach has been successfully deployed in pharmaceutical process development, identifying conditions achieving >95% yield and selectivity for challenging Ni-catalyzed Suzuki and Pd-catalyzed Buchwald-Hartwig reactions in significantly reduced timeframes [54]. For one API, the ML framework identified improved process conditions in 4 weeks compared to a previous 6-month development campaign [54].

Figure 2: Machine Learning-Driven Catalyst Optimization

Integrated Workflow and The Scientist's Toolkit

An Integrated Approach to PMI Reduction

The most significant PMI reductions are achieved by integrating solvent, stoichiometry, and catalyst optimization rather than treating them as isolated factors. For instance, selecting a green solvent that also facilitates catalyst recovery, combined with stoichiometry optimized via DoE, creates a synergistic effect that dramatically improves process mass efficiency. The development of an integrated solvent selection approach addressing both crystallization and isolation is novel and plays a crucial part in reducing issues encountered during isolation (agglomeration, lumping, impurity precipitation), which can severely impact PMI [47].

The Scientist's Toolkit: Essential Research Reagent Solutions

Table: Key Reagents and Tools for Optimization Levers

Tool/Reagent Category	Specific Examples	Function & Application in PMI Reduction
Heterogeneous Acid Catalysts	Amberlyst IR-15, Deloxan ASP I/9, SAC-13, Sulfonated Hydrothermal Carbon (SHTC) [53]	Replace homogeneous acids for acetalization, esterification; enable easy filtration and reuse.
Heterogeneous Base Catalysts	Amberlite IRA-400, TBD-PS, TBD-SiO₂ [53]	Replace homogeneous bases for transesterification, lactone alcoholysis; enable easy filtration and reuse.
Magnetically Recoverable Catalysts	Fe₃O₄@SiO₂/collagen, Cobalt Ferrite NPs [52]	Facilitate catalyst recovery via external magnet, minimizing mass loss and purification steps.
Green Solvents	Bio-derived Cyrene, Ionic Liquids, 2-MeTHF, cPVAc [49]	Reduce environmental impact, improve recyclability, and enhance worker safety.
DoE Software	MODDE, JMP, Design-Expert, Python/R toolboxes [50]	Statistically design efficient experiments and model complex factor interactions for optimization.
Predictive Solubility Tools	COSMO-RS, NRTL-SAC, COSMOtherm [47]	Predict solute solubility in various solvents to rationally select crystallization and wash solvents.
Process Modeling & Simulation	ICAS platform, gPROMS, Aspen Plus [48]	Simulate unit operations (e.g., solvent swap via batch distillation) to minimize solvent consumption.

The strategic optimization of solvent systems, reagent stoichiometry, and catalytic processes is fundamental to reducing Process Mass Intensity in pharmaceutical development. By moving beyond traditional OFAT approaches and adopting integrated, model-based strategies—including systematic solvent selection, DoE, kinetic modeling, and machine learning—researchers can significantly enhance process efficiency. The implementation of these advanced optimization levers not only delivers improved PMI and sustainability profiles but also accelerates development timelines and reduces costs. As the pharmaceutical industry continues to prioritize green chemistry and economic viability, mastering these optimization techniques becomes indispensable for every drug development professional.

The Impact of Process Intensification and Continuous Manufacturing on PMI

Process Mass Intensity (PMI) has emerged as a fundamental metric for assessing the efficiency and sustainability of pharmaceutical manufacturing processes. Defined as the total mass of materials used to produce a unit mass of a desired product, PMI provides a comprehensive measure of resource utilization that directly impacts both environmental sustainability and production economics. In the specific context of drug substance research and development, PMI is calculated by dividing the total quantity of raw materials (kg)—including reactants, solvents, water, and process consumables—by the quantity of bulk active pharmaceutical ingredient (API) produced (kg) [2] [6]. The pharmaceutical industry has widely adopted PMI as a standard benchmarking tool through initiatives led by the ACS GCI Pharmaceutical Roundtable, which first introduced standardized PMI calculation methods in 2008 and has conducted regular benchmarking exercises ever since [2].

The traditional batch manufacturing paradigm in pharmaceuticals has historically resulted in high PMI values, often ranging from 50 to 100 for complex synthetic routes, indicating that 50-100 kg of materials are required to produce just 1 kg of final API [2]. This inefficiency stems from multiple factors including multi-step synthesis with intermediate isolations, excessive solvent usage, and linear process designs that generate significant waste at each stage. Within typical pharmaceutical manufacturing processes, solvents account for approximately 58% of total input materials, water constitutes 28%, while reactants represent only about 8% of the total mass footprint [6]. This distribution highlights why PMI reduction strategies increasingly focus on solvent optimization and recovery rather than merely improving reaction yields.

The adoption of PMI as a key performance indicator reflects the pharmaceutical industry's commitment to green chemistry principles and sustainable development. By providing a standardized measurement framework, PMI enables objective comparison of processes across different organizations and manufacturing sites, driving continuous improvement in resource efficiency [2]. As the industry faces increasing pressure to reduce manufacturing costs, environmental impact, and supply chain vulnerabilities, PMI has become an essential metric for evaluating the success of process intensification strategies, particularly through the implementation of continuous manufacturing technologies.

The Fundamentals of Continuous Manufacturing and Process Intensification

Defining Continuous Manufacturing in Pharma

Continuous manufacturing represents a paradigm shift from traditional batch processing to an integrated production system where materials continuously enter the manufacturing system and processed products simultaneously exit the system. Unlike batch processes where each manufacturing step occurs in discrete intervals with intermediate storage and testing, continuous processes operate as a single, unified system with material constantly undergoing transformation [55]. This approach fundamentally changes the architecture of pharmaceutical manufacturing, eliminating hold times between process steps and enabling real-time quality control through integrated Process Analytical Technology (PAT) [55].

The technological foundation of continuous pharmaceutical manufacturing encompasses several core components: continuous flow reactors for chemical synthesis, continuous crystallization systems, in-line mixing and blending equipment, and continuous separation technologies [56]. These systems are integrated through sophisticated material handling systems that maintain consistent flow rates and precisely controlled residence times. Advanced process control systems utilizing real-time monitoring and automated feedback loops ensure that critical quality attributes are maintained within specified parameters throughout the production campaign [57]. The implementation of these technologies has been facilitated by regulatory support from agencies including the FDA's Emerging Technology Team and the International Council for Harmonization (ICH), which have developed updated guidance to support the transition from batch to continuous processing [55].

Principles of Process Intensification

Process intensification encompasses a set of design and operational strategies aimed at dramatically improving manufacturing efficiency, reducing equipment size, and minimizing resource consumption. In pharmaceutical applications, process intensification manifests through several key approaches: the integration of multiple unit operations into single, compact systems; the implementation of continuous processing to enhance mass and heat transfer; the adoption of alternative energy sources such as microwave irradiation or ultrasound; and the optimization of reaction pathways to minimize purification steps [58]. These strategies collectively enable substantial reductions in the manufacturing footprint, with intensified processes typically requiring 50-90% less equipment volume compared to conventional batch systems.

The relationship between process intensification and continuous manufacturing is synergistic—continuous operation often enables intensification, while intensification principles make continuous operation more efficient and economically viable. This synergy is particularly evident in the development of Portable, Continuous, Miniature, and Modular (PCMM) units, which represent the current state-of-the-art in intensified pharmaceutical manufacturing [55]. These self-contained production systems can be rapidly deployed and scaled to meet fluctuating demand, significantly enhancing supply chain resilience while reducing capital investment requirements. The efficiency gains from process intensification directly translate to PMI reduction through multiple mechanisms, including improved reaction yields, reduced solvent requirements, minimized purification losses, and elimination of intermediate isolation steps.

Quantitative Analysis of PMI in Continuous vs. Batch Processes

Comparative PMI Performance Across Manufacturing Approaches

The transition from batch to continuous manufacturing generates measurable improvements in Process Mass Intensity across multiple pharmaceutical manufacturing applications. The following table summarizes key comparative data from industry assessments and research studies:

Table 1: PMI Comparison Between Batch and Continuous Manufacturing Processes

Manufacturing Approach	Typical PMI Range	Key Contributing Factors	Application Context
Traditional Batch API Manufacturing	50-100 kg/kg API	High solvent usage, multiple isolation steps, intermediate purifications	Small molecule drug substances [2]
Intensified Continuous API Manufacturing	25-50 kg/kg API	Reduced solvent volumes, eliminated intermediate isolation, improved yields	Flow chemistry-based API synthesis [58]
Batch Biologics Manufacturing	1,000-10,000 L/kg	Large water consumption, single-use consumables, buffer requirements	Monoclonal antibody production [59]
Continuous Biologics Manufacturing	500-5,000 L/kg	Smaller bioreactors, intensified chromatography, reduced buffer volumes	Perfusion-based bioprocessing [59]
Integrated Continuous Drug Product	5-15 kg/kg product	Direct compression, continuous blending, real-time release	Oral solid dosage forms [56]

The PMI reduction achievable through continuous manufacturing varies significantly between small molecule APIs and biologics. For small molecule synthesis, industry data indicates that continuous processing can reduce PMI by 30-70% compared to batch processes, primarily through solvent reduction and yield improvements [58]. In biologics manufacturing, while continuous processes may show comparable or even slightly higher PMI when measured solely by water and material consumption per kg, they demonstrate superior performance when considering space-time-yield—the amount of product produced per unit volume of equipment per unit time [59]. This distinction highlights the importance of considering multiple efficiency metrics alongside PMI when evaluating process sustainability.

Regional Market Adoption and Impact on Industry PMI Standards

The global adoption of continuous manufacturing technologies follows distinct regional patterns that influence the development of PMI benchmarking standards. North America currently leads in continuous manufacturing implementation, with the market valued at $958.02 million in 2025 and projected to reach $2,178.28 million by 2033, representing a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 10.81% [60]. This leadership position is reinforced by strong regulatory support from the FDA, which has established expedited review pathways for drugs manufactured using continuous processes [55]. Europe follows closely with a continuous manufacturing market size of $583.42 million in 2025, expected to grow at a CAGR of 10.46% to $1,293 million by 2033 [60]. The European Medicines Agency (EMA) has actively promoted regulatory harmonization to support continuous manufacturing adoption across member states.

The Asia-Pacific region represents the fastest-growing market for continuous manufacturing technologies, with projected growth at a CAGR of 12.37% from 2025 to 2033 [60]. This accelerated adoption is particularly evident in countries with strong generic pharmaceutical industries, such as India and China, where continuous manufacturing offers competitive advantages for cost-effective production. The following table illustrates the projected growth of continuous manufacturing across key regions:

Table 2: Global Continuous Manufacturing Market Projections (2025-2033)

Region	Market Size (2025)	Projected Market Size (2033)	CAGR	PMI Reduction Potential
North America	$958.02 Million	$2,178.28 Million	10.81%	40-60% for small molecules [60]
Europe	$583.42 Million	$1,293 Million	10.46%	35-55% for small molecules [60]
Asia Pacific	$812.48 Million	$2,065.25 Million	12.37%	45-65% for small molecules [60]
South America	$97.45 Million	$206.53 Million	9.84%	30-50% for small molecules [60]
Middle East & Africa	$79.73 Million	$174.57 Million	10.28%	30-50% for small molecules [60]

The varying adoption rates across regions reflect differences in regulatory frameworks, manufacturing infrastructure, and economic drivers. However, the consistent theme across all regions is the recognition that continuous manufacturing technologies enable significant PMI reduction while improving overall manufacturing efficiency and product quality. As these technologies become more widely implemented, industry-wide PMI benchmarks are expected to decline, establishing new standards for sustainable pharmaceutical manufacturing.

Methodologies for PMI Calculation in Continuous Processes

Standard PMI Calculation Framework

The foundational methodology for Process Mass Intensity calculation follows a standardized equation established by the ACS GCI Pharmaceutical Roundtable:

PMI = Total Mass of Materials Input (kg) / Mass of API or Drug Substance Output (kg) [2] [6]

In this calculation, the total mass input encompasses all substances that enter the manufacturing process, including reactants, reagents, catalysts, solvents, water, and process consumables. The denominator represents the mass of the final purified active pharmaceutical ingredient or drug substance. For continuous manufacturing processes, this calculation must account for the dynamic nature of material flows and the potential for transient states during startup and shutdown. The ACS GCI Pharmaceutical Roundtable has developed specialized calculation tools to address these complexities, including a Convergent PMI Calculator that accommodates multi-step convergent syntheses and a Biopharma PMI Calculator specifically designed for biological manufacturing processes [2] [20].

The experimental protocol for determining PMI in continuous processes requires careful definition of system boundaries and operating conditions. For a comprehensive assessment, researchers should:

• Define System Boundaries: Clearly establish the start and end points of the process being evaluated, typically from the introduction of raw materials to the isolation of the final drug substance [2].
• Document All Inputs: Precisely measure or calculate the masses of all materials entering the system during a representative operating period, including solvents for extraction and purification [6].
• Measure Product Output: Accurately determine the mass of final API or drug substance produced during the same operating period, typically after final purification and isolation [2].
• Account for Process Parameters: Document critical process parameters including flow rates, residence time distributions, temperature profiles, and pressure conditions that might impact material utilization efficiency [56].
• Calculate PMI: Apply the standard PMI formula using the compiled mass data, ensuring consistency in unit application throughout the calculation [2].

This methodology enables direct comparison between continuous and batch processes, provided that system boundaries and material accounting methods remain consistent.

Advanced PMI Assessment Techniques

While the standard PMI calculation provides a straightforward measure of material efficiency, comprehensive assessment requires additional analytical techniques to capture the full environmental and economic impact of continuous manufacturing processes. Life Cycle Assessment (LCA)-integrated PMI evaluation expands the traditional PMI framework to incorporate environmental impact factors associated with material production, energy consumption, and waste treatment [6]. The ACS GCI Pharmaceutical Roundtable has developed a PMI-LCA tool that features pre-loaded life cycle inventory data for common solvents and reagents, enabling researchers to assess environmental trade-offs in manufacturing route selection [6].

