| Literature DB >> 33850241 |
Xisheng Xiong1, Kun Wang1, Tao Tang1, Jinzhi Fang1, Yijun Chen2.
Abstract
Hydroxychloroquine (2-[[4-[(7-Chloroquinolin-4-yl) amino]pentyl](ethyl) amino]-ethanol, HCQ), an effective anti-malarial drug, has been tested in the clinics for potential treatment of severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Despite the controversy around the clinical benefits of HCQ, the existence of a chiral center in the molecule to possess two optical isomers suggests that there might be an enantiomeric difference on the treatment of COVID-19. Due to their poor resolution and the inability of quantification by previously reported methods for the analysis of HCQ enantiomers, it is necessary to develop an analytical method to achieve baseline separation for quantitative and accurate determination of the enantiomeric purity in order to compare the efficacy and toxicity profiles of different enantiomers. In this study, we developed and validated an accurate and reproducible normal phase chiral high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) method for the analysis of two enantiomers of HCQ, and the method was further evaluated with biological samples. With this newly developed method, the relative standard deviations of all analytes were lower than 5%, and the limits of quantification were 0.27 μg/ml, 0.34 μg/ml and 0.20 μg/ml for racemate, R- and S-enantiomer, respectively. The present method provides an essential analytical tool for preclinical and clinical evaluation of HCQ enantiomers for potential treatment of COVID-19.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2021 PMID: 33850241 PMCID: PMC8044086 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-021-87511-5
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Figure 1Chemical structures of hydroxychloroquine enantiomers.
Figure 2Chromatogram for the resolution of racemic HCQ. Chromatographic conditions: Chiralpak AD-H (4.6 mm × 150 mm, 5 μm particle size); n-hexane-isopropanol (93:7, v/v) plus 0.5% DEA into hexane as mobile phase at a flow rate of 0.8 ml/min with UV detection at 343 nm at 20 °C.
Figure 3Comparison of chromatograms of blank rat plasma and samples incubated with rat plasma. Same analytical conditions were used as Fig. 1. (a) Blank; (b) 15 μg/ml of Rac-HCQ-sulfate incubated with rat plasma; (c) 10 μg/ml of (R)-HCQ-sulfate incubated with rat plasma; and (d) 10 μg/ml of (S)-HCQ-sulfate incubated with rat plasma.
Precision and accuracy of the method for the analysis of HCQ and its enantiomers.
| Time/d | Theoretical concentration | Obtained concentration ± SD* | R.S.Da | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| (μg/ml) | (μg/ml) | % | ||
| 0 | Racb | 10 | 9.67 ± 0.10 | 1.01 |
| Rc | 9.58 ± 0.12 | 1.25 | ||
| Sd | 9.76 ± 0.10 | 1.05 | ||
| 1 | Rac | 10 | 10.48 ± 0.41 | 3.90 |
| R | 10.69 ± 0.40 | 3.78 | ||
| S | 10.69 ± 0.19 | 1.76 | ||
| Rac | 15 | 15.98 ± 0.36 | 2.24 | |
| R | 15.70 ± 0.86 | 2.15 | ||
| S | 15.93 ± 0.37 | 2.35 | ||
| Rac | 20 | 21.93 ± 0.43 | 1.98 | |
| R | 21.72 ± 0.26 | 1.18 | ||
| S | 22.15 ± 0.61 | 2.77 | ||
| 4 | Rac | 10 | 10.77 ± 0.36 | 3.30 |
| R | 10.88 ± 0.33 | 3.01 | ||
| S | 10.93 ± 0.08 | 0.75 | ||
| Rac | 15 | 16.18 ± 0.82 | 5.07 | |
| R | 16.17 ± 0.71 | 4.39 | ||
| S | 16.18 ± 0.93 | 5.74 | ||
*n = 3; arelative standard deviation; bracemic HCQ; cR-enantiomer; dS-enantiomer.