Experimental Work

Chapter1
Introduction
CHAPTER 5 EXPERIMENTAL WORK
CONTENTS 5.1 IDENTIFICATION OF DRUG 5.2 DEVELOPMENT AND VALIDATION OF SPECTROMETRIC METHOD FOR SIMULTANEOUS ESIMATION OF AMLO, HCTZ AND VALS IN THEIR COMBINED DOSAGE FORM 5.3 DEVELOPMENT AND VALIDATION OF HPTLC METHOD FOR SIMULTANEOUS ESIMATION OF AMLO, HCTZ AND VALS IN THEIR COMBINED DOSAGE FORM 5.4 DEVELOPMENT AND VALIDATION OF RP-HPLC METHOD FOR SIMULTANEOUS ESIMATION OF AMLO, HCTZ AND VALS IN THEIR COMBINED DOSAGE FORM
Institute of pharmacy, Nirma university
Page 100
Chapter1
Introduction
5.1 IDENTIFICATION OF DRUGS Drug samples were received from pharmaceutical companies; these samples were subjected to identification of these drugs was carried out by melting point, IR spectroscopy and U.V spectra studies. 5.1.1 Determination of Melting Point Melting point of AMLO, HCTZ and VALS were determined by capillary method and obtained result is in table Table25. Melting points of drugs
Drug AMLO HCTZ VALS
Reported melting point (0C) 199-201 273-275 116-117
Observed melting point (0C) 200-202 274-275 117-118
5.1.2 UV spectra of AMLO, HCTZ and VALS UV- spectrum of AMLO (20g/mL), HCTZ (20g/mL) and VALS (20g/mL) in methanol was taken. AMLO was found show absorption maxima at 237.6nm; HCTZ was found to show absorption maxima at 270.2 nm and VALS was found to show absorption maxima at 249.2 nm.
Page 101
Chapter1
Introduction
Fig. 5: UV spectrum of AMLO (20g/mL) in methanol
Page 102
Chapter1
Introduction
Fig.6: UV spectrum of HCTZ (20g/mL) in methanol
Fig.7: UV spectrum of VALS (20g/mL) in methanol
Page 103
Chapter1
Introduction
Drug AMLO HCTZ VALS
Reported maxima 239nm, 238nm 225nm, 271nm, 317nm 249nm
Recorded maxima 237.6nm,210.8nm 270.2nm,316.6nm 249.2nm, 206nm, 243.8nm
Table 26: Wavelength maxima for AMLO, HCTZ and VALS
5.1.3 Determination of Infrared (IR) Spectra
Fig.8: Infrared spectrum of AMLO Table 27: Justification for IR Frequency (cm-1) Found for AMLO
SPECIFICATION OF AMLO
THEORITCAL WAVE NUMBER(CM-1) (85)
RECORDED WAVE NUMBER(CM-1) 3372 752.102

Page 104
-NH2 stretching -C-Cl

3500-3100 785-540
Chapter1
Introduction
C-H bending C=O Ester -C-O Ether
1465-1375 1750-1730 1300-1000
1440.56 1765.99 1265.07
Fig. 9: Infrared spectrum of HCTZ Table 28: Justification for IR Frequency (cm-1) Found for HCTZ
SPECIFICATION FOR HCTZ
THEO RITICAL WAVE NUMBER (CM-1) (85)
RECORDED WAVE NUMBER (CM-1)
(S=O) C-H stretch Mono substituted benzene
1050 3000-2850 900-690
1078.98 2963.09 996.053
Page 105
Chapter1
Introduction
-C-N - Amine Amide group
1350-1000 1680-1630
1206.26 1601.59
