| Literature DB >> 34955554 |
Deena A M Noureldeen1, John M Boushra2, Adel S Lashien2, Ahmed F Abdel Hakiem3, Tamer Z Attia1.
Abstract
A great demand for discovering new therapeutic solutions has been considered all over the world for managing the rapidly progressing COVID-19 pandemic. Remdesivir (REM) and Favipiravir (FAV) are introduced as promising newly developed antiviral agents against the corona virus as evidenced by the clinical findings. Hence, the optimization of an analytical method for their simultaneous determination acquires potential importance in quality control labs and further confirmatory investigations. Herein, a green, sensitive, and selective densitometric method has been proposed and validated for determination of REM and FAV in pharmaceutical formulations and spiked human plasma on normal phase TLC plates. A solvent mixture of ethyl acetate-methanol-ammonia (8:2:0.2 by volume) has been chosen as developing mobile phase system. Well resolved spots have been detected at 235 nm with retardation factors (Rf) of 0.18 and 0.98 for REM and FAV, respectively. A validation study has been carried out in the light of ICH guidelines. Remdesivir and FAV have shown excellent sensitivities with quantitation limits down to 0.12 and 0.07 μg/band, respectively. The developed method has been successfully applied to tablet formulations and spiked plasma with excellent recoveries ranged from 97.21 to 101.31%. The greenness of the method has been evaluated using the standards of greenness profile and Eco-Scale. It has passed the four greenness profile quadrants and achieved 80 score in Eco-Scale.Entities:
Keywords: COVID-19; Favipiravir; Human plasma; Remdesivir; TLC-densitometry
Year: 2021 PMID: 34955554 PMCID: PMC8683213 DOI: 10.1016/j.microc.2021.107101
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Microchem J ISSN: 0026-265X Impact factor: 4.821
Fig. 1Chemical structure of (a) Remdesivir and (b) Favipiravir.
Fig. 2TLC-densitograms of (a) blank plasma, (b) mixture of pure favipiravir and remdesivir and (c) mixture of favipiravir and remdesivir in spiked human plasma.
Analytical parameters for determination of REM and FAV by the proposed TLC-densitometric method in pure form and spiked human plasma.
| Parameters | Pure samples | Spiked human plasma samples | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| REM | FAV | REM | FAV | |
| Linearity range (μg/band) | 0.20 – 4.50 | 0.08 – 5.00 | 0.20 – 4.50 | 0.08 – 5.00 |
| Correlation coefficient (r) | 0.9999 | 0.9999 | 0.9998 | 0.9999 |
| Determination coefficient (r2) | 0.9999 | 0.9999 | 0.9998 | 0.9999 |
| Slope (b) | 4.20 | 1.7891 | 3.7877 | 1.61 |
| Intercept (a) | 0.7534 | 0.3069 | 0.9321 | 0.6428 |
| SD of slope | 0.01863 | 0.0009014 | 0.02436 | 0.004249 |
| SD of intercept | 0.05317 | 0.002443 | 0.06953 | 0.01193 |
| LOD (μg/band) | 0.04 | 0.02 | 0.06 | 0.02 |
| LOQ (μg/band) | 0.12 | 0.07 | 0.18 | 0.07 |
LOD, limit of detection; LOQ, limit of quantitation.
Evaluation of accuracy for determination of REM and FAV using the proposed method.
| Sample number | REM | FAV | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Taken (μg/band) | Found | % Recovery | Taken (μg/band) | Found | % Recovery | |
| 1 | 0.20 | 0.202 | 101.10 | 0.08 | 0.078 | 98.65 |
| 2 | 0.80 | 0.804 | 100.61 | 0.40 | 0.39 | 98.59 |
| 3 | 1.50 | 1.49 | 99.95 | 2.50 | 2.51 | 100.58 |
| 4 | 2.50 | 2.49 | 99.76 | 4.00 | 4.005 | 100.14 |
| 5 | 4.50 | 4.54 | 100.90 | 5.00 | 4.95 | 99.11 |
| Mean | 100.46 | 99.41 | ||||
| SD | 0.58 | 0.89 | ||||
| %RSD | 0.58 | 0.90 | ||||
SD, standard deviation; RSD, relative standard deviation.
