Article

HPTLC methods to assay active ingredients in pharmaceutical formulations: A review of the method development and validation steps

Department of Analytical Chemistry and Pharmaceutical Technology (FABI), Center for Pharmaceutical Research (CePhaR), Vrije Universiteit Brussel (VUB), Laarbeeklaan 103, 1090 Brussels, Belgium.
Journal of pharmaceutical and biomedical analysis (Impact Factor: 2.83). 03/2012; 66:11-23. DOI: 10.1016/j.jpba.2012.03.034
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT High-performance thin-layer chromatography (HPTLC) is still increasingly finding its way in pharmaceutical analysis in some parts of the world. With the advancements in the stationary phases and the introduction of densitometers as detection equipment, the technique achieves for given applications a precision and trueness comparable to high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC). In this review, the literature is surveyed for developed and validated HPTLC methods to assay active ingredients in pharmaceutical formulations published in the period 2005-2011. Procedures and approaches for method development, validation and quantitative assays are compared with the standard ways of conducting them. Applications of HPTLC in some other areas are also briefly highlighted.

0 Followers
 · 
239 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: A simple, sensitive, selective and precise high-performance thin-layer chromatographic method was developed for determination of lipid A (MPLA) adjuvant as a bulk and in solid fat nanoemulsions. Chromatographic separations were performed on thin-layer chromatography aluminum plates precoated with silica gel 60 F-254 as stationary phase and chloroform-methanol-ethyl acetate solution (10:2:4, v/v/v) as mobile phase. With this solvent system, compact spots for MPLA at Rf value 0.80 ± 0.02 were obtained. Densitometric analysis of MPLA was carried out in absorbance mode at 357 nm. Linear regression analysis for the calibration plots showed good linear relationship with r = 0.9996 in the concentration range of 20-100 ng/spot. The mean values (±SD) of slope and intercept were found to be 7.355 ± 0.006 and 109.52 ± 0.170, respectively. Limits of detection (LOD) and quantitation (LOQ) were observed at 3.096 and 9.382 ng/spot, respectively.The method was validated for precision, accuracy, robustness and recovery as per the International Conference on Harmonization guidelines. Statistical analysis proved that the developed method for quantification of MPLA as a bulk and in solid fat nanoemulsions is reproducible, selective and economical. This method could be applied for quantitative assay of MPLA in lipid-based vaccine formulations. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
    Biomedical Chromatography 02/2015; DOI:10.1002/bmc.3444 · 1.66 Impact Factor
  • Journal of Liquid Chromatography &amp Related Technologies 05/2014; 37(17):2420-2432. DOI:10.1080/10826076.2013.836714 · 0.64 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This paper presents an updated critical review about several attempts to contribute methionine (Met) to the world market with an emphasis on fermentation processes, especially from natural biological sources. Analytical methods for the determination of methionine are reviewed as well as applications in feed, food, pharmacy, and medicine. Fermentation studies published within the last five decades are elucidated critically, mainly with respect to the sulfur balance, substrate yield, and the analytical validity. From all the published fermentation data, it can be concluded that up to now no more than 5 g/L methionine are achievable without using genetically modified organisms (GMOs). The highest L-methionine concentration from natural sources reached so far amounts to 35 g/L and is published as a patent using a GMO of Escherichia coli. The review closes with a comprehensive overview of the role and activities of global methionine manufacturers. Some current market data is also presented.
    Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology 11/2014; DOI:10.1007/s00253-014-6156-y · 3.81 Impact Factor

Full-text

Download
208 Downloads
Available from
May 21, 2014