Fig.10: Infrared spectrum of VALS Table 29: Justification for IR Frequency (cm-1) Found for HCTZ
SPECIFICATION OF FOR VALS
THEORITICAL WAVE NUMBER (CM-1)(85) 3000-2850
RECORDED WAVE NUMBER (CM-1) 2834.85
C-H stretch
Page 106
Chapter1
Introduction
ketone (C=O) stretch -NH2 stretching
1750-1730 3200-3500
1730.8 3238.86
Carboxylic acid(-COOH)
3400-2400
2577.4
-N-H Stretch
1640-1550
1523.49
5.2
DEVELOPMENT
AND
VALIDATION
OF
UV-VIS
SPECTROPHOTOMETRIC
METHOD FOR SIMULTANEOUS
ESIMATION OF AMLO, HCTZ AND VALS IN THEIR COMBINED DOSAGE FORM

5.2.1 INSTRUMENTATION 5.2.1.1 UV-Visible Double-Beam spectrophotometer: Matched quartz cell (1cm), Model: UV-2450 Pc series, Manufacturer: Shimadzu Inc. Japan, Wavelength range: 200.00 to 400.00 nm 5.2.1.2 Analytical Balance: Model: KEROY, Manufacturer: Keroy (balance) pvt. Ltd. Varanasi, India. Weighing capacity: 100gm 5.2.1.3 Sonicator: Model: TRANS-O-SONIC; D-compect., Capacity: 2 Lit. 5.2.2 MATERIAL AND METHODS
Page 107
Chapter1
Introduction
5.2.2.1 Reagents and Chemicals API Amlodipine Besylate (AMLO) gifted sample from API Hydrochlorthiazide (HCTZ) gifted sample API Valsartan (VALS) gifted sample Methanol (AR Grade, S.D.Fine Chemicals Ltd., Bombay, INDIA) Tablets: containing Amlodipine besylate (5mg) ,Hctz( 12.5 mg) and Valsartan (160mg) Brand name : exforge hct, name of manufacturer 5.2.2.2 Preparation of standard stock solution of AMLO, HCTZ and VALS AMLO (25 mg), HCZ (25mg) and VALS (25mg) were accurately weighed and transferred to three separate 25 ml volumetric flasks and dissolved in methanol to obtain stock solution of concentration 100 g/ml each. .Aliquots of 2, 4, 5, 10, 15, 20 ml were prepared by using this stock solution of AMLO, aliquots of HCTZ of 5, 10, 15, 20, 25 ml by using stock solution of HCTZ and aliquots of 10 ,20, 30, 40, 50 ml by using of VALS stock solution ,for preparation of calibration curve . 5.2.2.3 Preparation of ternary mixture of AMLO, HCTZ and VALS Suitable aliquots of standard stock solution of AMLO, HCTZ and VALS were mixed and diluted to volume with methanol to obtain different ternary mixture solutions in concentration range of 2-50 were prepared for the calibration curve for AMLO, HCTZ and VALS 5.2.2.4 Selection of Analytical Wavelength and measurement From these stock solutions, working standard solutions were prepared by appropriate dilution of solvent to get final concentration of 20 g/ml each and were scanned in the spectrum mode from 200 to 400 nm. From the overlain spectra of these drugs (fig.1), wavelengths 237.6 nm (max of AMLO), 249.2 nm (max of VALS) and 270.2 nm (max of HCTZ) were selected for analysis.