For biopharmaceutical applications, standard PMI calculations require modification to address the unique characteristics of biological manufacturing. The Biopharma PMI Calculator incorporates industry-defined parameters specific to biologics, including cell culture media components, filtration membranes, chromatography resins, and buffer solutions [20] [34]. This specialized approach recognizes that water typically constitutes the majority of mass input in biologics manufacturing and that the intensity of water usage presents distinct sustainability challenges compared to small molecule production [59]. Additionally, biopharma PMI must account for the fact that some biological products are measured by potency rather than mass, requiring alternative functional units for meaningful efficiency comparisons [59].

The experimental workflow for comprehensive PMI assessment in continuous processes involves multiple analytical stages and decision points, as illustrated in the following diagram:

Diagram 1: Experimental Workflow for Comprehensive PMI Assessment

Research Reagent Solutions for PMI-Optimized Processes

The implementation of continuous manufacturing with reduced PMI requires specialized reagents, catalysts, and materials designed specifically for flow chemistry and intensified processing. The following table details essential research reagent solutions that enable PMI reduction in continuous pharmaceutical manufacturing:

Table 3: Key Research Reagent Solutions for PMI-Optimized Continuous Manufacturing

Reagent/Category	Function in Continuous Processes	PMI Reduction Mechanism	Application Examples
Immobilized Enzymes & Catalysts	Enable continuous flow biocatalysis and heterogeneous catalysis with simplified recovery	Eliminate metal catalyst residues, reduce purification requirements, enable solvent-free operation	Continuous asymmetric synthesis, packed-bed reactor systems [56]
Supported Reagents	Facilitate reagent delivery in flow systems with integrated purification	Minimize workup steps, reduce solvent usage for extraction, improve reaction efficiency	Scavengers, supported oxidizing/reducing agents in flow chemistry [58]
High-Performance Solvents	Optimal mass and heat transfer properties for continuous reactions	Lower volumes required, enhanced recyclability, reduced environmental impact	Green solvent alternatives for continuous extraction and purification [2]
Advanced Process Analytical Technology (PAT)	Real-time monitoring of critical quality attributes in continuous processes	Enable immediate process adjustment, reduce rejected batches, minimize rework	In-line spectroscopy for continuous reaction monitoring [55]
Specialized Flow Reactors	Enable intensified mixing, heat transfer, and reaction control	Improve yields, reduce reaction times, minimize byproduct formation	Corning and Chemtrix flow reactors for high-temperature/pressure synthesis [57]

The selection and optimization of these reagent solutions directly impact PMI performance through multiple mechanisms. Immobilized catalysts and supported reagents facilitate simplified product isolation and enable continuous operation without the catalyst removal steps typically required in batch processes [58]. This not only reduces material consumption but also minimizes purification waste streams. High-performance solvents selected for their compatibility with continuous equipment and potential for integrated recovery and reuse significantly lower the solvent contribution to overall PMI, which traditionally constitutes the majority of mass input in pharmaceutical processes [2].

Advanced Process Analytical Technology represents a critical enabling tool for PMI reduction in continuous manufacturing. Real-time monitoring using in-line spectroscopic methods (Raman, NIR, UV-Vis) and physical property analyzers (particle size, viscosity) allows for immediate detection and correction of process deviations, minimizing the generation of out-of-specification material [55]. This capability for real-time release testing eliminates the need for extensive hold times and quality control testing between manufacturing steps, further reducing auxiliary material requirements and shortening manufacturing campaigns. The integration of these analytical technologies with automated control systems creates a closed-loop manufacturing environment where process efficiency is continuously optimized, resulting in progressive PMI reduction over time.

Future Perspectives and Research Directions

Emerging Technologies Impacting PMI

The ongoing evolution of continuous manufacturing technologies promises further substantial reductions in Process Mass Intensity through several emerging technological frontiers. The integration of artificial intelligence and machine learning with continuous processing enables predictive optimization of process parameters, potentially reducing PMI by an additional 15-25% beyond current capabilities [57]. These systems analyze real-time process data to identify optimal operating conditions for material efficiency, predict maintenance needs to prevent unexpected shutdowns and material loss, and automatically adjust feed ratios to minimize excess reagent usage [55].

Digital twin technology represents another transformative approach to PMI reduction. By creating virtual replicas of continuous manufacturing systems, researchers can simulate and optimize processes before implementation, identifying PMI hotspots and testing intensification strategies without consuming materials [57]. These digital models can run thousands of simulations to identify the most material-efficient operating conditions, significantly reducing experimental PMI during process development. As digital twin technology matures, it is expected to reduce process development time by 30-50% while simultaneously identifying synthesis routes with 20-40% lower PMI compared to conventional development approaches [57].

The emerging field of continuous bioprocessing presents unique challenges and opportunities for PMI optimization. While traditional PMI metrics for biologics have focused primarily on water usage, next-generation assessment frameworks incorporate energy consumption, single-use consumables, and facility utilization efficiency [59]. Advanced continuous bioprocessing systems employing perfusion bioreactors with high cell densities and integrated downstream purification can reduce water-related PMI by 40-60% while simultaneously improving productivity by 3-5 fold compared to conventional batch bioreactors [59]. These improvements substantially enhance the sustainability of biological drug substance manufacturing while addressing the historically high PMI values associated with biologics production.

Methodological Advances in PMI Assessment

The methodology for assessing and calculating PMI continues to evolve to better capture the comprehensive sustainability impact of continuous manufacturing technologies. Current research focuses on developing multi-dimensional PMI metrics that incorporate energy utilization, greenhouse gas emissions, water stress weighting, and other environmental impact factors alongside traditional mass-based accounting [59]. These enhanced metrics address the limitation of conventional PMI, which primarily captures water usage for biologics manufacturing but fails to account for energy-intensive operations such as refrigeration, cleanroom maintenance, and HVAC systems that significantly contribute to overall environmental impact [59].

The ACS GCI Pharmaceutical Roundtable continues to lead methodological development through its ongoing benchmarking exercises and tool development initiatives. Recent efforts have focused on creating standardized approaches for accounting solvent recovery and reuse in PMI calculations, establishing consistent system boundaries for comparing continuous and batch processes, and developing predictive models for PMI based on process development stage [2] [6]. These methodological advances ensure that PMI remains a relevant and comprehensive metric for guiding the pharmaceutical industry toward more sustainable manufacturing practices as technology continues to evolve.

The relationship between continuous manufacturing implementation, process intensification strategies, and PMI reduction continues to strengthen as these technologies mature. With the global continuous manufacturing market projected to grow at a CAGR of 10.5% from 2025 to reach $8.4 billion by 2034, the cumulative impact of these technologies on pharmaceutical manufacturing sustainability will be substantial [57]. As research and development increasingly focuses on PMI reduction as a key design criterion, alongside traditional metrics of yield and productivity, the pharmaceutical industry is positioned to achieve significant improvements in both environmental performance and economic efficiency through the widespread adoption of continuous manufacturing technologies.

Addressing High PMI in Solid-Phase Peptide Synthesis (SPPS)

In the pursuit of sustainable pharmaceutical manufacturing, Process Mass Intensity (PMI) has emerged as a crucial metric for evaluating the environmental impact of drug substance research and production. PMI is defined as the total mass of materials used to produce a specified mass of the active pharmaceutical ingredient (API), providing a holistic assessment of process efficiency that includes reactants, reagents, solvents, and purification materials [61]. For peptide-based therapeutics—a rapidly growing class of pharmaceuticals—addressing high PMI in Solid-Phase Peptide Synthesis (SPPS) has become a critical research focus. The global peptide industry was valued at USD 45.3 billion in 2024 and is projected to grow at a compound annual growth rate of 9.5% from 2025 to 2035, reaching more than USD 123.2 billion by 2035 [62]. This growth creates an urgent need for more sustainable manufacturing approaches.

Current SPPS processes present significant environmental challenges, with PMI values averaging approximately 13,000—substantially higher than other therapeutic modalities such as small molecules (PMI median 168-308) and biopharmaceuticals (PMI ≈ 8,300) [3]. The extensive solvent consumption in traditional SPPS, particularly for washing steps between coupling and deprotection cycles, represents the primary contributor to this high PMI. These processes typically employ problematic solvents classified as reprotoxic, including N,N-dimethylformamide (DMF), N,N-dimethylacetamide (DMAc), and N-methyl-2-pyrrolidone (NMP) [3]. Additional environmental concerns include poor atom-efficiency of fluorenylmethyloxycarbonyl protected amino acids (Fmoc-AAs), potentially explosive coupling agents, highly corrosive trifluoroacetic acid (TFA), and other toxic solvents such as dichloromethane (DCM) [3].

Calculating PMI for Peptide Drug Substances

PMI Calculation Methodology

The fundamental calculation for Process Mass Intensity is straightforward but requires comprehensive data collection on all material inputs throughout the synthetic process. PMI is calculated using the following formula:

PMI = Total mass of all input materials (kg) / Mass of final peptide product (kg) [61]

This calculation encompasses all materials used in the synthesis, purification, and isolation processes, including protected amino acids, coupling reagents, solvents, resins, and purification materials. It's important to note that PMI differs from related metrics such as E-Factor, with the relationship between them defined as: E-Factor = PMI - 1 [61].

For peptide synthesis specifically, the total PMI can be partitioned into three distinct stages to better identify waste reduction opportunities:

• Synthesis Phase: Includes all materials used during the stepwise assembly of the peptide chain on solid support.
• Purification Phase: Encompasses solvents and materials used in purification, typically via reversed-phase high-performance liquid chromatography (RP-HPLC).
• Isolation Phase: Includes materials used in the final isolation and drying of the peptide API [3].

Industry PMI Benchmarking Data

Cross-company PMI assessments of 40 synthetic peptide processes at various development stages have provided valuable benchmarking data for the industry [3]. The table below summarizes typical PMI values for peptide synthesis compared to other therapeutic modalities:

Table 1: PMI Comparison Across Therapeutic Modalities

Therapeutic Modality	Typical PMI Range (kg/kg API)	Key Contributing Factors
Small Molecules	168 - 308	Efficient synthetic transformations, optimized processes
Biopharmaceuticals	~8,300	Cell culture media, purification processes
Oligonucleotides	3,035 - 7,023 (avg: 4,299)	Excess reagents, solvent-intensive steps
Peptides (SPPS)	~13,000 (average)	Solvent consumption in washing steps, excess reagents

The significantly higher PMI for SPPS underscores the critical need for innovative approaches to reduce waste, particularly solvent consumption, throughout the peptide manufacturing process.

Innovative Approaches to Reduce PMI in SPPS

Non-Swelling Silica-Based Resins (SiPPS)

Silica-assisted Solid-Phase Peptide Synthesis (SiPPS) utilizes non-swelling silica-based resins to dramatically reduce solvent consumption [62]. Unlike traditional polystyrene (PS) and polyethylene glycol (PEG) grafted PS resins that require significant solvent volumes to maintain swelling, silica-based resins maintain their structure without swelling, enabling a 50% reduction in solvent consumption [62].

Experimental Protocol for SiPPS:

• Resin Preparation: Amino-SiliCycle resin (100 mg) is washed with DMF (3 × 0.5 mL) in plastic syringes fitted with a porous polypropylene disk.
• Linker Attachment: Fmoc-Rink-Amide Linker-DIC-OxymaPure (1:1:1; 3.0 eq.) in DMF is added to the wet resin, and the reaction is placed on a shaker for 2 hours.
• Capping: Acetylation is performed using acetic anhydride (Ac₂O)-diisopropylethylamine (DIEA) (1:2; 10 eq.) for 30 minutes to cap unreacted amino groups.
• Peptide Assembly: Standard Fmoc/tBu strategy is employed using DIC-OxymaPure in DMF as a coupling method with 2-hour coupling times.
• Cleavage: The peptide is cleaved from the resin using TFA-TIS-H₂O (95:2.5:2.5) for 1-2 hours at room temperature [62].

This approach has been successfully demonstrated for peptides including H-YSSFL-NH₂, linear oxytocin, angiotensin II, and afamelanotide, with acceptable purity profiles though sometimes with reduced overall yields [62].

Wash-Free SPPS with Evaporative Base Removal

A groundbreaking approach completely eliminates all solvent-intensive washing steps during each amino acid addition cycle, achieving up to 95% waste reduction [63]. The key innovation involves removing volatile Fmoc deprotection base through bulk evaporation at elevated temperature while preventing condensation on vessel surfaces with directed headspace gas flushing.

Experimental Protocol for Wash-Free SPPS:

• Coupling Reaction: Employ carbodiimide-based activation with N,N'-diisopropylcarbodiimide (DIC) and ethyl 2-cyano-2-(hydroxyimino)acetate (Oxyma Pure) at elevated temperatures.
• One-Pot Deprotection: Pyrrolidine (replacing piperidine) is added directly to the post-coupling mixture without draining to quench excess coupling reagents and begin Fmoc-deprotection.
• Evaporative Base Removal: Microwave heating (80-110°C) is applied to evaporate pyrrolidine, whose boiling point (87°C) is lower than standard solvents like DMF (153°C) or NMP (202°C).
• Headspace Flushing: A dedicated nitrogen line flushes the reaction vessel headspace with directional flow to push condensation back into the reaction solution.
• Next Coupling: After complete base removal, the next Fmoc-amino acid is coupled directly without washing steps [63].

This process reduces base usage to only 10-15% of standard amounts and has been successfully demonstrated for challenging sequences up to 89 amino acids in length at both research and production scales [63].

Sustainable Ultrasound-Assisted SPPS (SUS-SPPS)

The integration of low-frequency ultrasound with SPPS significantly reduces solvent consumption, washing steps, time, and reagent usage compared to conventional manual SPPS protocols [64]. This approach reduces the synthetic process to just two steps and decreases solvent usage per coupling cycle by 83-88% [64].

Experimental Protocol for SUS-SPPS:

• Combined Operations Step: Ultrasound application sequentially combines Fmoc-amino acid coupling, capping of unreacted amino groups, and Fmoc deprotection into a single operation.
• Single Wash Step: A single washing procedure replaces multiple traditional wash steps.
• Resin Compatibility: The method is compatible with various resin types, including Rink-amide, Wang, and Cl-Trt resins.
• Peptide Assembly: Efficient synthesis of peptides up to 20 amino acids, including "difficult sequences," with excellent yields and purity [64].

