| Literature DB >> 22567572 |
K B Vinay1, H D Revanasiddappa, M S Raghu, Sameer A M Abdulrahman, N Rajendraprasad.
Abstract
Two simple, selective, and rapn>id spn>eEntities:
Year: 2012 PMID: 22567572 PMCID: PMC3336187 DOI: 10.1155/2012/875942
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Anal Methods Chem ISSN: 2090-8873 Impact factor: 2.193
Figure 1Absorption spectra of (a) MPM-p-CA C-T complex and its blank and (b) MPM-DDQ C-T complex and its blank.
Figure 2Effect of reagents concentration on color development: (1) p-CA (0.5%) using 200 μg mL−1 MPM, and (2) DDQ (0.25%) using 40 μg mL−1 MPM.
Figure 3Effect of reaction time.
Figure 4Job's plots obtained for (a) 4.61 × 10-4 M MPM and p-CA C-T complex and (b) 2.31 × 10−4 M MPM and DDQ C-T complex.
Scheme 1Proposed reaction path way for the formation of C-T complex between MPM and p-CA/DDQ.
Sensitivity and regression parameters of the proposed methods in comparison with the reported UV-spectrophotometric methods [10].
| Parameter | p-CA method | DDQ method | 0.1 N HCl method | Acetate buffer method |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| 520 | 580 | 250 | 250 |
| Color stability | 5 h | 20 min | — | — |
| Linear range, | 40–400 | 6–120 | 10–30 | 10–30 |
| Molar absorptivity ( | 1.06 × 103 | 3.87 × 103 | NR*** | NR |
| Sandell sensitivity*, | 0.4106 | 0.1119 | NR | NR |
| Limit of detection (LOD), | 3.96 | 0.79 | NR | NR |
| Limit of quantification (LOQ), | 11.99 | 2.40 | NR | NR |
| Regression equation, | ||||
| Intercept (a) | 0.0100 | 0.0376 | 0.00316 | 0.01547 |
| Slope (b) | 0.0024 | 0.0080 | 0.02201 | 0.02168 |
| Standard deviation of | 0.0118 | 0.0416 | — | — |
| Standard deviation of a ( | 0.0145 | 0.0350 | — | — |
| Standard deviation of b ( | 5.3 × 10−5 | 4.75 × 10−4 | — | — |
| Correlation coefficient ( | 0.9995 | 0.9947 | 0.9999 | 0.9996 |
*Limit of determination as the weight in μg per mL of solution, which corresponds to an absorbance of A = 0.001 measured in a cuvette of cross-sectional area 1 cm2 and l = 1 cm. **Y = a + bX, where Y is the absorbance, X is concentration in μg/mL, a is intercept, and b is slope. ***NR: not reported.
Evaluation of intraday and interday accuracy and precision.
| Method | MPM taken, | Intraday accuracy and precision ( | Interday accuracy and precision ( | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MPM found, | %RE | %RSD | MPM found, | %RE | %RSD | ||
| A | 100.0 | 100.63 | 0.63 | 0.66 | 101.26 | 1.26 | 1.14 |
| 200.0 | 200.22 | 0.11 | 0.36 | 201.28 | 0.64 | 0.78 | |
| 300.0 | 306.96 | 2.32 | 0.99 | 305.34 | 1.78 | 1.28 | |
|
| |||||||
| B | 45.00 | 43.84 | 2.58 | 0.50 | 45.75 | 1.67 | 0.74 |
| 75.00 | 76.04 | 1.39 | 0.87 | 76.69 | 2.25 | 1.36 | |
| 105.0 | 108.02 | 2.88 | 0.92 | 101.81 | 3.04 | 1.78 | |
%RE: percent relative error; %RSD: relative standard deviation.
Method robustness and ruggedness expressed as intermediate precision (%RSD).
| Method | MPM taken, | Robustness | Ruggedness | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Parameters altered | Interanalysts (%RSD), ( | Interinstruments (%RSD), ( | |||
| Volume of p-CA/DDQ* | Reaction timeΨ | ||||
| A | 100.0 | 0.94 | 0.58 | 1.28 | 2.42 |
| 200.0 | 1.36 | 0.65 | 0.84 | 3.15 | |
| 300.0 | 1.27 | 0.42 | 0.85 | 2.76 | |
|
| |||||
| B | 45.0 | 0.66 | 0.36 | 0.96 | 1.98 |
| 75.0 | 0.74 | 0.85 | 0.78 | 2.38 | |
| 105.0 | 1.03 | 0.64 | 0.54 | 1.62 | |
*The volumes of p-CA or DDQ added were 1 ± 0.2.
ΨThe reaction times were 5 ± 1 min.
Results of analysis of CellCept 500 tabletsΨ by the proposed methods and statistical comparison of the results with the reference method.
| Nominal amount (mg/tablet) | Found* (percent of label claim ± SD) | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Reference method | p-CA method | DDQ method | |
| 101.0 ± 1.16 | 99.89 ± 1.74 | ||
| 500 | 100.6 ± 0.76 |
|
|
|
|
| ||
*Mean value of 5 determinations.
Tabulated t-value at the 95% confidence level and for four degrees of freedom is 2.77.
Tabulated F-value at the 95% confidence level and for four degrees of freedom is 6.39.
ΨMarketed by Sun pharmaceuticals.
Results of recovery study via standard-addition method with CellCept 500.
| p-CA method | DDQ method | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MPM in tablet, | Pure MPM added, | Total found, | Pure MPM recovered (Percent ± SD*) | MPM in tablet, | Pure MPM added, | Total found, | Pure MPM recovered (Percent ± SD) |
| 101.0 | 50.0 | 152.8 | 103.6 ± 0.74 | 40.0 | 20.0 | 59.47 | 97.37 ± 0.76 |
| 101.0 | 100.0 | 202.5 | 101.5 ± 0.86 | 40.0 | 40.0 | 80.60 | 101.5 ± 1.08 |
| 101.0 | 150.0 | 249.1 | 98.74 ± 0.92 | 40.0 | 60.0 | 102.46 | 104.1 ± 0.84 |
*Mean value of three determinations.