| Literature DB >> 31652589 |
Benedito Roberto de Alvarenga Junior1, Renato Lajarim Carneiro2.
Abstract
Chemometrics is the chemistry field responsible for planning and extracting the maximum of information of experiments from chemical data using mathematical tools (linear algebra, statistics, and so on). Active pharmaceutical ingredients (APIs) can form impurities when exposed to excipients or environmental variables such as light, high temperatures, acidic or basic conditions, humidity, and oxidative environment. By considering that these impurities can affect the safety and efficacy of the drug product, it is necessary to know how these impurities are yielded and to establish the pathway of their formation. In this context, forced degradation studies of pharmaceutical drugs have been used for the characterization of physicochemical stability of APIs. These studies are also essential in the validation of analytical methodologies, in order to prove the selectivity of methods for the API and its impurities and to create strategies to avoid the formation of degradation products. This review aims to demonstrate how forced degradation studies have been actually performed and the applications of chemometric tools in related studies. Some papers are going to be discussed to exemplify the chemometric applications in forced degradation studies.Entities:
Keywords: chemometrics; degradation products; forced degradation; stress test
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31652589 PMCID: PMC6833076 DOI: 10.3390/molecules24203804
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Molecules ISSN: 1420-3049 Impact factor: 4.411
Degradation conditions for pharmaceutical drugs in forced degradation studies.
| API: Year | Acid | Base | Neutral | Thermolysis | Oxidation | Photolysis |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Zidovudine: | 2 M HCl | 2 M NaOH | - | Acid/base at 80 °C for 72 h | 10% H2O2 at room temperature for 10 h | 1.2 × 106 lx × h of fluorescent light and 200 W h/m2 UV light |
| Toloxatone: | 1 M HCl | 0.01 M NaOH | H2O | All hydrolysis at 80 °C for 2 h | 0.01% H2O2 at room temperature for 2 h | 2700 kJ/m2/h of UV-VIS and UVC 7.5 W/m2 |
| Amlodipine: | 1 M HCl at 80 °C for 30 min | 1 M NaOH at 80 °C for 1 h | H2O at 80 °C for 2 h | 50 °C for 48 h | 15% H2O2 at room temperature for 48 h | 1.2 × 106 lx × h of fluorescent light and 200 Wh/m2 UV-A light for 14 days |
| Acebutolol: | 1 M HCl | 2 M HCl | H2O | All hydrolysis at 80 °C | 3% H2O2 at 80 °C | Not less than 1.2 × 106 lx × h and ultraviolet energy of not less than 200 W h/m2 |
| Stevioside: | 0.1 M HCl/0.1 M H3PO4 | 0.1 M NaOH | H2O | All hydrolysis at 80 °C for 8 h | 10% H2O2 at 25 °C for 72 h | UV254nm lamp for 48 h |
| Pentoxifylline: | 2 M HCl at 70 °C for 4 h | 2 M NaOH at 70 °C for 4 h | H2O at 70 °C for 4 h | Dry heat under at 105 °C for 4 h | 30% H2O2 at 70 °C for 4 h | Sunlight for 8 h |
| Leflunomide: | 0.1–5 M at 85 °C for 8 h | 0.1 M NaOH at 85 °C for 8 h | H2O at 85 °C for 8 h | 50 °C for 30 days | 30% H2O2 at room temperature for 24 h | UV and white light for 14 days |
| Actarit: | 0.1 M HCl at 70 °C for 24 h | 0.1 M NaOH at 70 °C for 24 h | H2O at 70 °C for 14 days | Dry heat at 70 °C for 14 days | 3% H2O2 for 14 days | UV light |
| Nicardipine: | 1 M HCl at 60 °C for 1 h | 0.1–0.5 M NaOH at 50–80 °C for 1 h | - | - | 5% H2O2 at 30–50 °C for 1 h | UV254–365nm light at room temperature |
| Clopidogrel bisulfate: | 1 M HCl | 1 M NaOH | - | All hydrolysis at 80 °C for 1 h | 5% H2O2 | - |
| Biapenem: | pH from 2.5 to 7.5 at 80 °C for 40 min | From room temperature to 100 °C in pH 3.5 | - | - | ||
| Irbesartan: | 1 M HCl at 80 °C for 24 h | 2 M NaOH at 80 °C for 48 h | H2O at 80 °C for 48 h | 50 °C | 30% H2O2 at room temperature for 2 days | 8500 lx fluorescent and 0.05 W/m2 UV light |
Thresholds for degradation products.