The following diagram illustrates the comparative workflows of traditional SPPS versus the innovative approaches described above:

Comparison of PMI Reduction Technologies

The table below provides a quantitative comparison of the PMI reduction capabilities of each innovative approach:

Table 2: PMI Reduction Technologies Comparison

Technology	Solvent Reduction	Key Mechanism	Peptide Length Demonstrated	Implementation Complexity
SiPPS (Silica Resins)	50%	Non-swelling resin reduces solvent requirements for swelling	Up to pharmaceutical peptides (e.g., afamelanotide)	Medium (requires resin compatibility testing)
Wash-Free SPPS	Up to 95%	Evaporative base removal eliminates washing steps	Up to 89 amino acids	High (requires specialized equipment)
SUS-SPPS	83-88%	Ultrasound reduces reaction times and washing needs	Up to 20-mers, including difficult sequences	Low-Medium (compatible with standard resins)

The Scientist's Toolkit: Research Reagent Solutions

Implementing PMI reduction strategies requires careful selection of reagents and materials. The following table outlines essential research reagent solutions for sustainable SPPS:

Table 3: Essential Research Reagents for PMI-Reduced SPPS

Reagent/Material	Function	Sustainability Considerations	Example Specifications
Amino-SiliCycle Resin	Non-swelling solid support	50% solvent reduction vs. traditional resins [62]	Nominal loading: 0.69 mmol/g [62]
High-Purity Piperidine	Fmoc deprotection	Low primary amine content reduces side reactions [65]	Haelium Piperidine 800: 10x reduction in primary amines [65]
Pyrrolidine Alternative	Fmoc deprotection	Lower boiling point (87°C) enables evaporative removal [63]	Enables wash-free SPPS implementation [63]
DIC-OxymaPure	Coupling reagent	Avoids epimerization at elevated temperatures [63]	Compatible with microwave and ultrasound-assisted SPPS [63]
Ultra-Dry Solvents	Reaction medium	Minimal water content prevents failed couplings [65]	Haelium Pyridine 900: <30 ppm water [65]

The growing economic and environmental imperatives to reduce PMI in SPPS are driving rapid innovation in peptide manufacturing. The benchmark PMI of approximately 13,000 for current processes is unsustainable compared to other therapeutic modalities, necessitating adoption of the approaches detailed in this technical guide. The most promising strategies include non-swelling silica-based resins, wash-free synthesis through evaporative base removal, and ultrasound-assisted protocols, which collectively offer solvent reductions of 50-95% while maintaining or improving product quality.

For researchers calculating PMI in drug substance development, partitioning the metric into synthesis, purification, and isolation phases provides valuable insight into waste hotspots and improvement opportunities. As the peptide therapeutics market continues its projected growth to USD 123.2 billion by 2035, implementing these PMI-reduction technologies will be essential for achieving sustainable manufacturing practices that align with the principles of green chemistry and the sustainability goals of the American Chemical Society Green Chemistry Institute Pharmaceutical Roundtable.

Navigating the Limitations of PMI as a Stand-Alone Metric

Process Mass Intensity (PMI) has emerged as a critical green chemistry metric throughout the pharmaceutical industry for evaluating the material efficiency of drug substance manufacturing processes. Defined as the total mass of materials used (including reactants, solvents, and reagents) to produce a specified mass of the active pharmaceutical ingredient (API), PMI provides a straightforward calculation: PMI = total mass of inputs (kg) / mass of product (kg) [2] [3]. The American Chemical Society Green Chemistry Institute Pharmaceutical Roundtable (ACS GCIPR) has identified PMI as a key mass-related green chemistry metric and an indispensable indicator of the overall greenness of a process [3]. For over a decade, pharmaceutical companies have utilized PMI to benchmark and quantify improvements toward greener manufacturing processes, with the first industry-wide benchmarking exercise conducted in 2008 [2].

The fundamental value of PMI lies in its simplicity and direct connection to process efficiency. By measuring the total mass expenditures required to manufacture an API, PMI helps process chemists and engineers identify opportunities to reduce material usage, particularly solvents which often constitute the largest portion of mass input in pharmaceutical synthesis [2]. This focus on mass reduction not only aligns with green chemistry principles but also translates to significant cost savings and environmental benefits through decreased waste generation and lower resource consumption [2] [66]. The metric has become so integral to pharmaceutical development that the Sustainable Accounting Standards Board (SASB) has identified process efficiency as a "material" sustainability topic and put forward PMI as the preferred accounting metric for disclosure to investors [67].

The Critical Limitations of Isolated PMI Assessment

System Boundary Restrictions and Upstream Impacts

A fundamental limitation of using PMI as a stand-alone metric lies in its conventional system boundary, which typically encompasses only gate-to-gate operations—from factory entrance to factory exit. This restricted scope fails to account for the environmental impacts embedded within the supply chain of input materials. Recent systematic research demonstrates that expanding the system boundary from gate-to-gate to cradle-to-gate strengthens correlations for fifteen of sixteen environmental impact categories [41]. This indicates that the traditional PMI calculation provides an incomplete picture of a process's true environmental footprint.

The concept of Value-Chain Mass Intensity (VCMI) has been proposed to address this limitation by incorporating cradle-to-gate system boundaries that include upstream resource consumption. However, the strength of correlation between mass-based metrics and environmental impacts varies significantly depending on which product classes are included in the system boundary and which specific environmental impact is being considered [41]. This variation occurs because different environmental impacts are approximated by distinct sets of key input materials that serve as proxies for processes in the value chain. For instance, coal consumption implies combustion processes with carbon dioxide emissions, making it a key input material for approximating climate change impact [41].

Table 1: Comparison of Mass Intensity System Boundaries and Their Coverage

System Boundary	Description	Materials Included	Environmental Coverage
Gate-to-Gate (Traditional PMI)	Factory entrance to factory exit	Intermediate products, solvents, reagents	Direct mass efficiency only
Cradle-to-Gate (VCMI)	Natural resource extraction to factory exit	Natural resources, energy carriers, all upstream inputs	Multiple environmental impacts, varies by product class
"Commonly Available Materials"	Intermediate starting points	Materials commercially available below $100/mol	Limited upstream inclusion

Exclusion of Energy Consumption and Environmental Impact Factors

PMI's exclusive focus on mass balances means it completely neglects energy consumption throughout the manufacturing process—a significant oversight given that energy usage can constitute a substantial portion of environmental impacts, particularly in biologics manufacturing where cleanroom environments require extensive climate control [67]. This limitation becomes especially problematic when comparing processes that may have similar mass efficiencies but vastly different energy profiles. For example, biopharmaceutical manufacturing typically exhibits PMI values of approximately 8,300 kg/kg API, with energy-intensive operations contributing significantly to its environmental footprint despite not being captured in PMI calculations [67].

Additionally, PMI does not account for the environmental impact characteristics of the materials themselves. A process with a lower PMI might utilize highly hazardous or environmentally damaging solvents, while a process with a slightly higher PMI might employ benign alternatives. This limitation is particularly evident in peptide synthesis, where PMI values can reach approximately 13,000 kg/kg API, largely due to the use of problematic solvents like N,N-dimethylformamide (DMF), N-methyl-2-pyrrolidone (NMP), and dichloromethane (DCM) [3]. These solvents are classified as reprotoxic and face potential regulatory restrictions, yet their hazardous nature is not differentiated from benign solvents like water in traditional PMI calculations [3].

Modality-Specific Limitations and Cross-Modal Comparisons

PMI exhibits significant limitations when applied across different pharmaceutical modalities, as their fundamental manufacturing paradigms differ substantially. The metric does not account for molecular complexity, structural versatility, or the inherent material requirements of different production technologies [3] [67]. This creates challenges when benchmarking sustainability performance across small molecules, biologics, and synthetic peptides.

Table 2: PMI Comparison Across Pharmaceutical Modalities

Pharmaceutical Modality	Typical PMI Range (kg/kg API)	Major PMI Contributors	Modality-Specific Considerations
Small Molecules	168 - 308	Solvents, reagents	Well-controlled synthetic methods; lower water usage
Biologics (mAbs)	~8,300	Water (94%), raw materials (5%), consumables (1%)	Water-intensive cell culture; purification processes; energy not included
Synthetic Peptides	~13,000	Solvents (DMF, NMP, DCM), Fmoc-AA building blocks	Solid-phase synthesis excess reagents; purification solvents
Oligonucleotides	3,035 - 7,023 (avg: 4,299)	Solvents, reagents, energy-intensive processes	Similar solid-phase challenges as peptides

The strikingly higher PMI values for biologics and peptides do not necessarily indicate poor sustainability performance but rather reflect their different production methodologies. Biologics manufacturing is inherently water-intensive, with water constituting 94% of the total PMI in monoclonal antibody production [67]. Similarly, solid-phase peptide synthesis (SPPS) necessitates large excesses of solvents and reagents to drive reactions to completion, resulting in elevated PMI values [3]. These modality-specific characteristics highlight that PMI alone cannot facilitate fair sustainability comparisons across different therapeutic modalities.

Integrated Methodologies for Comprehensive Process Assessment

PMI-LCA Combined Tool Implementation

To address the limitations of stand-alone PMI assessment, the ACS GCI Pharmaceutical Roundtable has developed a combined PMI and Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) Tool that integrates mass efficiency calculations with environmental impact assessment [66]. This tool incorporates pre-loaded LCA data sourced from the Ecoinvent life cycle inventory database, enabling users to bypass the lengthy timelines typically required for full LCA studies [66]. The tool evaluates six environmental impact indicators in addition to PMI: mass net, energy, global warming potential (GWP), acidification, eutrophication, and water depletion [66].

The recommended workflow involves iterative application throughout process development, beginning when a chemical route has been established. This approach enables early identification of environmental "hot spots" and allows for timely modifications before process lock-in. The tool automatically generates customizable charts that break down both PMI and LCA results by raw material or processing step, providing visual guidance for prioritization of improvement efforts [66]. By grouping materials shared across multiple steps and assigning complex raw materials like stock solutions or organometallic compounds appropriately, the tool offers a more nuanced perspective than PMI alone.

Experimental Protocol for Comprehensive Process Evaluation

Protocol Title: Integrated PMI-LCA Assessment for Pharmaceutical Process Development

Scope and Purpose: This protocol describes a standardized methodology for conducting simultaneous PMI and life cycle impact assessment of drug substance manufacturing processes to enable comprehensive environmental evaluation.

Materials and Equipment:

• Process flow diagram with mass balances
• PMI-LCA Tool (ACS GCI Pharmaceutical Roundtable)
• Solvent and reagent inventory with quantities
• Energy consumption data for unit operations
• Water usage records

Procedure:

• Process Segmentation: Divide the synthetic route into discrete unit operations, noting all input and output masses for each step.
• Data Collection: Document all material inputs, including solvents, reagents, catalysts, and consumables, with precise quantities per kg API.
• Water Accounting: Include all process water used in reaction, workup, purification, and isolation steps, differentiating between ultra-pure and standard grade water where applicable.
• Energy Inventory: Record energy consumption for specialized equipment (e.g., lyophilizers, chromatography systems, bioreactors).
• Tool Input: Enter collected data into the PMI-LCA Tool, ensuring proper material categorization and allocation to appropriate process steps.
• Impact Analysis: Review generated output charts to identify steps with highest PMI and environmental impacts across the six indicator categories.
• Iterative Improvement: Target high-impact steps for optimization through solvent substitution, reagent efficiency improvements, or process intensification.
• Comparative Assessment: Benchmark results against modality-specific industry data where available.

Validation: The assessment should be verified through mass balance closure and comparison with historical data from similar processes. For commercial processes, consider third-party validation of LCA results.

Diagram 1: Integrated PMI-LCA Assessment Workflow

Research Reagent Solutions for Enhanced PMI Assessment

Table 3: Essential Research Tools for Comprehensive PMI Assessment

Tool/Resource	Function	Application Context
PMI Calculator	Basic PMI calculation for linear syntheses	Early-stage route scouting; educational settings
Convergent PMI Calculator	PMI calculation for convergent syntheses	Complex molecules with multiple branches; natural product synthesis
PMI-LCA Tool	Combined mass and environmental impact assessment	Holistic process evaluation; regulatory documentation
PMI Prediction Calculator	Predictive analytics for proposed routes	In-silico route selection; development planning
Biopharma PMI Calculator	Standardized PMI for biologics manufacturing	Monoclonal antibodies; recombinant proteins
Streamlined LCA Databases	Pre-loaded environmental impact data	Rapid assessment without full LCA expertise

While Process Mass Intensity remains a valuable metric for measuring material efficiency in drug substance research, its limitations as a stand-alone assessment tool necessitate a more comprehensive approach. The restricted system boundaries, exclusion of energy considerations, and inability to differentiate between materials based on their environmental impact characteristics fundamentally constrain PMI's effectiveness as a complete sustainability metric. The pharmaceutical industry's development of integrated tools that combine PMI with life cycle assessment principles represents a significant advancement in environmental performance evaluation.

Moving forward, researchers should adopt a multi-metric approach that contextualizes PMI within a broader framework of environmental indicators. The PMI-LCA Tool provides a practical starting point, enabling process chemists and engineers to identify improvement opportunities that balance mass efficiency with overall environmental impact reduction. As the chemical industry continues its transition toward a defossilized, circular economy, the reliance on mass-based proxies for environmental performance will require continual re-evaluation and refinement. By acknowledging and addressing the limitations of PMI through integrated assessment methodologies, pharmaceutical researchers can more effectively guide the development of truly sustainable manufacturing processes.