Average of three determinations.
Precision study for the developed TLC-densitometric method.
| Parameters | REM | FAV | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0.20 μg/band | 2.60 μg/band | 4.50 μg/band | 0.40 μg/band | 2.50 μg/band | 5.00 μg/band | ||
| Intraday | 1 | 100.51 | 100.88 | 100.42 | 100.58 | 100.58 | 100.10 |
| 2 | 101.10 | 101.62 | 100.90 | 99.59 | 100.96 | 99.11 | |
| 3 | 100.96 | 100.35 | 101.85 | 99.68 | 99.97 | 100.26 | |
| Mean | 100.86 | 100.95 | 101.06 | 99.95 | 100.50 | 99.82 | |
| SD | 0.31 | 0.63 | 0.72 | 0.54 | 0.49 | 0.62 | |
| %RSD | 0.30 | 0.63 | 0.72 | 0.54 | 0.49 | 0.62 | |
| Interday | 1 | 100.51 | 100.88 | 100.42 | 100.58 | 100.58 | 100.10 |
| 2 | 101.96 | 99.42 | 99.57 | 98.59 | 99.68 | 99.11 | |
| 3 | 101.58 | 99.77 | 98.56 | 99.68 | 98.76 | 100.86 | |
| Mean | 101.35 | 100.02 | 99.52 | 99.61 | 99.68 | 100.02 | |
| SD | 0.75 | 0.76 | 0.93 | 0.99 | 0.90 | 0.87 | |
| %RSD | 0.74 | 0.76 | 0.93 | 1.00 | 0.90 | 0.87 | |
SD, standard deviation; RSD, relative standard deviation.
System suitability testing parameters of the developed TLC-densitometric method.
| Parameters | FAV | REM | Reference value |
|---|---|---|---|
| Tailing factor (T) | 0.92 | 0.81 | Less than 2 |
| Selectivity (α) | 10.37 | More than 1 | |
| Resolution (RS) | 6.38 | More than 1.5 | |
Determination of REM and FAV in their pharmaceutical formulations by the proposed TLC-densitometric method with application of standard addition technique, and statistical comparison of the obtained results using the reported HPLC methods [13], [18].
| Pharmaceutical formulation | Found | Standard addition technique | Reported method | F- test | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Added (µg/band) | % Recovery | |||||
| Remdesivir-Rameda® lyophilized powder for I.V injection (1.00 µg/band) | 99.86 ± 0.82 | 0.50 | 101.31 | 100.68 ± 0.61 | 1.77 | 1.76 |
| 1.00 | 100.10 | |||||
| 1.50 | 101.2 | |||||
| (Mean ± S.D) | 100.90 ± 0.69 | |||||
| Avipiravir® tablets (1.00 µg/band) | 104.24 ± 0.70 | 0.50 | 98.57 | 103.18 ± 0.99 | 1.93 | 1.98 |
| 1.00 | 100.25 | |||||
| 1.50 | 100.66 | |||||
| (Mean ± S.D) | 99.82 ± 1.10 | |||||
The values are the mean of five determinations.
The values are the mean of three determinations.
The tabulated values of t-test and F test at 0.05% are 2.306 and 6.388, respectively.
Greenness assessment of the developed TLC method by Analytical Eco-scale and NEMI.
| Eco-scale | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Parameters | |||
| Reagents | Ethyl acetate | 4 | |
| Methanol | 6 | ||
| Ammonia solution | 6 | ||
| Instrument | 1 | ||
| Occupational hazard | 0 | ||
| Waste | 3 | ||
| Total penalty points | 20 | ||
| Analytical Eco-Scale score | 80 | ||