Page 108
Chapter1
Introduction
By appropriate dilution of standard drug solution with methanol six working concentration containing 2, 4, 5, 10, 15, 20 g/ml for AMLO, 5, 10, 15, 20, 25 g/ml for HCTZ and 10, 20, 30, 40, 50 g/ml for VALS were prepared separately prepared and scanned in the range of 200-400 nm .The values of absorbance were recorded at the selected wavelengths and the absorptivity and molar absorptivity values for AMLO, HCTZ and VALS were determined .Molar absorptivity value for AMLO were 320, 177.7, 178.63 mol lit -1, for HCTZ were 45.88, 615.55, 88.086 mol lit
-1
and for VALS were 320.07, 141.02, 295.75 mol lit -1 at 237.6 nm, 270.2 nm and 249.2 nm respectively. Molecular weight of AMLO, HCTZ and for VALS is respectively. A1== 320C AMLO + 45.88C HCTZ +320.07C VALS...(1) A2=177.7C AMLO +615.55C HCTZ +141.02C VALS..(2) A3=178.63C AMLO +88.086C HCTZ +295.75C VALS .(3) Where A1, A2 and A 3 are absorbance of the sample solution at 237.6nm, 270.2 nm and 249.2 nm respectively.C
AMLO
is the concentration of AMLO, CHCTZ is the
concentration of the HCTZ, and C VALS is the concentration of the VALS. Fig. 11: overlay spectra of AMLO, HCTZ and VALS
Page 109
Chapter1
Introduction
Overlay UV-spectrum of AMLO (20g/ml), HCTZ (20g/ml) and VALS (20g/ml) in methanol was taken. AMLO was found to show absorption maxima at 237.6 nm, HCTZ at 270.2 nm and VALS was found to show absorption maxima at 249.2nm
5.2.2.5 Method Validation 1) Preparation of linearity curve For estimation of AMLO, calibration curve (n=6) was plotted in the range of 2-20 g/ml at 237.6nm as well as estimation of HCTZ, calibration curve (n=5) was plotted in the range of 5-25 g/ml at 270.2nm and For estimation of VALS, calibration curve (n=6) was plotted in the range of 10-50 g/ml at 249.2 nm. Linearity curve shows linearity in the range of 2-20 g/ml for AMLO, 5-25 g/ml for HCTZ and 10-50 g/ml for VALS 2) Precision The precision of analytical method is the degree of agreement among individual results when the method is applied to multiple sampling of homogenous samples. It provides an indication of random error in results and was expressed as coefficient of variance (CV). 2.1 Intra-day precision: Intra-day precision was determined by measuring amplitudes of three different concentrations 2, 4, 5 g/ml for AMLO and 15, 20, 25, g/ml for HCTZ and for VALS 30,40,50 g/ml individually for three times in a day. 2.2 Inter-day precision: Inter-day precision was determined by measuring amplitudes of three different concentrations 2, 4, 5 g/ml for AMLO AND 15, 20, 25, g/ml for HCTZ and for VALS 30, 40, 50 g/ml individually for three days.
Page 110
Chapter1
Introduction
2.3 Repeatability: It is a measure of precision under the same operating conditions over a short interval of time. It is sometimes referred to as intra-assay precision. To study the repeatability, six determinations at 100% test concentrations (i.e. 4g/ml of AMLO, 10 g/ml for HCTZ and 20 g/ml of VALS) were carried out. 3. Limit of detection and limit of quantification (LOD/LOQ) For this determination Calibration curve for both the drugs was repeated six times The LOD & LOQ were measured by using mathematical equations given below. LOD = 3.3 x /S LOQ = 10 x /S Where, = Standard deviation of the Intercept S = slope of calibration curve 4. Accuracy To study the accuracy, 7 tablets were weighed and powdered. The powder equivalent to 5mg of AMLO, 12.5 mg for HCTZ and 160 mg of VALS were weighed and transferred to 100ml volumetric flask containing 70 ml of methanol. The solution was sonicated for 15 minutes and volume was made up to the mark with methanol. The above solution was filtered with whatmann filter paper (No. 41). Aliquot (5ml) was pipetted out and transferred to 50ml volumetric flask. Volume was made up to the mark with methanol to get a solution containing 5g/ml of AMLO, 12.5 g/ml and 160 g/ml of VALS. Standard drug was added at three different concentration levels (80%, 100% and 120% of test sample concentration) to pre-analyzed sample and amplitudes of the solution were measured at selected wavelengths for AMLO, HCTZ and VALS drugs. Amplitudes were substituted into respective straight line equation to calculate percentage recovery of the drugs. 5. Analysis OF Tablet Dosage form Marketed tablet formulation containing VALS 160 mg, AMLO besylate equivalent to AMLO 5mg and HCTZ 12.5 mg was analysed using this method. From the triturate of 7 tablets, an amount equivalent to 160 mg of VALS, (5 mg of AMLO and 12.5 mg HCTZ) was weighed and dissolved in 35 ml of methanol and sonicated for 30
Page 111
Chapter1
Introduction
minutes. After 30 min. Sonication the solution was filtered in a 100ml calibrated volumetric flask through whatmann filter paper. The filtrate was appropriately diluted with the same solvent to obtain final concentration within Beer Lambert's range for each drug. The concentration of drugs was determined by using the Eqns 1, 2 and 3. Eqn.1 A 1 = 320C AMLO + 45.88C HCTZ +320.07C VALS (1) Eqn.2 A = 177.7C AMLO +615.55C HCTZ +141.02C VALS (2) and Eqn.3 A 3 = 178.63C AMLO +88.086C HCTZ +295.75C VALS (3), Where A1, A2 and A 3 are absorbance of the tablet sample solution at 237.6, 270.2 and 249.2 nm respectively.C AMLO is the concentration of AMLO, CHCTZ is the concentration of the HCTZ, and C VALS is the concentration of the VALS.