Validating PMI Calculations and Comparative Analysis Across Modalities

In the realm of drug substance research, Process Mass Intensity (PMI) has emerged as a crucial metric for benchmarking the efficiency, sustainability, and economic viability of synthetic routes. PMI provides a comprehensive measure of the total mass of materials used to produce a specified mass of active pharmaceutical ingredient (API), enabling researchers to quantify environmental impact and identify opportunities for process optimization [2]. Unlike simple yield calculations, PMI accounts for all input materials—including solvents, reagents, catalysts, and process chemicals—offering a more holistic view of resource utilization throughout the synthetic pathway [2].

The pharmaceutical industry faces increasing pressure to develop more sustainable manufacturing processes, and PMI serves as a key performance indicator in this endeavor. By calculating and validating PMI throughout drug development, scientists and engineers can make data-driven decisions that reduce waste, lower costs, and minimize environmental footprint while maintaining product quality and regulatory compliance.

Core PMI Calculation Methodology

Fundamental Calculation Formula

The foundational formula for Process Mass Intensity is straightforward yet powerful in its comprehensiveness:

PMI = Total Mass of Input Materials (kg) / Mass of API Produced (kg)

This calculation encompasses all substances introduced into the reaction system, including reactants, solvents, catalysts, and work-up materials. The result represents the total mass required to produce one unit mass of the final drug substance, with lower values indicating more efficient processes [2].

Table 1: PMI Calculation Components

Component	Description	Inclusion in PMI
Starting Materials	Reactants incorporated into API structure	Always included
Solvents	Reaction, work-up, and purification media	Always included
Reagents	Chemicals facilitating transformation but not incorporated	Always included
Catalysts	Substances accelerating reaction rate	Always included
Process Aids	Filter aids, drying agents	Always included
Water	Process water used in work-up	Always included

Convergent Synthesis Considerations

For complex drug substances synthesized through convergent routes, where multiple intermediates are prepared separately and combined in later stages, PMI calculation requires special consideration. The ACS GCI Pharmaceutical Roundtable has developed a Convergent PMI Calculator that accommodates multi-branch synthetic pathways, ensuring accurate accounting of all material inputs across parallel synthesis streams [2]. This approach prevents the underestimation of PMI that can occur when simply summing inputs from linear sequences.

Validation Framework for PMI Calculations

Material Tracking and Reconciliation Protocols

Valid PMI calculations depend on precise measurement and accounting of all input materials. Implement the following experimental protocols to ensure data integrity:

• Gravimetric Measurement Standards: Utilize calibrated analytical balances with appropriate precision for all mass measurements. Document measurement uncertainty and maintain calibration records.

• Material Reconciliation Procedures: Track material flows throughout the synthetic process, accounting for transfers, losses, and transformations. Implement mass balance closures for each synthetic step to identify discrepancies.

• Solvent Recovery Accounting: Clearly distinguish between fresh and recovered solvents in PMI calculations. Establish standardized protocols for quantifying and reporting solvent recycling efficiency.

• Byproduct Quantification: Develop analytical methods to identify and quantify byproducts, enabling more complete mass balancing and identification of transformation inefficiencies.

Table 2: PMI Validation Metrics and Targets

Validation Metric	Calculation Method	Acceptance Criteria
Mass Balance Closure	(Total Output Mass / Total Input Mass) × 100%	95-105%
Measurement Precision	Relative Standard Deviation of Repeated Measurements	<2%
Material Tracking Accuracy	(Documented Usage / Actual Usage) × 100%	98-102%
Synthetic Step PMI Consistency	Comparison across multiple batches	<10% variance

Cross-Validation with Complementary Metrics

Strengthen PMI validation by calculating and comparing complementary green chemistry metrics:

• Atom Economy: Assess the inherent efficiency of molecular transformations based on molecular weights of reactants and products.

• Reaction Mass Efficiency (RME): Calculate the percentage of reactant mass incorporated into the final product.

• Environmental Factor (E-Factor): Determine the mass of waste generated per unit mass of product, closely related to PMI (PMI = E-Factor + 1).

• Carbon Efficiency: Evaluate the percentage of carbon atoms from starting materials incorporated into the final product.

These complementary metrics provide multiple perspectives on process efficiency and help identify potential calculation errors or methodological inconsistencies in PMI determination.

Advanced PMI Modeling and Prediction Methods

Sensitivity Analysis for Parameter Optimization

Sensitivity analysis determines how variations in process parameters affect PMI, enabling researchers to identify critical control points and optimization priorities. Implement the following methodology:

• Parameter Identification: List all variables potentially influencing PMI, including reaction concentration, stoichiometry, solvent selection, and work-up procedures.

• Experimental Design: Structure studies using Design of Experiments (DoE) approaches to efficiently explore multi-variable parameter spaces.

• Response Surface Modeling: Develop mathematical models correlating process parameters with PMI outcomes to predict optimal conditions.

• Critical Parameter Ranking: Quantify the relative impact of each parameter on PMI to prioritize development efforts [68].

Decision Matrix for Route Selection

When evaluating multiple synthetic routes to a drug substance, employ a quantitative decision matrix that incorporates PMI alongside other critical factors:

• Criteria Definition: Identify evaluation criteria including PMI, cost, safety, intellectual property, and regulatory considerations.

• Weight Assignment: Assign relative weights (1-10) to each criterion based on project priorities, with PMI typically receiving high weighting in sustainable process design.

• Route Scoring: Score each synthetic route against all criteria (1-10 scale).

• Composite Calculation: Multiply scores by corresponding weights and sum to generate total scores for route comparison and selection [68].

Table 3: Synthetic Route Decision Matrix

Evaluation Criterion	Weight	Route A Score	Route B Score	Route C Score
PMI	10	8	6	9
Cost	9	7	8	6
Safety	10	9	7	8
Scalability	8	6	9	7
IP Position	7	5	8	6
Total Score		295	282	278

Monte Carlo Simulation for PMI Uncertainty Analysis

For complex synthetic processes with significant variability in input parameters, employ Monte Carlo simulation to quantify uncertainty in PMI predictions:

• Parameter Distribution Modeling: Define probability distributions for key input variables (yields, stoichiometries, solvent volumes) based on experimental data.

• Iterative Calculation: Perform thousands of PMI calculations using randomly selected values from parameter distributions.

• Output Analysis: Analyze the resulting PMI distribution to determine confidence intervals and probability of achieving PMI targets [68].

This approach is particularly valuable during early development when parameter uncertainty is high, enabling evidence-based risk assessment and resource allocation.

Experimental Protocols for PMI Determination

Standardized Laboratory Procedure

Implement this detailed protocol to ensure consistent and accurate PMI determination across development activities:

Materials and Equipment

• Analytical balances (calibrated)
• Laboratory notebooks (electronic preferred)
• Solvent recovery apparatus
• Analytical instrumentation for yield determination (HPLC, NMR)

Procedure

• Pre-Experiment Planning
  • Document complete synthetic route with anticipated masses
  • Establish material tracking spreadsheet or database
  • Confirm calibration status of all measurement equipment

• Material Accounting

  • Record tare weights of all containers
  • Measure and document all input masses to appropriate precision
  • Track solvent volumes with density corrections for mass conversion

• Reaction Execution

  • Conduct synthesis according to established procedures
  • Monitor reaction progress with appropriate analytical methods
  • Document any process deviations or observations

• Work-up and Isolation

  • Quantify all materials used in work-up procedures
  • Measure masses of all isolated intermediates and byproducts
  • Collect and quantify solvents for recovery

• Product Characterization and Yield Determination

  • Determine final product mass and purity
  • Calculate corrected yield based on purity
  • Document characterization data confirming identity

• Data Compilation and PMI Calculation

  • Sum all input masses
  • Calculate PMI using standard formula
  • Perform mass balance assessment
  • Document all calculations with supporting data

Analytical Verification Methods

Support PMI calculations with analytical verification to ensure accuracy:

• Quantitative Yield Determination: Utilize HPLC with certified reference standards for precise product quantification.

• Byproduct Identification and Quantification: Implement LC-MS methods to identify and quantify reaction byproducts.

• Solvent Composition Analysis: Employ GC methods to verify solvent compositions and quantify recovery efficiency.

• Material Balance Verification: Use multiple analytical techniques to account for >95% of input mass in outputs (products, byproducts, wastes).

Research Reagent Solutions for PMI Studies

Table 4: Essential Materials for PMI Determination

Research Reagent	Function in PMI Studies	Application Notes
Certified Analytical Standards	Quantitative yield determination	Essential for accurate HPLC calibration and yield verification
Deuterated Solvents	Reaction monitoring by NMR	Enables mechanistic studies supporting PMI optimization
High-Purity Solvents	Process efficiency assessment	Establishes baseline for solvent recovery studies
Supported Catalysts	Heterogeneous catalysis development	Enables catalyst recovery and reuse, reducing PMI
Immobilized Reagents	Simplified work-up protocols	Reduces purification PMI through facile separation
Green Chemistry Alternatives	Solvent and reagent substitution	Enables direct PMI comparison between traditional and green approaches
Mass Tracking Software	Data organization and calculation	Automates PMI determination and reduces calculation errors

Implementation Strategy and Technology Integration

PMI Tracking in Development Workflow

Integrate PMI calculation and validation throughout the drug development lifecycle using a systematic approach:

• Early Development (Discovery Support): Implement simplified PMI tracking for initial route scouting, focusing on major material inputs.

• Process Optimization: Conduct detailed PMI studies with complete material accounting to guide route selection and optimization.

• Technology Transfer: Validate PMI at scale during technology transfer to manufacturing, identifying scale-dependent effects.

• Commercial Manufacturing: Establish ongoing PMI monitoring for continuous improvement in commercial processes.

Digital Tools and Automation

Leverage technology to enhance PMI calculation accuracy and efficiency:

• Electronic Laboratory Notebooks (ELNs): Implement structured data capture for automated PMI calculation.

• Process Mass Intensity Calculators: Utilize tools developed by the ACS GCI Pharmaceutical Roundtable for standardized determination [2].

• Data Analytics Platforms: Employ statistical analysis software for sophisticated PMI modeling and trend identification.

• Life Cycle Assessment Integration: Connect PMI data with environmental impact assessment tools for comprehensive sustainability evaluation.

Valid PMI calculation requires meticulous experimental execution, comprehensive material accounting, and robust verification protocols. By implementing the methods outlined in this guide—including standardized measurement techniques, sensitivity analysis, decision matrices, and uncertainty quantification—drug development professionals can ensure the accuracy and reliability of their PMI determinations. This rigorous approach to PMI validation supports the development of more sustainable pharmaceutical processes while maintaining scientific and regulatory standards. As the industry continues to advance green chemistry initiatives, precise PMI calculation and validation will remain essential tools for measuring and improving environmental performance throughout the drug development lifecycle.

Process Mass Intensity (PMI) has emerged as a crucial green chemistry metric for evaluating the sustainability and efficiency of pharmaceutical manufacturing processes. The American Chemical Society Green Chemistry Institute Pharmaceutical Roundtable (ACS GCIPR) has identified PMI as a key mass-related metric and an indispensable indicator of a process's overall greenness [2]. In the context of drug substance research, PMI provides researchers, scientists, and development professionals with a standardized approach to quantify the material efficiency of their synthetic routes and process designs. This technical guide provides a comprehensive comparative analysis of PMI across batch and continuous manufacturing platforms, offering detailed methodologies for calculation and critical evaluation of both paradigms within drug substance research.

PMI is defined as the total mass of materials used (including raw materials, reactants, and solvents) to produce a specified mass of product, typically expressed as kilograms of material per kilogram of active pharmaceutical ingredient (API) [3]. Unlike simpler metrics such as atom economy (which only considers reactant atoms appearing in the final product) or chemical yield (which measures conversion of limiting reactant), PMI provides a holistic assessment of the mass requirements of an entire process, including synthesis, purification, and isolation stages [3]. This comprehensive scope makes PMI particularly valuable for comparing the environmental and economic performance of different manufacturing approaches.

The pharmaceutical industry faces increasing pressure to develop more sustainable manufacturing processes, driven by both environmental concerns and economic imperatives. As therapeutic modalities expand beyond traditional small molecules to include peptides, oligonucleotides, and biologics, understanding the PMI implications of different manufacturing technologies becomes increasingly critical for drug development professionals. This guide establishes the framework for such evaluations, with particular emphasis on the comparative analysis between established batch processes and emerging continuous manufacturing technologies.

PMI Calculation Methodology

Fundamental PMI Equation

The calculation of Process Mass Intensity follows a straightforward formula that belies its significant interpretive value:

PMI = Total Mass of Materials Used (kg) / Mass of Product (kg) [3]

In this equation, the "Total Mass of Materials Used" includes all input materials entering the process: starting materials, reagents, solvents, and process chemicals. The "Mass of Product" refers to the final isolated drug substance or API, meeting all quality specifications. For comprehensive assessment, the ACS GCIPR recommends calculating PMI across all stages of the manufacturing process, including synthesis, purification, and isolation [3].

The ACS GCIPR provides a PMI Calculator tool to standardize this calculation across the industry [2]. This digital tool enables researchers to quickly determine PMI values by accounting for raw material inputs against bulk API output. For more complex synthetic routes involving convergent syntheses, the Roundtable has developed an enhanced Convergent PMI Calculator that uses the same fundamental calculations while accommodating multiple synthetic branches for single-step or convergent synthesis [2].

Stage-Gate Analysis for Process Optimization

To identify specific improvement opportunities, researchers should calculate PMI at each stage of the manufacturing process:

• Synthesis PMI: Mass intensity of the core chemical transformation steps
• Purification PMI: Mass intensity of purification processes (chromatography, recrystallization, etc.)
• Isolation PMI: Mass intensity of isolation and drying operations

This stage-gate analysis enables researchers to pinpoint which unit operations contribute most significantly to overall mass intensity and focus optimization efforts accordingly. For example, peptide synthesis PMI assessment reveals that solid-phase peptide synthesis (SPPS) has an average PMI of approximately 13,000, with the synthesis stage typically being the most mass-intensive [3].

