To compare the performance of both methods at higher temperatures, model predictions are compared to the experimental data in the CombiSolu-HighT-Exp database. Compared to the CombiSolu-Exp database, many of the solutes in this database are not drug-like components but e.g. polyaromatic hydrocarbons, and the majority of the data are measured in water rather than other organic solvents. A comparison of the different methods is given in Figure for selected solvent/solute pairs (isophathalic acid in water, 4-formylbenzoic acid in acetic acid, phenothiazine in water, and 2-methylanthracene in water). The experimental data for those solvent/solute pairs originate from Sheehan et al., Long et al., Han et al., Cheng et al., Lyu et al., Li et al., Sun et al., Ahmadian et al., Karasek et al., and Dohanyosova et al. 58 In Figure , four different methods for the prediction of log(S X,T ) are compared to experimental data as a function of temperature. If the temperature dependence of the dissolution enthalpy is accounted for (∆H diss = f (T )) and the experimental solid solubility at 298K for that solvent/solute pair (log(S X,exp,298K )) is used for Eq. 11, the best results are obtained (Figure , full red line). In case the experimental solid solubility at 298K is replaced by the model solid solubility log(S X,model,298K ) calculated based on the aqueous solid solubility log(S aq,model,298K ) and ∆G solv,298K predictions, the trends of log(S X,model,T ) as a function of temperature are well captured, but the absolute values are off in some cases (Figure , dashed red line). The blue lines in Figure do not account for the temperature dependence of the dissolution enthalpy (∆H diss,T ≈ ∆H diss,298K ). For most solvent/solute pairs, this approximation causes significant deviations in log(S X,T ) predictions above 350K.