| Literature DB >> 28228805 |
Fatma Demirkaya-Miloglu1, Tuba Oznuluer2, Buket Ozdurak2, Elmas Miloglu1.
Abstract
Isoniazid (INH) was studied with regard to its electrochemical treatment on a strongly alkaline solution of a poly (3,4-ethylenedioxythiophene)-modified gold electrode, using both cyclic voltammetric and controlled potential techniques. Electrocatalytic performance measurements of this composite electrode toward oxidation of INH exhibited an increase of 4-folds in oxidation peak densities compared to the bare gold electrode. Central composite design method was used to obtain optimum experimental conditions, and used critical parameters (pH (A), scan rate (mV/s, B) and temperature (C, C) to assess the effects on amperometric response. Optimum experimental conditions were achieved by using a pH of 9.2 with a scan rate of 260 mV/s and a temperature of 30 C. Under these circumstances, a good linear relationship was observed between peak current densities and INH concentration in the range of 0.05-2 μM, with correlation coefficient of 0.9998. Furthermore, the method was very sensitive (limit of quantitation, 0.0043 μM), accurate (relative error, -5.65 to 4.03) and precise (relative standard deviation %, ≤ 7.97). The method was also applied to determine INH in pharmaceutical formulations, and statistically compared the results with the official method using the two one-sided equivalence test; the results were in good agreement with those obtained by the official and reported methods.Entities:
Keywords: Central composite design; Isoniazid; PEDOT modified electrode; Voltammetric method
Year: 2016 PMID: 28228805 PMCID: PMC5242353
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Iran J Pharm Res ISSN: 1726-6882 Impact factor: 1.696
Figure 1A) CVs of bare gold electrode and PEDOT modified gold electrode in an aqueous solution (pH: 9.2) containing 1 µM INH, B) The curve of the stability data for the PEDOT modified Au-electrode
The real values of optimization method parameters against peak current densities of INH defined as response for the central composite design
|
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 11.0 | 100 | 30.0 | 0.18 |
| 2 | 9.0 | 32 | 45.0 | 0.15 |
| 3 | 9.0 | 200 | 45.0 | 0.27 |
| 4 | 9.0 | 368 | 45.0 | 0.35 |
| 5 | 11.0 | 300 | 60.0 | 0.19 |
| 6 | 7.0 | 300 | 60.0 | 0.12 |
| 7 | 12.3 | 200 | 45.0 | 0.20 |
| 8 | 7.0 | 100 | 60.0 | 0.15 |
| 9 | 7.0 | 100 | 30.0 | 0.21 |
| 10 | 9.0 | 200 | 70.2 | 0.18 |
| 11 | 7.0 | 300 | 30.0 | 0.2 |
| 12 | 5.6 | 200 | 45.0 | 0.06 |
| 13 | 9.0 | 200 | 19.8 | 0.35 |
| 14 | 11.0 | 100 | 60.0 | 0.12 |
| 15-20 | 9.0 | 200 | 45.0 | 0.27-0.28 |
Figure 2Surface plot for INH peak current densities A) Effect of A and B and their reciprocal interaction B) Effect of A and C and their reciprocal interaction C) Effect of B and C and their reciprocal interaction
Figure 3A) CVs as increasing concentration of INH (0.05-2 μM) in phosphate buffer solution (0.1M, pH 9.2) at PEDOT/Au electrode. B) Calibration curve for INH of different concentrations from (0.05-2 μM
Figure 4CVs of drug solutions (0.75 µM) in phosphate buffer solution (0.1M, pH 9.2) at PEDOT/Au electrode. A) I.N.H tablets B) Isovit tablets
Precision and accuracy of INH obtained with the proposed method
|
|
|
| ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| 0.1 | 0.104 ± 0.005 | 4.03 | 5.47 | 0.099 ± 0.008 | -0.79 | 7.97 |
| 0.75 | 0.742 ± 0.020 | -0.98 | 2.72 | 0.707 ± 0.047 | -5.65 | 6.66 |
| 1.5 | 1.493 ± 0.018 | -0.44 | 1.18 | 1.517 ± 0.049 | 1.19 | 3.23 |
SD: Standard deviation,
: Average of ten determinations, RSD %: Relative standard deviation. RE: Relative error.
Determination of INH in commercial tablets using the proposed voltammetric method and comparison statistically with the Official U.S.P. methods (17, 39) results
|
|
|
|
|
| ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
| |||
| Isovit | 100 | 100.2 ± 1.55 | 100.2 ± 1.55 | 99.82 ± 1.11 | -0.619 | 1.438 |
| I.N.H | 300 | 300.5 ± 5.36 | 100.2 ± 1.68 | 99.82 ± 1.11 | -0.747 | 1.432 |
SD: standard deviation,
: Average of ten determinations.