| Literature DB >> 23641331 |
Pallavi Vukkum1, J Moses Babu, R Muralikrishna.
Abstract
A rapid, reversed-phase liquid chromatographic method was developed for the quantitative determination of Atorvastatin calcium, its related substances (12 impurities), and degradation impurities in bulk drugs. The chromatographic separation was achieved on a Zorbax Bonus-RP column by employing a gradient elution with water-acetonitrile-trifluoroacetic acid as the mobile phase in a shorter run time of 25 min. The flow rate was 1.0 mL/min and the detection wavelength was 245 nm. The drug substance was subjected to stress studies such as hydrolysis, oxidation, photolysis, and thermal degradation, and considerable degradation was observed in acidic hydrolysis, oxidative, thermal, and photolytic stress conditions. The formed degradation products were reported and were well-resolved from the Atorvastatin and its related substances. The stressed samples were quantified against a qualified reference standard and the mass balance was found to be close to 99.5% (w/w) when the response of the degradant was considered to be equal to the analyte (i.e. Atorvastatin), which demonstrates the stability-indicating capability of the method. The method was validated in agreement with ICH requirements. The method developed here was single and shorter (25 min method for the determination of all 12 related impurities of Atorvastatin and its degradation products), with clearly better resolution and higher sensitivity than the European (85 min method for the determination of six impurities) and United States pharmacopeia (115 min and 55 min, two different methods for the determination of six related substances).Entities:
Keywords: Atorvastatin calcium; Forced degradation; LC-MS; RP-HPLC; Stability-indicating method; Validation
Year: 2012 PMID: 23641331 PMCID: PMC3617653 DOI: 10.3797/scipharm.1208-06
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Pharm ISSN: 0036-8709
Fig. 1Structures and names of Atorvastatin calcium, its related impurities, and its forced degradation impurities
Results of system suitability test
| Imp-F | 7.0 | 0.59±0.01 | – | 1.0±0.05 | 42,302 |
| Imp-A | 11.2 | 0.94±0.01 | 18.4±0.32 | 1.0±0.02 | 57,012 |
| Imp-B | 11.5 | 0.97±0.01 | 2.0±0.41 | 1.0±0.03 | 62,354 |
| Atorvastatin | 11.9 | 1.0 | 2.1±0.57 | 1.0±0.02 | 65,869 |
| Imp-C | 12.4 | 1.04±0.01 | 2.8±0.18 | 1.0±0.05 | 67,568 |
| Imp-H | 14.0 | 1.18±0.01 | 9.1±0.49 | 1.0±0.01 | 137,049 |
| Imp-G | 14.6 | 1.23±0.01 | 3.5±0.67 | 1.0±0.05 | 179,352 |
| Imp-J | 15.0 | 1.26±0.01 | 3.1±0.75 | 1.0±0.09 | 201,754 |
| Imp-K | 15.6 | 1.32±0.01 | 5.5±0.92 | 1.0±0.02 | 260,023 |
| Imp-L | 16.0 | 1.34±0.01 | 2.6±0.61 | 1.0±0.05 | 222,493 |
| Imp-D | 16.5 | 1.39±0.01 | 4.1±0.18 | 1.0±0.01 | 226,010 |
| Imp-M | 17.4 | 1.47±0.01 | 7.2±0.10 | 1.0±0.01 | 404,130 |
| Imp-I | 20.6 | 1.74±0.03 | 29.8±0.12 | 1.0±0.01 | 651,954 |
Relative retention times (RRT) were calculated against the retention time (RT) of Atorvastatin;
Resolution calculated between two adjacent peaks;
Mean ± SD.
Results of method development
| 1 | Zorbax | 150 X 4.6 mm | Phosphate buffer with pH 2.5/Acetonitrile | Imp-B and Imp-C were co-eluted with analyte |
| 2 | Zorbax | 150 X 4.6 mm | Water/Acetonitrile/Trifluoroacetic acid | Imp-B was co-eluted with analyte |
| 3 | Zorbax | 150 X 4.6 mm | Water/Acetonitrile/Trifluoroacetic acid | Imp-B was co-eluted with analyte |
| 4 | Zorbax | 150 X 4.6 mm | Water/Acetonitrile/Trifluoroacetic acid | Imp-B and Imp-C were co-eluted with analyte |
| 5 | Zorbax | 150 X 4.6 mm | Water/Acetonitrile/Trifluoroacetic acid | Imp-B was co-eluted with analyte |
Fig. 2Typical chromatograms of method development
Fig. 3Typical HPLC chromatogram and peak purity spectrum of Atorvastatin calcium spiked with its related impurities at specification level
Fig. 4Specificity in presence of degradation products
Summary of forced degradation results
|
| |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unstressed sample | – | 99.8 | 99.7 | – | |
| Acid hydrolysis (0.1N HCl) | 24 h | 85.3 | 85.9 | Significant degradation was observed. Unknown degradation impurity-A1 along with known impurities-H & J were formed | |