Comparison with Related Metrics

While PMI serves as the primary mass-based green metric, researchers should understand its relationship to complementary measures:

• Atom Economy (AE): Quantifies efficiency based on atoms incorporated into final product, assuming 100% yield and stoichiometric loading [3]
• Complete Environmental Factor (cEF): Measures the complete waste stream, factoring in all process materials [3]
• Life Cycle Assessment (LCA): Comprehensive evaluation of environmental impact across all stages (raw materials, production, end-of-life)

PMI strikes a balance between comprehensive scope and practical calculability, making it particularly suitable for early-phase development when full LCA may be prohibitively resource-intensive.

PMI Performance Across Manufacturing Modalities

Comparative PMI Analysis by Therapeutic Modality

Table 1: PMI Values Across Pharmaceutical Manufacturing Modalities

Therapeutic Modality	Manufacturing Approach	Typical PMI Range (kg/kg API)	Key PMI Drivers
Small Molecules	Batch / Continuous	168 - 308 [3]	Solvent usage, reaction stoichiometry
Biologics / Monoclonal Antibodies	Batch	~8,300 [3]	Cell culture media, purification resins
Oligonucleotides	Solid-Phase Synthesis	3,035 - 7,023 (avg: 4,299) [3]	Solvents, protected phosphoramidites
Synthetic Peptides	Solid-Phase Peptide Synthesis	~13,000 [3]	Solvents (DMF, DCM), protected amino acids
Synthetic Peptides	Liquid-Phase Peptide Synthesis	Variable, typically lower than SPPS	Solvents, coupling reagents

The data reveals striking differences in PMI across therapeutic modalities, with small molecules demonstrating significantly higher material efficiency than larger, more complex modalities. Synthetic peptides manufactured via solid-phase peptide synthesis (SPPS) show the highest PMI values, approximately 40-80 times greater than traditional small molecules [3]. This dramatic difference primarily stems from the large excess of solvents and reagents required for SPPS, including problematic solvents like N,N-dimethylformamide (DMF), N-methyl-2-pyrrolidone (NMP), and dichloromethane (DCM) [3].

Batch vs. Continuous Manufacturing PMI Comparison

Table 2: Batch vs. Continuous Manufacturing PMI Comparison

Performance Aspect	Batch Manufacturing	Continuous Manufacturing
Typical PMI (Biologics)	Comparable to continuous processes [8]	Comparable to batch processes [8]
PMI Drivers	Fixed batch scales, equipment sizing constraints	Steady-state operation, smaller equipment footprint
Productivity Impact	Lower productivity per unit time can increase PMI/timeline	Multifold higher productivity per unit time can lower effective PMI [8]
Process Intensity	May require larger equipment for scale-up	Process intensification can drive significant PMI improvement [8]
Energy Considerations	PMI metric does not account for energy consumption [8]	Lower energy consumption per unit API possible despite higher PMI [8]

Current research indicates that for biologics manufacturing, including monoclonal antibodies, the PMI of continuous processes is comparable to batch processes [8]. This equivalence in mass intensity must be considered alongside other critical factors, as a continuous process with higher PMI might still demonstrate superior overall sustainability if it enables multifold higher productivity per unit time, resulting in lower energy consumption per unit of drug substance produced [8].

The PMI metric alone does not account for energy consumption, which represents a key driver of sustainability for biologics manufacturing [8]. This limitation highlights the importance of complementary assessments when evaluating the overall environmental impact of pharmaceutical manufacturing processes.

Batch Manufacturing: PMI Characteristics and Optimization

Batch Process PMI Profile

Batch manufacturing follows a discrete production approach where specific quantities of materials move through each production step together as a group [69] [70]. In pharmaceutical applications, this typically involves sequential unit operations with defined start and end points, often separated by hold times and intermediate isolation steps [71]. The inherent characteristics of batch processing significantly influence its PMI profile.

The primary PMI drivers in batch manufacturing include:

• Equipment Sizing Constraints: Batch reactors must be sized for the entire batch volume, often requiring larger vessels and greater solvent volumes than continuous systems [72]
• Intermediate Isolation: Purification and isolation between steps typically involve solvent-intensive operations such as crystallization, filtration, and drying
• Cleaning and Changeover: Between batches, equipment cleaning consumes substantial solvent volumes, particularly in multi-product facilities
• Scale-Up Challenges: Linear scale-up from laboratory to production often maintains or increases PMI rather than optimizing it

Batch PMI Optimization Strategies

Drug development professionals can employ several strategic approaches to optimize PMI in batch manufacturing:

• Solvent Selection and Recovery: Implementing solvent recovery systems can dramatically reduce PMI by recycling high-volume solvents like methanol, acetone, and toluene used in extraction and crystallization processes
• Telescoping Reactions: Combining multiple synthetic steps without intermediate isolation reduces solvent and reagent consumption between stages
• Process Mass Intensity Tracking: Implementing stage-gate PMI tracking during process development identifies high-intensity unit operations for targeted improvement
• Alternative Stoichiometries: Reducing molar excesses of reagents and developing catalytic rather than stoichiometric processes
• Design of Experiments (DoE): Systematic optimization of reaction parameters to maximize yield while minimizing material inputs

Continuous Manufacturing: PMI Characteristics and Optimization

Continuous Process PMI Profile

Continuous manufacturing involves uninterrupted flow of materials through an integrated manufacturing system, with raw materials continuously fed into the process and products continuously removed [72] [71]. This paradigm offers distinct PMI advantages and challenges compared to batch processing.

Key factors influencing PMI in continuous manufacturing include:

• Smaller Equipment Footprint: Continuous systems typically operate with smaller residence times and equipment volumes, potentially reducing solvent inventory [72]
• Process Intensification: Enhanced mass and heat transfer in continuous flow reactors enable improved reaction kinetics and potentially reduced reagent excesses [8]
• Reduced Intermediate Isolation: Telescoped processes with integrated purification steps minimize intermediate handling and solvent consumption
• Steady-State Operation: Once equilibrium is established, continuous processes can operate with consistent material efficiency without the stop-start inefficiencies of batch processes

Continuous PMI Optimization Strategies

Continuous manufacturing enables unique approaches to PMI optimization:

• Process Analytical Technology (PAT) Implementation: Real-time monitoring and control enables precise material feeding and minimizes excess reagents and solvents [72]
• Flow Chemistry Advantages: Enhanced heat transfer facilitates reactions at higher concentrations or with reduced solvent volumes compared to batch
• Integrated Purification: Continuous chromatography and crystallization systems can operate with improved efficiency compared to batch equivalents
• Modular Design: Smaller, dedicated continuous systems can minimize cleaning solvent consumption between campaigns
• Residence Time Distribution Engineering: Precise control over reaction times minimizes decomposition and byproduct formation, improving effective PMI

Experimental Protocols for PMI Assessment

Standardized PMI Calculation Protocol

Objective: Establish a standardized methodology for calculating and comparing PMI across different process routes and manufacturing technologies.

Materials:

• Process flow diagram with all input streams and output products
• Mass balances for all process steps
• Analytical methods for quantifying product quality and yield

Procedure:

• Define system boundaries for PMI calculation (include all process steps from starting materials to isolated API)
• Document all mass inputs: starting materials, reagents, solvents, catalysts, process aids
• Document all product and byproduct outputs: API, isolated intermediates, waste streams
• Calculate total mass input (sum of all input materials)
• Determine mass of final isolated API meeting quality specifications
• Calculate PMI using the formula: PMI = Total Mass Input / Mass of API
• Perform stage-gate analysis by calculating PMI for synthesis, purification, and isolation stages separately
• Compare against benchmark values for similar processes

Validation: Repeat calculation using convergent PMI calculator for complex syntheses [2]. Verify mass balance closure within acceptable limits (typically 95-105%).

Comparative PMI Assessment Protocol for Batch vs. Continuous Processes

Objective: Directly compare PMI performance of batch and continuous manufacturing for the same drug substance.

Materials:

• Laboratory or pilot-scale batch and continuous equipment capable of producing the target API
• Analytical equipment for real-time monitoring (for continuous process)
• Solvent recovery systems (if applicable)

Procedure:

• Develop and optimize batch process using traditional laboratory techniques
• Develop and optimize continuous process using flow chemistry and continuous processing equipment
• Operate each process at equivalent production scales (e.g., kg/day API output)
• Measure all material inputs with precision mass flow meters or scales
• Quantify isolated API yield and quality for each process
• Calculate PMI for each manufacturing approach using standardized methodology
• Perform sensitivity analysis on key parameters (e.g., solvent volume, reagent excess, concentration)
• Normalize results based on API productivity (g API/day) to account for throughput differences

Analysis: Despite comparable static PMI values for some processes [8], the higher productivity of continuous processes may result in lower environmental impact per unit API when considering full life cycle assessment.

Visualization of PMI Calculation Workflow

Diagram 1: PMI Calculation Workflow

The Scientist's Toolkit: Essential Research Reagents and Materials

Table 3: Essential Research Materials for PMI Assessment

Research Material	Function in PMI Assessment	Application Context
Process Mass Intensity Calculator	Standardized PMI calculation tool	ACS GCI Pharmaceutical Roundtable online tool [2]
Convergent PMI Calculator	PMI calculation for convergent syntheses	Complex multi-branch synthetic routes [2]
Solvent Recovery Systems	Reduction of solvent-related PMI	Laboratory and pilot-scale process development
Process Analytical Technology (PAT)	Real-time monitoring for continuous processes	Quality control and material consumption tracking [72]
Flow Chemistry Reactors	Continuous process development	API synthesis in continuous manufacturing [72]
Automated Solid-Phase Synthesizers	Peptide and oligonucleotide synthesis	SPPS for complex biomolecules [3]
Life Cycle Assessment Software	Comprehensive environmental impact assessment	Complementary analysis to PMI [3]

This comparative analysis demonstrates that both batch and continuous manufacturing approaches present distinct PMI profiles and optimization opportunities. While small molecule syntheses typically achieve PMI values of 168-308 kg/kg API, more complex modalities like peptides and oligonucleotides exhibit significantly higher mass intensities, with SPPS processes averaging approximately 13,000 PMI [3]. For biologics manufacturing, continuous and batch processes show comparable PMI values, though continuous processes may offer advantages through higher productivity and lower energy consumption per unit API [8].

Drug development professionals should consider PMI as a crucial parameter in process selection and optimization, while recognizing its limitations in capturing full environmental impact. The PMI metric provides a valuable standardized approach for comparing material efficiency across different processes and manufacturing technologies, serving as an essential tool in the development of more sustainable pharmaceutical manufacturing processes.

Process Mass Intensity (PMI) is a key green chemistry metric used in the pharmaceutical industry to measure the efficiency of an Active Pharmaceutical Ingredient (API) manufacturing process. It is defined as the total mass of materials (including raw materials, reactants, solvents, and process agents) used to produce a specified mass of product, typically expressed as kilograms of material per kilogram of API [2] [3]. The American Chemical Society Green Chemistry Institute Pharmaceutical Roundtable (ACS GCIPR) has identified PMI as an indispensable indicator of the overall greenness of a process because it focuses on maximizing value and efficiency by accounting for all mass expenditures in a process [2] [3].

The pharmaceutical industry faces increasing pressure to develop sustainable manufacturing processes, and PMI has become a crucial benchmarking tool for quantifying improvements toward greener manufacturing. However, PMI has a significant limitation: it is a mass-based metric that does not account for the environmental impact incurred during the manufacture of starting building blocks and reagents, nor does it consider types of materials, energy usage, logistics, or starting material complexity [3]. This case study explores the paradoxical situations where processes with higher PMI values may actually be more sustainable when a comprehensive, multi-factorial environmental assessment is applied.

Calculating PMI for Drug Substance Research

Fundamental PMI Calculation Methodology

The standard PMI calculation involves a gate-to-gate system boundary, focusing only on materials directly used in the manufacturing process. The basic formula is:

PMI = Total Mass of Materials Input (kg) / Mass of API Output (kg)

For drug substance research, this calculation includes all materials entering the reaction vessel and purification systems, including starting materials, reagents, catalysts, and solvents [2] [3]. The ACS GCI Pharmaceutical Roundtable provides a PMI Calculator that enables researchers to quickly determine PMI values by accounting for raw material inputs against bulk API output [2].

Advanced PMI Calculation Approaches

For more complex syntheses, particularly convergent syntheses where multiple branches of synthesis are combined, the Convergent PMI Calculator uses the same fundamental calculations but allows for multiple branches in the synthesis pathway [2]. This is particularly relevant for peptide-based therapeutics and other complex molecules where linear and convergent synthesis approaches are employed [3].

Table 1: Components of PMI Calculation in Pharmaceutical Development

Component Category	Description	Included in PMI
Starting Materials	Key molecular building blocks	Yes
Reagents & Catalysts	Substances that enable reactions but aren't incorporated into final product	Yes
Solvents	Reaction, workup, and purification solvents	Yes
Process Aids	Materials like filtering agents	Yes
Water	Used in extraction, washing, precipitation	Yes
Energy	Electricity, steam, cooling	No
Upstream Materials	Resources to produce starting materials	No

System Boundary Considerations

Recent research emphasizes that PMI's system boundaries significantly affect its utility as a sustainability metric. While traditional PMI calculations use a gate-to-gate approach, expanding to cradle-to-gate boundaries (termed Value-Chain Mass Intensity or VCMI) strengthens correlations with environmental impacts [41]. This expanded view accounts for upstream resource consumption in the supply chain, though it requires more extensive data collection [41].

The Limitations of PMI as a Standalone Sustainability Metric

Exclusion of Energy Consumption and Environmental Impact

PMI does not account for energy consumption, which is a critical driver of sustainability, particularly in biologics manufacturing where equipment, cleanroom requirements, and HVAC systems contribute significantly to the overall environmental footprint [59] [38]. A process with lower PMI might require substantially more energy to operate, potentially resulting in higher overall environmental impact when energy generation emissions are considered [59].

Lack of Material Differentiation

PMI treats all mass inputs equally, regardless of their environmental impact, renewability, or toxicity [41] [3]. This means that a kilogram of water carries the same weight as a kilogram of hazardous solvent, and renewable resources are not distinguished from fossil-based inputs. This limitation is particularly problematic when comparing processes using different material types with varying environmental footprints [41].

