| Literature DB >> 28117312 |
Nagadeep Jaishetty1, Kamaraj Palanisamy2, Arthanareeswari Maruthapillai3, Rajamanohar Jaishetty4.
Abstract
Efavirenz is a non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor used in the treatment of human immunodeficiency virus type-1 (HIV). (2S)-(2-Amino-5-chlorophenyl)-4-cyclopropyl-1,1,1-trifluoro-3-butyn-2-ol (AMCOL), used as an intermediate in the synthesis of efavirenz and a degradation impurity, has an aminoaryl derivative which is a well-known alerting function for genotoxic activity. Upon request from a regulatory agency, a selective and sensitive liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) method was developed for trace level quantitative determination of AMCOL related compound of efavirenz, for a risk assessment and comparison of impurity levels with the commercially available innovator product (brand name: Sustiva). The method provided excellent sensitivity at a typical target analyte level of <2.5 ppm, an established threshold of toxicological concern (TTC), when the drug substance and drug product samples were prepared at 15.0 mg/mL. The AMCOL sample was analyzed on a Luna C18 (2) (100 mm × 4.6 mm, 3 µm) column interfaced with a triple quadrupole tandem mass spectrometer operated in a multiple reaction monitoring (MRM) mode. Positive electrospray ionization (ESI) was employed as the ionization source and the mobile phase used was 5.0 mM ammonium acetate-methanol (35:65, v/v). The calibration curve showed good linearity over the concentration range of 0.2-5.0 ppm with a correlation coefficient of >0.999. The limit of detection (LOD) and limit of quantification (LOQ) were found to be 0.07 and 0.2 ppm, respectively. The developed method was validated as per international council on harmonization (ICH) guidelines in terms of LOD, LOQ, linearity, precision, accuracy, specificity, and robustness.Entities:
Keywords: LC–MS/MS; efavirenz; genotoxicity; method development; validation
Year: 2015 PMID: 28117312 PMCID: PMC5064237 DOI: 10.3390/scipharm84030456
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Pharm ISSN: 0036-8709
Figure 1Schematic reaction mechanism showing the formation of (a) (2S)-(2-Amino-5-chlorophenyl)-4-cyclopropyl-1,1,1-trifluoro-3-butyn-2-ol (AMCOL) during the synthesis of efavirenz and (b) degradation of efavirenz to AMCOL.
Figure 2Typical mass spectrum scans of the (a) AMCOL impurity and (b) efavirenz.
Figure 3Typical chromatograms of the (a) efavirenz drug substance (b), efavirenz tablet, and (c) accuracy of AMCOL.
Figure 4Blank chromatogram (a) and typical chromatogram (b) of AMCOL at the 2.5 ppm level. XIC: Extracted ion chromatogram; MRM: Multiple reaction monitoring; amu: atomic mass unit; SST-1: System suitability solution-1.
Validation Summary of AMCOL
| Parameter | AMCOL |
|---|---|
| Slope | 41915.8 |
| Intercept | 1066.8 |
| R value | 0.9999 |
| R2 value | 0.9997 |
| LOD (in ppm) | 0.071 |
| LOQ (in ppm) | 0.213 |
| Precision at LOQ | 2.3 |
| Precision | 0.8 |
| Intermediate | 0.6 |
LOD: Limit of detection; LOQ: Limit of quantification.
LOD and LOQ Data of AMCOL
| Injection ID | LOD (0.07 ppm) | LOQ (0.21 ppm) |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2684 | 8568 |
| 2 | 2962 | 8865 |
| 3 | 2851 | 9014 |
| 4 | 2762 | 8465 |
| 5 | 2914 | 8856 |
| 6 | 2645 | 8752 |
| Mean Area | 2803.0 | 8753.3 |
| Standard deviation. | 127.1 | 204.2 |
| % RSD | 4.53 | 2.33 |
RSD: Relative standard deviation.
Evaluation of Accuracy
| Sample | % Recovery of AMCOL a | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0.2 ppm (LOQ) | 1.25 ppm | 2.5 ppm | 5 ppm | |
| Pure sample-I | 96.8 ± 2.8 | 98.5 ± 0.8 | 99.6 ± 1.2 | 97.8 ± 2.1 |
| Pure sample-II | 100.3 ± 1.2 | 98.2 ± 0.6 | 98.6 ± 0.8 | 98.3 ± 1.1 |
| Pure sample-III | 98.1 ± 1.9 | 101.4 ± 1.2 | 98.3 ± 0.9 | 99.2 ± 1.2 |
| Formulation sample-I | 98.8 ± 1.2 | 97.5 ± 1.1 | 98.7 ± 1.1 | 99.8 ± 1.3 |
| Formulation sample-II | 101.3 ± 2.1 | 98.2 ± 0.6 | 100.2 ± 0.8 | 98.3 ± 1.1 |
| Formulation sample-III | 99.5 ± 2.4 | 100.6 ± 1.2 | 99.3 ± 0.9 | 98.2 ± 1.6 |
a Mean ± %RSD for three determinations.
Solution Stability Data of AMOCL at the LOQ Concentration
| Sample Name | Time (h) | Peak Area | Theoretical Concentration (ppm) | Measured Concentration (ppm) | % Recovery |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pure sample | 0 h | 8753 | 0.213 | 0.209 | 98.1 |
| 12 h | 8810 | 0.213 | 0.211 | 99.1 | |
| 24 h | 8713 | 0.213 | 0.208 | 97.6 | |
| 48 h | 8816 | 0.213 | 0.214 | 100.5 | |
| Formulation sample | 0 h | 8865 | 0.213 | 0.212 | 99.5 |
| 12 h | 8923 | 0.213 | 0.213 | 100.3 | |
| 24 h | 8710 | 0.213 | 0.211 | 99.1 | |
| 48 h | 8689 | 0.213 | 0.215 | 100.9 |