| Maximum Daily Dose | Threshold | |
|---|---|---|
|
| ≤1 g | 0.1% |
| >1 g | 0.05% | |
|
| <1 mg | 1.0% or 5 µg TDI, whichever is lower |
| 1 mg–10 mg | 0.5% or 20 µg TDI, whichever is lower | |
| >10 mg–2 g | 0.2% or 2 mg TDI, whichever is lower | |
| >2 g | 0.10% | |
|
| <10 mg | 1.0% or 50 µg TDI, whichever is lower |
| 10 mg–100 mg | 0.5% or 200 µg TDI, whichever is lower | |
| >100 mg–2 g | 0.2% or 3 mg TDI, whichever is lower | |
| >2 g | 0.15% |
Figure 1Experimental domain of the most common experimental designs.
Real and coded values of variables considered in design of experiment.
| Variable | Level (−1) | Level (0) | Level (+1) |
|---|---|---|---|
| TBHAH (mM) | 5 | 7.5 | 10 |
| pH | 2.6 | 2.9 | 3.2 |
| Organic phase ( | 20 | 25 | 30 |
Conditions of experiments performed in full factorial 33 design.
| Experiment | x1 | x2 | x3 | Experiment | x1 | x2 | x3 | Experiment | x1 | x2 | x3 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| −1 | −1 | −1 |
| −1 | −1 | 0 |
| −1 | −1 | 1 |
|
| 0 | −1 | −1 |
| 0 | −1 | 0 |
| 0 | −1 | 1 |
|
| 1 | −1 | −1 |
| 1 | −1 | 0 |
| 1 | −1 | 1 |
|
| −1 | 0 | −1 |
| −1 | 0 | 0 |
| −1 | 0 | 1 |
|
| 0 | 0 | −1 |
| 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 0 | 0 | 1 |
|
| 1 | 0 | −1 |
| 1 | 0 | 0 |
| 1 | 0 | 1 |
|
| −1 | 1 | −1 | −1 | 1 | 0 |
| −1 | 1 | 1 | |
|
| 0 | 1 | −1 |
| 0 | 1 | 0 |
| 0 | 1 | 1 |
|
| 1 | 1 | −1 |
| 1 | 1 | 0 |
| 1 | 1 | 1 |
Design of experiments used in some papers to optimize chromatographic conditions for analyses of degradation products.
| API | Design | Ref |
|---|---|---|
| Teriflunomide | Full factorial 33 | [ |
| Simvastatin | Plackett Burman/Box-Behnken | [ |
| Linagliptin | Full factorial | [ |
| Ticagrelor | Fractional Factorial Resolution V/Central composite | [ |
| Imatinib mesylate | Box Behnken | [ |
| Fusidic acid | Taguchi/Central Composite | [ |
| Cloxacillin | Plackett Burman | [ |
| Vilazodone hydrochloride | Central composite experimental | [ |
| Darifenacin hydrobromide | Central composite | [ |
| Edaravone | Placket Burman/Box Behnken | [ |
| Sofosbuvir and Ledipasvir | Box Behnken | [ |
Real values of the variables used in the design of experiments.
| Variable | High Level (+1) | Low Level (−1) | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Acid | Basic | Oxid. | Dry Heat | Wet Heat | Acid | Basic | Oxid. | Dry Heat | Wet Heat | |
|
| 1 | 0.1 | 30% | - | - | 0.1 | 0.01 | 3% | - | - |
|
| 75 | 30 | 24 h | 360 | 120 | 15 | 10 | 2h | 30 | 30 |
|
| 100 | 100 | - | 200 | 100 | 60 | 60 | - | 50 | 60 |
Design of experiments with coded values and % of degradation of active pharmaceutical ingredient (API) for acid, basic, and oxidative conditions.