Modality-Specific Limitations

The usefulness of PMI varies significantly across pharmaceutical modalities. For biologics manufacturing, PMI primarily captures water usage, which constitutes over 90% of PMI, while failing to adequately account for other sustainability drivers [59] [38]. Similarly, for vaccines where the final drug product is measured based on potency rather than mass, PMI becomes particularly problematic as a comparative metric [59].

Temporal and Productivity Considerations

PMI does not account for process duration or productivity rates (grams of drug substance per unit of time), which can significantly influence overall sustainability [8] [38]. A process with higher PMI but substantially higher productivity may produce the required API quantity faster, potentially reducing facility energy consumption and overall environmental impact [38].

Case Studies: When Higher PMI Correlates with Improved Sustainability

Continuous Biologics Manufacturing vs. Batch Processing

Recent research comparing continuous and batch manufacturing processes for monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) reveals that continuous processes can have comparable or even higher PMIs than batch processes yet still be more sustainable [8]. One study found that while a batch process had approximately 1.6-fold lower PMI than a continuous process, the continuous process needed to run significantly fewer batches to meet typical demand [59] [38].

The critical factor is productivity: continuous processes often achieve multifold higher productivity (grams of drug substance per unit time), meaning that less time in the manufacturing plant is required to meet overall product demand [38]. This results in a multifold reduction in electricity and other resources consumed through implementation of the continuous process, despite its higher PMI [38].

Table 2: Comparison of Batch vs. Continuous Monoclonal Antibody Production

Parameter	Intensified Fed-Batch Process	Continuous Process
PMI	Lower	Higher (approx. 1.6x batch)
Productivity	0.2 g/L/day	1 g/L/day
Time to Produce 200 kg mAb DS	Longer	Shorter
Facility Utilization	Higher	Lower
Energy Consumption per kg DS	Higher	Lower
Overall Environmental Impact	Potentially higher	Potentially lower

Peptide Synthesis: High PMI with Therapeutic Necessity

Peptide-based therapeutics represent an important modality for targets poorly tractable by small molecules, despite their high PMI values. Solid-phase peptide synthesis (SPPS) demonstrates PMI values approximately 13,000, significantly higher than small molecules (PMI median 168-308) and biopharmaceuticals (PMI ≈ 8,300) [3]. While this high PMI indicates substantial resource consumption, peptide therapeutics offer unique therapeutic benefits for specific targets, representing a necessary environmental trade-off for critical medical applications [3].

Process Intensification with Media Recycling

In perfusion cultures for biologics manufacturing, innovative approaches like spent media recycling demonstrate how higher initial material inputs can yield sustainability benefits. While media recycling may initially increase PMI calculations, it recaptures nutrients that would otherwise be discarded, reducing overall waste generation and fresh media consumption [38]. This approach exemplifies how circular economy principles can conflict with simplistic PMI optimization while delivering genuine environmental benefits.

Beyond PMI: Integrated Methodologies for Comprehensive Sustainability Assessment

Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) Integration

Life Cycle Assessment provides a holistic method that evaluates multiple environmental impacts across the entire life-cycle of chemical processes, addressing PMI's limitations [41]. LCA considers factors such as global warming potential, freshwater use, human toxicity, and resource depletion, offering a more comprehensive sustainability picture [41] [38]. For biologics manufacturing, LCA reveals that the global warming potential of a biologic produced using single-use technology is approximately 22.7 tons CO2 equivalent per 1 kg biological drug substance—equivalent to the annual CO2 emissions of five automobiles [38].

Value-Chain Mass Intensity (VCMI)

Expanding system boundaries from gate-to-gate to cradle-to-gate strengthens correlations between mass intensity and environmental impacts [41]. This approach, termed Value-Chain Mass Intensity (VCMI), accounts for upstream resource consumption by including natural resources required for producing intermediate products [41]. While more data-intensive, VCMI provides a more accurate reflection of a process's true resource efficiency and environmental impact.

Combined Metric Approaches for Biologics

For biologics manufacturing, comprehensive sustainability assessment requires metrics beyond PMI that capture energy utilization, cleanroom requirements, HVAC systems, and space/time/yield optimization [59] [38]. Merck & Co. advocates for a holistic view that includes how purportedly greener products are derived, power needed to operate facilities, plant footprint, process duration, and recovery and remediation strategies during manufacturing [59]. They are working with industry partners to develop modality-appropriate metrics that outperform PMI in assessing environmental impact [73].

Experimental Protocols for Comprehensive Sustainability Assessment

Protocol 1: Integrated PMI and Energy Assessment

Objective: To evaluate both mass and energy efficiency of API manufacturing processes.

Methodology:

• Calculate traditional PMI using ACS GCIPR calculator tools [2]
• Monitor energy consumption throughout manufacturing process using smart meters
• Record process duration and productivity rates (g API per unit time)
• Calculate energy intensity (kWh per kg API)
• Correlate PMI with energy consumption data

Key Metrics:

• PMI (kg total materials/kg API)
• Energy Intensity (kWh/kg API)
• Productivity Rate (g API/L/day or g API/batch)
• Space-Time Yield (kg API/m³/day)

Protocol 2: Comparative Sustainability Analysis

Objective: To compare batch and continuous processes using multi-criteria assessment.

Methodology:

• Run parallel processes (batch vs. continuous) for the same API
• Calculate PMI for each process [8]
• Conduct streamlined LCA for both processes [41] [73]
• Measure productivity rates and facility utilization
• Assess environmental impacts using multiple categories (global warming potential, water use, etc.)

Analysis:

• Compare traditional PMI values
• Analyze productivity-adjusted environmental impacts
• Evaluate facility utilization efficiency
• Assess overall sustainability using integrated metrics

Table 3: Key Research Reagent Solutions for Sustainability Assessment

Tool/Resource	Function	Application in Sustainability Research
ACS GCIPR PMI Calculator	Standardized PMI calculation	Provides industry-standard PMI values for benchmarking [2]
Convergent PMI Calculator	PMI calculation for complex syntheses	Handles multi-branch synthesis routes common in peptide therapeutics [2]
SMART PMI Tool	Target PMI setting	Sets ambitious, molecule-aware PMI targets for API manufacturing [73]
LCA Databases	Environmental impact data	Provides emission factors and environmental impact data for comprehensive assessment [41]
Solvent Recovery Systems	Material efficiency improvement	Increases solvent recycling rates to reduce waste and virgin material consumption [74]
Process Analytical Technology	Real-time process monitoring	Enables continuous manufacturing and process optimization for resource efficiency [38]

Process Mass Intensity remains a valuable green chemistry metric for benchmarking resource efficiency in pharmaceutical development, but it cannot be viewed as a comprehensive sustainability indicator. As demonstrated through continuous biologics manufacturing, peptide synthesis, and other case studies, processes with higher PMI can indeed be more sustainable when factors such as energy consumption, productivity rates, facility utilization, and therapeutic necessity are considered. Pharmaceutical researchers and drug development professionals must adopt integrated assessment methodologies that combine PMI with Life Cycle Assessment, energy analysis, and productivity metrics to make truly sustainable process decisions. The industry's transition toward a defossilized, circular economy will require this multifaceted approach to environmental assessment, moving beyond mass-based metrics to comprehensive sustainability evaluation.

In the pursuit of sustainable pharmaceutical manufacturing, Process Mass Intensity (PMI) has emerged as a fundamental green chemistry metric. PMI is calculated by dividing the total mass of materials used in a process by the mass of the final Active Pharmaceutical Ingredient (API) produced [66] [2]. While PMI provides a straightforward measure of material efficiency, it offers a limited perspective as it does not differentiate between materials based on their environmental impact or resource consumption. This limitation has driven the integration of PMI with Life Cycle Assessment (LCA), creating a more robust framework that evaluates environmental impacts across the entire supply chain [66] [15]. The American Chemical Society's Green Chemistry Institute Pharmaceutical Roundtable (ACS GCIPR) has been instrumental in advancing this integration through the development of a combined PMI-LCA tool, transforming how researchers assess sustainability in drug substance research [75] [66].

The pharmaceutical industry faces unique environmental challenges, generating more waste per unit of product than most other chemical sectors [76]. Traditional green metrics like PMI, E-factor, and atom economy help quantify material efficiency but fail to capture broader environmental consequences such as toxicity, resource depletion, and ecosystem impacts [76] [77]. The integrated PMI-LCA approach addresses this gap by combining the material efficiency focus of PMI with the comprehensive environmental assessment capabilities of LCA, enabling researchers to make more informed decisions during process development [15].

The PMI-LCA Framework: Concepts and Calculations

Core Principles and Metrics

The integrated PMI-LCA framework adopts a "cradle-to-gate" approach, focusing on the environmental impacts from raw material extraction through API manufacturing [15]. This perspective captures the hidden environmental burdens embedded in chemical precursors and reagents, which often constitute the majority of a pharmaceutical process's environmental footprint [76]. The framework evaluates six key environmental impact indicators alongside PMI: global warming potential (GWP), energy consumption, acidification, eutrophication, and water depletion [66].

A critical innovation in the PMI-LCA approach is its streamlined methodology that bypasses the lengthy timelines typically associated with full LCAs. By incorporating pre-loaded LCA data sourced from the Ecoinvent life cycle inventory database and using average values for classes of compounds like solvents, the tool provides rapid environmental impact estimates without sacrificing scientific rigor [66]. This efficiency makes it practical for iterative assessment throughout process development, allowing researchers to quickly compare alternative synthetic routes and identify environmental "hot spots" [66] [77].

Calculation Methodology

The PMI-LCA calculation process begins with compiling a comprehensive inventory of all materials used in the API synthesis, including solvents, reagents, catalysts, and process chemicals. The PMI is calculated according to the standard formula:

PMI = Total Mass of Materials / Mass of API

For the LCA component, each material input is associated with corresponding life cycle impact factors derived from the Ecoinvent database. The tool automatically calculates environmental impacts across the six indicators using the following general calculation:

Impact Category Total = Σ (Mass of Material × Category-Specific Impact Factor)

The PMI-LCA tool is specifically designed to handle the complexity of pharmaceutical processes, accommodating various process topologies including linear and convergent syntheses, multiple output streams, and recycle streams [75]. It can manage typical process complexities involving 10-30 steps and 50-200 unique process inputs, with no hard limit on process size to maintain flexibility for different chemical modalities [75].

Figure 1: PMI-LCA Calculation Workflow. This diagram illustrates the sequential process of calculating integrated PMI-LCA metrics, from data input to sustainability decision support.

Implementation in Pharmaceutical Research

The ACS GCI PMI-LCA Tool

The ACS GCI Pharmaceutical Roundtable has developed a web-based PMI-LCA application designed specifically for pharmaceutical researchers [75]. This tool represents a significant advancement over the original Excel-based calculator, addressing limitations such as sluggish performance, data entry error handling, version control, and benchmarking capabilities [75]. The tool is structured to handle complex pharmaceutical process topologies, including recycle streams for solvent recovery and crystallization seed charges, which significantly impact the mass balance of upstream steps [75].

Key features of the PMI-LCA tool include:

• Automated impact calculations using pre-loaded LCA data from Ecoinvent [66]
• Hotspot reporting that identifies steps with the greatest environmental impacts [75]
• Flexible process modeling for different synthesis architectures [75]
• Error detection and troubleshooting guides for common data-entry mistakes [75]
• Customizable visualization of PMI and LCA results by raw material or process step [66]

The tool is designed for iterative assessment throughout API development, beginning when a chemical route has been established and continuing through commercialization to ensure continuous improvement in sustainability metrics [66].

Experimental Protocol for PMI-LCA Assessment

Implementing PMI-LCA analysis in drug substance research requires a systematic approach. The following protocol provides a step-by-step methodology for researchers:

• Process Definition and Scoping

  • Define the synthetic route to be assessed, including all process steps
  • Identify system boundaries (typically cradle-to-gate)
  • Determine the functional unit (typically 1 kg of final API) [77]

• Data Collection

  • Compile mass balances for all process steps, including inputs (reactants, solvents, catalysts) and outputs (API, byproducts, waste)
  • Document energy consumption for specialized unit operations
  • Identify recycle streams and purification losses

• Data Input and Modeling

  • Input process data into the PMI-LCA tool
  • Assign appropriate LCA impact factors to each material from the database
  • Configure process topology to accurately represent material flows

• Calculation and Analysis

  • Execute PMI and LCA calculations
  • Review results presented in customizable charts and tables
  • Identify environmental hotspots across process steps and materials

• Interpretation and Optimization

  • Prioritize hotspots with the greatest environmental impact
  • Develop alternative approaches to address key impacts
  • Iteratively reassess the process after implementing changes

This protocol supports the Green-by-Design philosophy, where sustainability considerations are integrated early in process development rather than as a retrospective assessment [15].

Comparative Analysis of Environmental Impact Indicators

The PMI-LCA tool evaluates environmental performance across multiple indicators, providing a more comprehensive sustainability assessment than mass-based metrics alone. The table below summarizes the key environmental impact categories included in the assessment:

Table 1: PMI-LCA Environmental Impact Indicators

Impact Category	Description	Measurement Units	Key Contributors in Pharma Processes
Process Mass Intensity (PMI)	Total mass of materials per mass of API	kg total inputs/kg API	Solvents, water, process aids
Global Warming Potential (GWP)	Contribution to climate change	kg CO₂-equivalent	Energy-intensive steps, certain reagents
Energy Consumption	Cumulative energy demand	MJ	High-temperature reactions, distillations
Acidification	Potential to acidify soils and water bodies	kg SO₂-equivalent	Acidic reagents, emissions from energy production
Eutrophication	Potential to over-fertilize water ecosystems	kg PO₄-equivalent	Nitrogen-containing compounds, certain wastes
Water Depletion	Consumption of freshwater resources	m³ water	Extraction, purification, cooling processes

This multi-indicator approach reveals important trade-offs that might be overlooked when focusing solely on mass reduction. For example, a process modification that reduces PMI might inadvertently increase GWP if it requires energy-intensive purification steps [66] [77]. The PMI-LCA tool makes these trade-offs visible, enabling more balanced sustainability decisions.

