| Literature DB >> 24959406 |
Khaldun M Al Azzam1, Lee Kam Yit2, Bahruddin Saad2, Hassan Shaibah3.
Abstract
The aim of the current study was to develop a simple, precise, and accurate capillary zone electrophoresis method for the determination of zolpidem tartrate in tablet dosage form. Separation was conducted in normal polarity mode at 25°C, 22 kV, using hydrodynamic injection for 10 s. Separation was achieved using a background electrolyte of 20 mM disodium hydrogen phosphate adjusted with phosphoric acid (85%), pH at 5.50, and detection at 254 nm. Using the above optimized conditions, complete determination took place in less than 3 min using amiloride HCl as the internal standard. The method was linear over the range of 3-1000 μg mL(-1) with a correlation coefficient of 0.9999. Forced degradation studies were conducted by introducing a sample of zolpidem tartrate standard and pharmaceutical sample solutions to different forced degradation conditions, being neutral (water), basic (0.1 M NaOH), acidic (0.1 M HCl), oxidative (10% H2O2), temperature (60°C in oven for 3 days), and photolytic (exposure to UV light at 254 nm for 2 h). Degradation products resulting from the stress studies did not interfere with the detection of zolpidem tartrate and the assay can be considered stability-indicating.Entities:
Keywords: Capillary zone electrophoresis; Stability indicating; Tablet dosage form; Zolpidem tartrate
Year: 2014 PMID: 24959406 PMCID: PMC4065127 DOI: 10.3797/scipharm.1401-11
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Pharm ISSN: 0036-8709
Fig. 1The chemical structures of the drug (ZT), amiloride HCl (IS), and the resonance form of the protonated ZT.
Adopted CE operating conditions
| Background electrolyte | 20 mM disodium hydrogen phosphate-concentrated phosphoric acid; pH 5.50. |
| Applied voltage | 22 kV (normal polarity) |
| Sample injection | 10 s hydrodynamic injection |
| Capillary temperature | 25°C |
| Fused silica capillary | 50 μm i.d × 40 cm (detection length), 8.5 cm from the outlet end of the capillary |
| Detection wavelength | 254 nm |
Fig. 2Electropherograms obtained from the injection of ZT standard (250 μg mL−1) (A); Sobrium tablet (100 μg mL−1) (B); and tablet placebo (C). Please refer to text for CE conditions.
Results of intra-day (repeatability), inter-day precision (intermediate precision), accuracy, and the comparison of the developed method with other reported methods for the determination of ZT.
| Am | RSD (%) | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| ||||||||||
| MT | PA | CPA | RCPA | RPA | Am | % Recovery ± SD (n = 9) | LOD | LOQ | Method [Reference] | |
| Intra-day precision (n = 9) | ||||||||||
|
| ||||||||||
| 10 | 2.43 | 3.45 | 4.91 | 3.11 | 3.50 | 25 | 100.09±0.77 | 0.81 | 2.70 | Current work |
| 500 | 1.60 | 3.12 | 3.96 | 2.68 | 4.69 | 500 | 99.91±0.86 | 0.1 | – | HPLC-UV [ |
| 1000 | 1.05 | 1.87 | 1.28 | 2.15 | 1.39 | 900 | 103.63±0.99 | 0.026 | – | HPLC-UV [ |
| 0.0000015 | – | HPLC-FL [ | ||||||||
| 0.0002 | – | LC-MS/MS [ | ||||||||
| 0.0001 | – | LC-MS/MS [ | ||||||||
| 0.00017 | – | LC-MS/MS [ | ||||||||
|
| ||||||||||
| Inter-day precision (n = 27) | ||||||||||
|
| ||||||||||
| 10 | 2.90 | 2.68 | 4.12 | 5.56 | 4.76 | |||||
| 500 | 3.04 | 4.65 | 4.94 | 5.98 | 5.76 | |||||
| 1000 | 2.28 | 1.70 | 1.93 | 3.80 | 3.63 | |||||
[μg mL−1];
No. of introductions to the CE system (three preparations for each concentration);
Am…Amount; MT…Migration time; PA…Peak area; CPA…Corrected peak area; RCPA…Ratio of corrected peak area; RPA…Ratio of peak area; HPLC-UV…High-performance liquid chromatography coupled with UV detector; HPLC-FL…High-performance liquid chromatography coupled with fluorescence detector; LC-MS/MS…Liquid chromatography–mass spectrometry.
Fig. 3Typical electropherograms obtained. Samples were heated in 0.1 M NaOH for (A) 2 h, (B) 4 h, and (C) 6 h. Please refer to text for CE conditions.
Fig. 4Method specificity (view A & B). CE-DAD analysis of the ZT Sobrium tablet after refluxed at 80°C in 0.1 M NaOH for 6 hours under the optimized electrophoretic conditions (please refer to Table 1 for the CE conditions). The concentration of ZT is 100 μg mL−1
Results for the determination of the ZT standard and tablet dosage form when subjected to different stressed conditions
| Stress Condition | % Recovery ± SD | |
|---|---|---|
|
| ||
| Standard | Pharmaceutical Formulation | |
| Water | ||
| 2 h | 97.35 ± 0.39 | 103.36 ± 1.02 |
| 4 h | 85.58 ± 0.39 | 97.58 ± 0.77 |
| 6 h | 76.91 ± 0.38 | 96.69 ± 0.38 |
| 10% H2O2 | ||
| 2 h | 95.80 ± 0.67 | 94.24 ± 0.77 |
| 4 h | 83.58 ± 0.77 | 81.13 ± 0.67 |
| 6 h | 76.69 ± 0.77 | 77.36 ± 0.77 |
| HCl 0.1 M | ||
| 2 h | 94.25 ± 0.39 | 95.14 ± 1.15 |
| 4 h | 82.69 ± 0.77 | 88.24 ± 1.02 |
| 6 h | 72.02 ± 0.77 | 75.13 ± 1.15 |
| NaOH 0.1 M | ||
| 2 h | 16.47 ± 1.02 | 91.58 ± 0.39 |
| 4 h | 14.69 ± 0.38 | 85.36 ± 0.77 |
| 6 h | 10.69 ± 0.77 | 77.58 ± 1.02 |
| UV exposure (254 nm) 2 h | ||
| Solution | 81.13 ± 0.67 | 62.78 ± 1.10 |
| Dry powder | 92.47 ± 1.02 | 78.18 ± 0.37 |
| Oven (3 days) | ||
| Solution | 91.76 ± 0.95 | 95.06 ± 0.61 |
| Dry powder | 93.80 ± 0.67 | 95.82 ± 0.38 |
Fig. 5Proposed mechanisms for the reactions of ZT upon (A) acid hydrolysis and (B) base hydrolysis.