| Base hydrolysis (1N NaOH) | 42 h | 99.5 | 99.4 | No degradation products formed | |
| Oxidation (1% H2O2) | 24 h | 87.1 | 87.9 | Significant degradation was observed. Unknown degradation impurities-O1 & O2 along with known impurities-D & L were formed | |
| Thermal (105°C) | 10 d | 95.2 | 94.8 | Significant degradation was observed. Known impurities-H & J were formed | |
| Photolytic degradation as per ICH guidelines | 11 d | 94.7 | 94.1 | Significant degradation was observed. Known impurities-J, L & D were formed | |
Results of degradation studies
| A1 | 523.6 | 1.52 | 1.0 |
| O1 | 591.6 | 1.43 | 1.0 |
| O2 | 591.6 | 1.45 | 1.0 |
Results of validation parameters for related impurities
|
| |||||||
| LOD (mg/mL) | 0.011 | 0.013 | 0.012 | 0.009 | 0.010 | 0.009 | |
| LOQ (mg/mL) | 0.035 | 0.044 | 0.041 | 0.031 | 0.034 | 0.031 | |
| Regression equation(y) | |||||||
| Slope (m) | 451.21 | 472.12 | 455.91 | 436.54 | 604.62 | 338.4 | |
| Intercept (C) | −2.50 | −3.20 | 0.98 | 2.31 | −3.10 | 0.98 | |
| % Y-intercept | −0.21 | −0.32 | 0.12 | 1.10 | −1.10 | 0.53 | |
| Correlation coefficient | 0.9999 | 0.9997 | 0.9999 | 0.9992 | 0.9996 | 0.9994 | |
| Precision at LOQ level (%RSD) | 0.98 | 0.72 | 1.01 | 1.24 | 0.32 | 1.23 | |
| Precision (%RSD) | – | 1.10 | 1.23 | 1.35 | 1.24 | 1.02 | |
| Ruggedness(%RSD) | – | 0.98 | 0.93 | 1.10 | 1.27 | 0.98 | |
| Relative response factor | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.30 | 0.75 | |
|
| |||||||
|
| |||||||
| LOD (mg/mL) | 0.009 | 0.010 | 0.011 | 0.010 | 0.012 | 0.010 | 0.009 |
| LOQ (mg/mL) | 0.029 | 0.034 | 0.036 | 0.032 | 0.041 | 0.033 | 0.029 |
| Regression equation(y) | |||||||
| Slope (m) | 466.43 | 436.15 | 471.23 | 432.16 | 458.94 | 315.84 | 453.67 |
| Intercept (C) | −4.7 | 1.10 | −0.98 | 1.35 | 1.42 | −2.97 | −6.12 |
| % Y-intercept | −0.54 | 0.51 | −0.34 | 1.23 | 0.24 | −0.58 | −0.96 |
| Correlation coefficient | 0.9999 | 0.9992 | 0.9994 | 0.9998 | 0.9997 | 0.9993 | 0.9995 |
| Precision at LOQ level (%RSD) | 1.54 | 0.21 | 0.31 | 0.54 | 0.68 | 1.21 | 1.36 |
| Precision (%RSD) | 1.98 | 0.31 | 0.45 | 0.56 | 0.58 | 0.60 | 1.45 |
| Ruggedness(%RSD) | 1.21 | 0.54 | 0.96 | 0.63 | 0.57 | 0.69 | 1.21 |
| Relative response factor | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.7 | 1.0 |
Linearity range was from LOQ to 0.30 %w/w of Atorvastatin calcium and its related impurities with respect to analyte concentration;
(n=6).
Results of validation parameters for Atorvastatin calcium at assay level
| Regression equation (y) | |
| Slope (m) | 234.1 |
| Intercept (C) | −4.2 |
| % Y-intercept | −0.56 |
| Correlation coefficient | 0.9999 |
| Precision (%RSD) | 0.12 |
| Ruggedness(%RSD) | 0.36 |
| % Recoveryc at 50% level | 99.9 ± 0.13 |
| % Recoveryc at 100% level | 99.5 ± 0.69 |
| % Recoveryc at 150% level | 99.7 ± 0.78 |
(n=6);
(n=3).
Fig. 5Typical LOQ and LOD chromatograms of Atorvastatin calcium with its related impurities
Evaluation of accuracy for related impurities
|
| ||||||
| LOQ | 101.0 ± 0.32 | 101.0 ± 0.25 | 98.9 ± 0.12 | 98.1 ± 0.56 | 98.3 ± 0.12 | 99.9 ± 0.49 |
| 80% | 99.7 ± 0.69 | 101.4 ± 0.56 | 101.3 ± 0.07 | 100.7 ± 0.17 | 98.5 ± 0.45 | 98.6 ± 0.87 |
| 100% | 102.1 ± 0.82 | 100.8 ± 0.32 | 101.1 ± 0.17 | 100.9 ± 0.23 | 100.1 ± 0.45 | 100.9 ± 0.98 |
| 120% | 100.6 ± 0.24 | 100.1 ± 0.82 | 100.6 ± 0.48 | 100.0 ± 0.32 | 99.1 ± 0.53 | 101.1 ± 0.79 |
|
| ||||||
|
| ||||||
| LOQ | 98.2 ± 0.87 | 102.1 ± 0.94 | 100.8 ± 0.56 | 101.2 ± 0.48 | 100.1 ± 0.28 | 100.3 ± 0.18 |
| 80% | 100.2 ± 0.52 | 101.0 ± 0.90 | 100.7 ± 0.40 | 101.7 ± 0.23 | 100.0 ± 0.83 | 103.1 ± 0.17 |
| 100% | 101.1 ± 0.46 | 100.2 ± 0.74 | 101.1 ± 0.69 | 100.7 ± 0.68 | 102.1 ± 0.99 | 100.9 ± 0.16 |
| 120% | 98.8 ± 0.89 | 99.7 ± 0.69 | 98.5 ± 0.98 | 100.6 ± 0.23 | 99.5 ± 0.32 | 100.6 ± 0.42 |
Amount of impurities spiked with respect to specification level;
(n=3).
Results of robustness parameter
| 1.0 mL/min | 0.8 mL/min | 62,154 | 1.1 | 2.2 | 2.9 |
| 245 nm | 243 nm | 68,968 | 1.0 | 2.1 | 2.8 |
| 40°C | 35°C | 61,459 | 1.0 | 2.0 | 2.5 |
| 65,265 | 1.0 | 2.2 | 2.9 | ||
(T/%B).