Research Reagent Solutions and Sustainability Considerations

The PMI-LCA framework highlights the significant environmental impacts associated with specific reagents and solvents used in pharmaceutical research. The table below details key reagent categories and their sustainability considerations:

Table 2: Research Reagent Solutions in PMI-LCA Context

Reagent Category	Examples	Primary Functions	PMI-LCA Considerations
Solvents	Methanol, THF, DMF, Dichloromethane	Reaction medium, extraction, purification	Account for ~80% of PMI in typical API processes; high purification energy and waste treatment impacts [76]
Catalysts	Palladium, enzymes, chiral ligands	Accelerate reactions, enable selectivity	Precious metal catalysts have high embedded energy; biocatalysts often have lower LCA impacts
Reagents	LiAlH₄, Diisopropylamine, EDC	Facilitate bond formation, enable transformations	Some reagents have energy-intensive production processes; alternatives may reduce multiple impact categories [77]
Purification Materials	Silica, chromatography solvents, filters	Isolation and purification of intermediates and API	Chromatography contributes significantly to PMI and energy use; crystallization often preferable

The PMI-LCA tool incorporates specific emission factors for pharmaceutical-grade materials, which differ from standard chemical production due to their higher purity requirements and more intensive processing [75]. This refinement increases the accuracy of assessments for pharmaceutical applications compared to generic LCA approaches.

Case Studies and Applications

MK-7264 API Development

The implementation of PMI-LCA analysis during the development of the MK-7264 active pharmaceutical ingredient demonstrates the practical utility of this approach. Through iterative application of the PMI-LCA tool, researchers reduced the PMI from 366 to 88 over the course of process development [15]. The LCA component helped identify that reductions in solvent usage and switching to solvents with lower life cycle impacts drove significant improvements in multiple environmental indicators, including GWP and energy consumption [15]. This case exemplifies the Green-by-Design strategy, where continuous sustainability assessment guides process optimization toward more environmentally favorable outcomes.

Letermovir Synthesis Analysis

A comprehensive PMI-LCA assessment of the antiviral drug Letermovir revealed unexpected environmental hotspots [77]. While the manufacturing process had received a green chemistry award, the LCA identified that a Pd-catalyzed Heck cross-coupling and certain purification steps contributed disproportionately to the overall environmental impact [77]. The analysis demonstrated that traditional green metrics alone might not capture all relevant environmental aspects, highlighting the value of the integrated PMI-LCA approach. Researchers used these insights to develop alternative synthetic strategies that addressed the identified hotspots while maintaining process efficiency.

Figure 2: Iterative PMI-LCA Optimization Process. This workflow illustrates how PMI-LCA assessment is applied throughout process development to continuously identify improvement opportunities and verify their effectiveness.

Limitations and Future Developments

While the PMI-LCA approach represents a significant advancement in sustainability assessment for pharmaceuticals, several limitations remain. Data availability for specialized pharmaceutical intermediates continues to challenge comprehensive LCA implementation [77]. The ecoinvent database contains approximately 1,000 chemicals, while pharmaceutical syntheses may utilize many unique intermediates not represented in these databases [77]. Current approaches address this through proxy data or estimation methods, but this can affect accuracy [77].

The ACS GCI Pharmaceutical Roundtable is actively addressing these limitations through a tool development challenge to create a next-generation web-based PMI-LCA application [75]. This initiative will further enhance functionality, with features including improved handling of data gaps, more refined emission factors for pharmaceutical-specific scenarios, and better integration of circular economy principles such as solvent recycling [75]. The upcoming tool will remain open source and publicly accessible, continuing the Roundtable's commitment to advancing green chemistry practices across the pharmaceutical sector [75].

Future developments in PMI-LCA methodology will likely include more sophisticated approaches to account for antimicrobial resistance (AMR) potential in environmental discharges, a particular concern for antibiotic manufacturing [76]. Additionally, integration with predictive analytics could enable sustainability assessment at the earliest stages of route selection, further advancing the Green-by-Design paradigm in pharmaceutical development [15] [77].

The integration of Process Mass Intensity with Life Cycle Assessment represents a transformative advancement in how pharmaceutical researchers evaluate and improve the sustainability of drug substance manufacturing. By moving beyond simple mass-based metrics to a multi-dimensional environmental assessment framework, PMI-LCA provides the comprehensive insights needed to make truly sustainable decisions in process development. The availability of streamlined tools from ACS GCI makes this sophisticated analysis accessible to researchers without specialized LCA expertise, supporting broader adoption across the pharmaceutical industry. As these tools continue to evolve and incorporate more pharmaceutical-specific data, PMI-LCA assessment will become an increasingly indispensable component of pharmaceutical development, driving the industry toward more environmentally sustainable manufacturing practices while maintaining the high quality standards required for pharmaceutical products.

In the pursuit of a defossilized chemical industry, Process Mass Intensity (PMI) has emerged as a pivotal metric for quantifying the resource efficiency and environmental impact of manufacturing processes, particularly in pharmaceutical development. PMI is defined as the total mass of materials used to produce a specified mass of product, accounting for all reactants, reagents, solvents, and catalysts employed throughout the synthesis [1]. Unlike simpler metrics such as atom economy, PMI provides a comprehensive assessment by including all mass inputs, making it an indispensable tool for driving sustainable manufacturing practices in the pharmaceutical industry and beyond [2] [3]. As the industry faces increasing pressure to transition from fossil-based feedstocks to renewable resources, PMI offers a standardized approach to benchmark improvements, optimize resource utilization, and reduce the environmental footprint of chemical processes.

The American Chemical Society Green Chemistry Institute Pharmaceutical Roundtable (ACS GCIPR) has identified PMI as a key mass-related green chemistry metric for measuring the efficiency of chemical processes [78]. The calculation of PMI is straightforward: it is the ratio of the total mass of materials entering a process to the mass of the final active pharmaceutical ingredient (API) produced [78]. This calculation provides a holistic view of process efficiency, enabling researchers to identify areas for improvement and track progress toward more sustainable manufacturing. As the chemical industry evolves toward defossilization, PMI will play an increasingly critical role in guiding the development of processes that minimize resource consumption and environmental impact while maintaining economic viability.

PMI Fundamentals and Calculation

Definition and Calculation Methodology

Process Mass Intensity is calculated using a straightforward formula that encompasses the total mass of all materials used in a synthetic process relative to the mass of the final product obtained:

PMI = Total Mass of Materials (kg) / Mass of Product (kg) [78]

Where the Total Mass of Materials includes all reactants, reagents, solvents, catalysts, and process chemicals used in the synthesis, purification, and isolation steps of the manufacturing process [1] [3]. This comprehensive scope distinguishes PMI from other green chemistry metrics, as it accounts for the complete material footprint of a process rather than focusing solely on reaction efficiency.

The fundamental equation highlights that lower PMI values indicate more efficient processes, with the theoretical ideal being a PMI of 1, representing perfect atom economy with no auxiliary materials. In practice, even highly optimized pharmaceutical processes typically have PMI values significantly greater than 1 due to the use of solvents, purification materials, and isolation agents. The ACS GCI Pharmaceutical Roundtable has developed standardized PMI calculators to help researchers consistently apply this metric across different processes and development stages, including simple PMI calculators, convergent synthesis calculators, and predictive tools [1] [2].

Comparative PMI Analysis Across Therapeutic Modalities

Table 1: PMI Benchmarks Across Different Therapeutic Modalities

Therapeutic Modality	Typical PMI Range (kg/kg API)	Key Factors Influencing PMI
Small Molecule APIs	168 - 308 [3]	Synthetic step count, reaction efficiency, purification methods
Biologics & Monoclonal Antibodies	~8,300 [3]	Cell culture media, purification requirements, buffer volumes
Oligonucleotides	3,035 - 7,023 (average: 4,299) [3]	Solid-phase synthesis, reagent excess, purification challenges
Synthetic Peptides	~13,000 [3]	Amino acid excess, solvent-intensive solid-phase synthesis, purification

The significant variation in PMI across therapeutic modalities highlights the distinct sustainability challenges for each platform technology. Small molecule APIs generally demonstrate the most favorable PMI values due to well-established, highly optimized synthetic methodologies and efficient purification techniques. In contrast, peptide synthesis exhibits substantially higher PMI, primarily due to the resource-intensive nature of solid-phase peptide synthesis (SPPS), which requires large excesses of solvents and protected amino acids [3]. This disparity underscores the critical need for modality-specific PMI benchmarking and improvement strategies, particularly as the pharmaceutical industry expands beyond traditional small molecules to include more complex therapeutic agents.

Current Pharmaceutical PMI Landscape

PMI Benchmarking in Drug Substance Research

The pharmaceutical industry has systematically adopted PMI benchmarking to quantify and improve the environmental performance of drug substance manufacturing processes. The ACS GCI Pharmaceutical Roundtable has been instrumental in establishing standardized benchmarking practices across member companies, conducting regular PMI benchmarking exercises since 2008 [2]. These initiatives have enabled the industry to identify key drivers of process inefficiency and establish realistic improvement targets throughout the drug development lifecycle.

PMI values typically follow a characteristic trajectory throughout API process development, starting with high values in early research phases and decreasing as processes are optimized for commercial manufacturing. This progression reflects the continuous improvement mindset essential to green chemistry implementation in pharmaceuticals. The industry has developed specialized tools to support this evolution, including:

• Simple PMI Calculator: For linear synthetic routes [2]
• Convergent PMI Calculator: For complex syntheses with multiple branches [1] [2]
• PMI Prediction Calculator: Uses historical data and Monte Carlo simulations to estimate probable PMI ranges for proposed synthetic routes [79]

These tools enable researchers to make informed decisions during route selection and process optimization, embedding sustainability considerations early in the development lifecycle when changes are most impactful and cost-effective.

Experimental PMI Determination Protocol

Table 2: Essential Research Reagent Solutions for PMI Studies

Reagent Category	Specific Examples	Function in API Synthesis	PMI Considerations
Solvents	DMF, DMAc, NMP, DCM, MTBE [3]	Reaction medium, purification	Major PMI driver; replacement with greener alternatives reduces PMI
Protecting Groups	Fmoc, Boc, Cbz [3]	Temporary protection of functional groups	Atom-inefficient; contribute to raw material mass
Coupling Agents	HATU, HBTU, DCC [3]	Facilitate amide bond formation	Often used in excess; generate stoichiometric waste
Catalysts	Palladium, enzymes	Accelerate specific transformations	Low loading but may require specialized ligands
Cleavage Reagents	TFA, scavengers [3]	Release product from solid support	Highly corrosive; requires extensive washing

Accurate experimental determination of PMI requires meticulous mass accounting throughout all stages of the synthetic process. The following protocol provides a standardized methodology for PMI calculation in drug substance research:

Step 1: Material Inventory

• Record the mass of all input materials, including reactants, reagents, solvents, catalysts, and purification agents
• Use analytical balances for precise measurement (±0.1% accuracy recommended)
• Account for all process solutions, including aqueous washes and extraction solvents

Step 2: Process Execution

• Execute the synthetic process according to established procedures
• Document any process deviations that may impact material usage
• Collect all output streams, including product, byproducts, and waste

Step 3: Product Quantification

• Precisely measure the mass of isolated, purified API
• Use standardized drying procedures to ensure consistent moisture content
• Apply appropriate analytical methods (HPLC, NMR) to determine purity and apply mass corrections if necessary

Step 4: PMI Calculation

• Sum the total mass of all input materials recorded in Step 1
• Divide the total input mass by the mass of purified API from Step 3
• Report PMI as a dimensionless value (kg total inputs/kg API)

Step 5: Stage-Gate Analysis

• For complex processes, calculate individual PMI values for each synthetic stage
• Identify high-PMI stages for targeted optimization efforts
• Document opportunities for improvement in subsequent development cycles

This experimental protocol enables consistent PMI determination across different processes and development stages, facilitating meaningful comparisons and tracking of improvement over time [1] [2] [3].

PMI Prediction and Modeling Approaches

Molecular Complexity-Based Prediction

Advanced PMI prediction approaches have emerged that leverage molecular complexity metrics to estimate resource requirements early in development when minimal process data exists. These methods recognize that API structural complexity directly influences synthetic challenge and consequently PMI. The foundational relationship for these predictions is:

Target PMI = f(Molecular Weight, Estimated Molecular Complexity) [78]

Recent work has refined this approach using machine learning models trained on historical pharmaceutical manufacturing data. Sheridan et al. developed a random forest model that achieves 82.6% predictive accuracy for molecular complexity using just four key molecular descriptors [78]:

• Heteroatom count - The number of non-carbon, non-hydrogen atoms
• Stereocenter count - The number of chiral centers
• Unique topological torsion - A 2D descriptor capturing molecular flexibility
• Connectivity index chi4n - A graph-based descriptor of molecular branching

The Open SMART-PMI tool implements this model as an open-source application that accepts chemical structure files (SDF format) and generates PMI predictions along with complexity scores [78]. This enables researchers to set ambitious yet realistic PMI targets during early route design, embedding sustainability considerations when process flexibility is greatest.

PMI Prediction Tool Workflow

PMI Prediction Workflow

The PMI Prediction Calculator developed by the ACS GCI Pharmaceutical Roundtable represents the state-of-the-art in predictive PMI modeling [79]. This tool employs historical data from approximately 2,000 pharmaceutical processes across multiple companies combined with Monte Carlo simulations to generate probable PMI ranges for proposed synthetic routes [79]. The tool can be applied before any laboratory work begins, enabling in-silico evaluation and comparison of alternative synthetic approaches.

Key advantages of this predictive approach include:

• Early sustainability assessment during route selection
• Identification of high-PMI steps before resource commitment
• Scenario analysis for evaluating potential process improvements
• Data-driven target setting for process development teams

As these predictive models incorporate more data across diverse synthetic methodologies and chemical spaces, their accuracy and utility for guiding sustainable process design will continue to improve, making them indispensable tools for future-proofing pharmaceutical manufacturing in a defossilized industry.