| 23 Full Factorial Design | 22 Full Factorial Design | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Exp. | X1 | X2 | X3 | Acid | Basic | Exp. | X1 | X2 | Oxidative Condition |
|
| −1 | −1 | −1 | 0% | 0% | 1 | −1 | −1 | 0% |
|
| +1 | −1 | −1 | 4% | 3% | 2 | −1 | +1 | 48% |
|
| −1 | +1 | −1 | 10% | 8% | 3 | +1 | −1 | 51% |
|
| +1 | +1 | −1 | 23% | 11% | 4 | +1 | +1 | 100% |
|
| −1 | −1 | +1 | 8% | 19% | ||||
|
| +1 | −1 | +1 | 32% | 26% | ||||
|
| −1 | +1 | +1 | 21% | 38% | ||||
|
| +1 | +1 | +1 | 41% | 43% | ||||
Figure 2Representation of principal component analysis (PCA). Original data at left side, PC1 × PC2 in the middle and PC2 × PC3 at right side.
Works involving forced degradation studies and the partial least squares (PLS) tool.
| Author | API | Forced Degradation Condition | Chemometric Tool | Year | Ref. |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Attia et al. | Cefprozil | Basic hydrolysis | PLS; SRACLS | 2016 | [ |
| Alamein et al. | Pimozide | Acid and basic hydrolysis | CLS; PCR; PLS | 2015 | [ |
| Hegazy et al. | Linezolid | Acid and basic hydrolysis; oxidative | PLS; PCR; Parafac; N-PLS | 2014 | [ |
| Hegazy et al. | Imidapril hydrochloride | Basic hydrolysis; oxidative | PCR; PLS | 2014 | [ |
| Souza et al. | Captopril | Thermolysis | PLS | 2012 | [ |
| Abou Al Alamein | Zafirlukast | Basic hydrolysis | PLS | 2012 | [ |
| Naguib | Bisacodyl | Acid hydrolysis | PLSR; SRACLS | 2011 | [ |
| Abdelwahab | Atenolol; Chlorthalidone | Acid and basic hydrolysis | PCR; PLS | 2010 | [ |
| Wagieh et al. | Oxybutynin hydrochloride | Basic hydrolysis | PCR; PLS | 2010 | [ |
| Moneeb | Rabeprazole sodium | Acid hydrolysis | CLS; PCR; PLS | 2008 | [ |
| S Fayed et al. | Cilostazol | Acid hydrolysis | PLS; CRACLS | 2007 | [ |
| Ragno et al. | Lacidipine | Photodegradation | PLS; PCR; MLRA | 2006 | [ |
| Shehata et al. | Rofecoxib | Basic hydrolysis; photodegradation | PLS; CRACLS | 2004 | [ |
Works involving forced degradation studies and the Multivariate Curve Resolution-Alternating Least Squares (MCR-ALS) tool.
| Author | API | Forced Degradation Condition | Chemometric Tool | Year | Ref. |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gómez-Canela | 5-Fluorouracil | Photodegradation | MCR-ALS | 2017 | [ |
| Bērziņš et al. | Furazidin | Basic hydrolysis | HS-MCR-ALS | 2016 | [ |
| Luca et al. | Amiloride | Photodegradation | MCR-ALS | 2012 | [ |
| Sílvia Mas et al. | ketoprofen | Photodegradation | MCR-ALS; HSMCR | 2011 | [ |
| Luca et al. | Nitrofurazone | Photodegradation | HS-MCR-ALS | 2010 | [ |
| Javidnia et al. | Nitrendipine and felodipine | Photodegradation | MCR | 2008 | [ |
| Shamsipur et al. | Nifedipine | Photodegradation | MCR | 2003 | [ |