PMI Optimization Strategies for Defossilization

Solvent Selection and Management

Solvents typically constitute the largest contribution to PMI in pharmaceutical processes, often accounting for 80-90% of the total mass intensity [3]. Consequently, solvent optimization represents the most significant opportunity for PMI reduction in alignment with defossilization goals. Strategic approaches include:

Solvent Replacement

• Identify and substitute problematic solvents (DMF, NMP, DCM) with greener alternatives [3]
• Prioritize solvents derived from renewable feedstocks rather than fossil sources
• Consider solvent recovery and reuse systems to dramatically reduce net consumption

Process Intensification

• Implement solvent-free or neoteric solvent reaction systems where feasible
• Increase reaction concentrations to minimize solvent volume per unit product
• Develop continuous processes that inherently reduce solvent requirements

The pharmaceutical industry's transition from traditional solvents like DMF and NMP to renewable alternatives represents a critical step toward defossilization. These problematic solvents are not only derived from fossil resources but are also classified as reprotoxic, creating dual incentives for replacement [3].

Synthetic Technology Innovation

Beyond solvent optimization, fundamental innovations in synthetic methodology offer substantial opportunities for PMI reduction:

Catalysis Advancements

• Develop more efficient catalytic systems to reduce stoichiometric reagent usage
• Implement catalytic methods for steps currently requiring stoichiometric reagents
• Explore biocatalysis and enzymatic transformations with inherent selectivity benefits

Process Integration

• Design convergent synthetic routes that minimize intermediate isolation and purification
• Develop telescoped processes where crude intermediates proceed directly to subsequent steps
• Implement in-situ reagent generation to avoid isolation and handling of unstable intermediates

Alternative Platform Technologies

• For peptides, explore hybrid SPPS/LPPS approaches that balance efficiency with practicality [3]
• Evaluate enzymatic peptide synthesis as a potentially more sustainable alternative to traditional methods [3]
• Consider continuous flow processing for improved mass and heat transfer efficiency

These technological innovations not only reduce PMI but also frequently align with defossilization goals by eliminating hazardous chemicals, reducing energy requirements, and incorporating renewable raw materials.

Process Mass Intensity has evolved from a simple green chemistry metric to an indispensable tool for guiding the pharmaceutical industry toward sustainable, defossilized manufacturing. By providing a comprehensive measure of resource efficiency that encompasses all material inputs, PMI enables meaningful benchmarking, targeted optimization, and transparent communication of environmental performance. The ongoing development of predictive PMI tools and their integration with molecular complexity metrics will further strengthen our ability to design sustainable processes from the earliest stages of development.

As the chemical industry transitions away from fossil resources, PMI will play an increasingly critical role in quantifying progress toward defossilization goals. The expanding application of PMI across therapeutic modalities—from small molecules to peptides and oligonucleotides—demonstrates its versatility and underscores the universal importance of resource efficiency in sustainable manufacturing. By continuing to refine PMI calculation methodologies, establish realistic targets, and develop innovative synthetic approaches that minimize material intensity, researchers and drug development professionals can lead the transition to a sustainable, defossilized chemical industry that meets society's pharmaceutical needs while minimizing environmental impact.

Conclusion

Calculating and optimizing Process Mass Intensity is a fundamental practice for developing efficient and environmentally sustainable drug substances. This guide has outlined a clear path from foundational understanding and practical calculation to advanced troubleshooting and validation. While PMI is an indispensable metric for benchmarking material efficiency, its limitations necessitate a broader view that includes energy consumption and full life cycle assessments. The future of green pharmaceutical manufacturing lies in leveraging PMI not in isolation, but as a key component of an integrated strategy that embraces process intensification, continuous manufacturing, and simplified LCA methods to genuinely reduce the environmental footprint of medicines.

References

• 1. Process Mass Intensity Metric [https://learning.acsgcipr.org/guides-and-metrics/metrics/process-mass-intensity-metric/]
• 2. Process Mass Intensity Calculator [https://acsgcipr.org/tools/process-mass-intensity/]
• 3. Process Mass Intensity (PMI): A Holistic Analysis of Current ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11002941/]
• 4. Process Mass Intensity → Term [https://lifestyle.sustainability-directory.com/term/process-mass-intensity/]
• 5. Process Mass Intensity → Area → Resource 3 [https://product.sustainability-directory.com/area/process-mass-intensity/resource/3/]
• 6. Process Mass Intensity Calculation Tool - ACS Community [https://communities.acs.org/t5/GCI-Nexus-Blog/Process-Mass-Intensity-Calculation-Tool/ba-p/15892]
• 7. Manufacturing mass intensity: 15 ​Years of Process ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666086521001764]
• 8. Comparison of process mass intensity (PMI) of continuous ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1871678422000619]
• 9. Top Trends in the Pharmaceutical Industry [2025] [https://www.epicflow.com/blog/top-trends-in-the-pharmaceutical-industry-what-to-expect/]
• 10. Performance metrics | PMI [https://www.pmi.com/sustainability/performance-metrics]
• 11. LEADERSHIP PANEL - What Will Have the Most Impact on ... [https://drug-dev.com/leadership-panel-what-will-have-the-most-impact-on-drug-development-in-2025/]
• 12. Next in pharma 2025: The future is now [https://www.pwc.com/us/en/industries/pharma-life-sciences/pharmaceutical-industry-trends.html]
• 13. Green Chemistry and Engineering Metrics [https://www.acs.org/green-chemistry-sustainability/research-innovation/engineerings-metrics.html]
• 14. Metrics of green chemistry: Waste minimization [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S2452223621001255]
• 15. Green and sustainable metrics: Charting the course for ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666086522000662]
• 16. Green chemistry metrics [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_chemistry_metrics]
• 17. 12 Principles of Green Chemistry [https://www.acs.org/green-chemistry-sustainability/principles/12-principles-of-green-chemistry.html]
• 18. A proposal of twelve principles for LCA of chemicals [https://pubs.rsc.org/en/content/articlehtml/2025/gc/d4gc04844j?page=search]
• 19. Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) in Green Chemistry: A Guide ... [https://www.chemcopilot.com/blog/lifecicle-assessment]
• 20. Biopharma PMI Calculator [https://acsgcipr.org/tools/biopharma-pmi-calculator/]
• 21. Cradle to Gate vs. Cradle to Grave: What's the Difference? [https://www.earthster.org/post/cradle-to-gate-vs-cradle-to-grave-what-s-the-difference]
• 22. Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) – Everything you need to know [https://ecochain.com/blog/life-cycle-assessment-lca-guide/]
• 23. A detailed comparison of three types of Life Cycle ... [https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/detailed-comparison-three-types-life-cycle-assessment-m-p-jlb3f]
• 24. ACSGCIPR [https://acsgcipr.org/]
• 25. Solvents and Process efficiency [https://organicchemistrydata.org/gcipr/]
• 26. Announces ACS I... - GCI ... Pharmaceutical Roundtable 2025 ACS [https://communities.acs.org/t5/GCI-Nexus-Blog/ACS-GCI-Pharmaceutical-Roundtable-Announces-2025-Industry-Award/ba-p/98230]
• 27. Recap of the SELECT Criteria [https://learning.acsgcipr.org/process-design/route-selection/recap-of-the-select-criteria/]
• 28. Improving Process Mass Intensity for Bio/Pharmaceutical Production [https://www.pharmtech.com/view/improving-process-mass-intensity-biopharmaceutical-production]
• 29. Defining and Managing Raw Manufacturing Data [https://www.pharmtech.com/view/defining-and-managing-raw-manufacturing-data]
• 30. Presenting data in tables and charts - PMC [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4008059/]
• 31. Presenting the Results of Quantitative Analysis [https://pressbooks.ric.edu/socialdataanalysis/chapter/writing-about-quantitative-data/]
• 32. Figures and Charts - UNC Writing Center [https://writingcenter.unc.edu/tips-and-tools/figures-and-charts/]
• 33. Tools – ACSGCIPR [https://acsgcipr.org/tools/]
• 34. Biopharma PMI Calculator [https://chemistryforsustainability.org/tools-metrics/biopharma-pmi-calculator]
• 35. Controversial Nomenclature in Peptide Synthesis: A Call ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12301071/]
• 36. Origin peptides [https://rarerevolutionmagazine.com/rare-insider/a-new-method-of-peptide-synthesis-may-be-the-key-to-a-greener-future-for-pharma/]
• 37. Comparison of process mass intensity (PMI) of continuous ... [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36368463/]
• 38. Driving Sustainability in Biologics Process Development [https://www.bioprocessintl.com/process-development/driving-sustainability-in-biologics-process-development-innovative-strategies-and-technologies]
• 39. Techno‐economic analysis of membrane‐based ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12353975/]
• 40. Global sensitivity analysis of Open Systems Pharmacology ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11646943/]
• 41. Assessing mass intensity as a green chemistry metric [https://pubs.rsc.org/en/content/articlehtml/2025/gc/d5gc02994e]
• 42. Process Mass Intensity (PMI): A Holistic Analysis of Current ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/org/science/article/pii/S0022326324004079]
• 43. Biologics Contract Manufacturing Market Industry Trends ... [https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20251023383604/en/Biologics-Contract-Manufacturing-Market-Industry-Trends-and-Global-Forecasts-to-2035-Over-305-CMOs-Engaged-in-Biologics-Production-Show-Robust-Growth---ResearchAndMarkets.com]
• 44. Particle size analysis [https://www.pharmtech.com/view/particle-size-analysis]
• 45. Pharmaceutical Particle Size Analysis: Methods ... [https://www.labmanager.com/pharmaceutical-particle-size-analysis-methods-significance-and-regulatory-considerations-33989]
• 46. Mastering Particle Size Analysis: A Step-By- ... [https://www.complexgenerics.org/education-training/mastering-particle-size-analysis-a-step-by-step-illustration-of-techniques-and-best-practices/]
• 47. A Novel Integrated Workflow for Isolation Solvent Selection ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8289338/]
• 48. Solvent selection methodology for pharmaceutical processes [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0263876216302891]
• 49. Pharmaceutical Solvents Market Size & Share Analysis [https://www.mordorintelligence.com/industry-reports/pharmaceutical-solvents-market]
• 50. A Brief Introduction to Chemical Reaction Optimization - PMC [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10037254/]
• 51. Optimization-based simultaneous modelling of ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0009250923003147]
• 52. Recent advances in the application of heterogeneous ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0010854524000602]
• 53. Application of Heterogeneous Catalysts in the First Steps ... [https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4344/7/12/393]
• 54. Highly parallel optimisation of chemical reactions through ... [https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-025-61803-0]
• 55. Continuous Processing Lines for Pharma Market Size 2025 ... [https://www.360iresearch.com/library/intelligence/continuous-processing-lines-for-pharma]
• 56. Pharmaceutical Continuous Manufacturing Equipment ... [https://www.futuremarketinsights.com/reports/pharmaceutical-continuous-manufacturing-equipment-market]
• 57. Pharmaceutical Continuous Manufacturing Market Outlook ... [https://www.researchandmarkets.com/reports/6185171/pharmaceutical-continuous-manufacturing-market?srsltid=AfmBOor4KukvxVlYK0pM16LbqKROKCBy5j2i1gbONtjHxfbbcCdzlXrf]
• 58. Pharmaceutical Continuous Manufacturing 2025-2033 ... [https://www.archivemarketresearch.com/reports/pharmaceutical-continuous-manufacturing-140018]
• 59. Process Mass Intensity is Only Partial Gauge of ... [https://www.genengnews.com/topics/bioprocessing/process-mass-intensity-is-only-partial-gauge-of-sustainability-for-biologics/]
• 60. Global Continuous Manufacturing Market Report 2025 ... [https://www.cognitivemarketresearch.com/continuous-manufacturing-market-report]
• 61. Mass Intensity - an overview [https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/chemistry/mass-intensity]
• 62. Silica‐Assisted Solid‐Phase Peptide Synthesis (SiPPS) [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12357219/]
• 63. Total wash elimination for solid phase peptide synthesis [https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-023-44074-5]
• 64. Sustainable Ultrasound-Assisted Solid-Phase peptide ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1350417725000367]
• 65. How Reagent Purity Impacts API Manufacturing for ... [https://www.aurorium.com/resources/api-manufacturing-reagent-purity-oligonucleotides-peptides]
• 66. Fast, Accessible, Practical: New PMI-LCA Tool Make... [https://communities.acs.org/t5/GCI-Nexus-Blog/Fast-Accessible-Practical-New-PMI-LCA-Tool-Makes-Connecting/ba-p/93767]
• 67. Introduction of a process mass intensity metric for biologics [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1871678418302255]
• 68. Quantitative Decision-Making Methods [https://www.pmi.org/learning/library/decisions-quantitative-making-process-7466]
• 69. Batch Processing vs. Continuous Processing [https://www.getmaintainx.com/learning-center/batch-processing-vs-continuous-processing]
• 70. Continuous vs. Batch Process: What Are the Differences? [https://katanamrp.com/blog/continuous-vs-batch-process/]
• 71. Continuous Manufacturing Batch Industry [https://www.nnit.com/insights/articles/continuous-manufacturing-batch-manufacturing-pharmaceutical-industry]
• 72. Learning from the future: towards continuous manufacturing of ... [https://aapsopen.springeropen.com/articles/10.1186/s41120-025-00111-9]
• 73. Green chemistry programs and initiatives [https://www.merck.com/research/areas-of-innovation/green-and-sustainable-science/green-chemistry-programs-and-initiatives/]
• 74. API manufacturing: The cost of decarbonization [https://www.mckinsey.com/industries/life-sciences/our-insights/decarbonizing-api-manufacturing-unpacking-the-cost-and-regulatory-requirements]
• 75. PMI-LCA Tool Development Challenge [https://acsgcipr.org/funding-awards/pmi-lca-tool-development-challenge/]
• 76. Advantages and drawbacks of life cycle assessment ... [https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11356-024-33964-w]
• 77. Integrated Life Cycle Assessment Guides Sustainability in ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12593353/]
• 78. Evaluating Molecular Complexity with Open-Source ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11223213/]
• 79. PMI Prediction Tool [https://members.acsgcipr.org/pmi-prediction-tool/]