5.2.3 Results and Discussion

5.2.3.1 Method Validation 1) Linearity Linearity curve shows linearity in the range of 2-20 g/ml for AMLO, 5-25 g/ml for HCTZ and for VALS 10-50 g/ml. The correlation coefficient (r2) was found to be 0.9997, 0.9990, and 0.9990 for AMLO, HCTZ and VALS respectively.
Page 112
Chapter1
Introduction
Fig 12: Linearity Curve for AMLO at 237.6 nm
Table 30: calibration curve data of AMLO at 237.6 nm, 270.2 nm and 249.2 nm
237.6nm Conc. g/ml 2 MeanAbs. S.D* 0.0450.01 6 0.1220.01 8 0.1590.02 3 0.3460.01 1 0.5580.01 2 0.7070.01 5 320 %RS D
270.2nm MeanAbs S.D* 0.0130.002 1 0.0240.002 4 0.0420.001 6 0.0560.001 3 0.0640.001 7 0.0780.001 6 177.7 %RS D
249.2nm Mean Abs.S.D* 0.0210.001 3 0.0650.001 7 0.0880.001 4 0.2010.001 5 0.3280.001 2 0.4220.001 6 178.63 %RS D
1.55
1.61
1.61
1.47
1.60
1.53
1.44
1.80
1.13
10
0.31
1.12
0.74
15
0.17
1.42
0.30
20 Absorpti vity
0.21
0.95
0.37
Page 113
Chapter1
Introduction
Fig. 12: Linearity Curve for HCTZ at 270.2 nm
237.6nm Conc. g/ml 5 10 15 20 25 Absorptivity MeanAbs. %RSD S.D* 0.0090.0012 0.0420.0015 0.0760.0013 0.1130.0015 0.1660.006 45.88 1.33 1.57 1.71 1.32 1.61
270.2nm Mean Abs. S.D* %RSD
249.2nm Mean Abs. %RSD S.D*
0.2970.0021 0.6180.0023 0.9250.0015
0.70 0.37 0.16 0.12 0.12
0.0320.0012 0.0830.0013 0.1370.0016 0.1920.0015 0.2650.0020 88.086
1.75
1.56 1.16 0.78 0.37
1.2450.0035 1.5640.0032 615.55
Page 114
Chapter1
Introduction
Table 31: Calibration curve data of HCTZ at 237.6 nm, 249.2 nm and 270.2 nm
Fig.13: Calibration Curve of VALS at 249.2 nm
237.6nm Conc. g/ml Mean Abs.S.D* %RSD
270.2nm
249.2nm
Mean Abs.S.D*
%RSD
Mean Abs.S.D*
%RS
10 20 30 40 50
0.3260.0032
0.98 0.34 0.25 0.30 0.97
0.1460.0015 0.2790.0035 0.4330.0017 0.5530.0031 0.6820.0021
1.02 0.53 0.34 0.56 0.30
0.3100.027 0.5830.025 0.8950.021 1.1670.032 1.4620.021

Page 115
0.80
0.6340.0022 0.9780.0025 1.2630.0038 1.580.0015
0.42
0.23
0.25
0.14
Chapter1
Introduction
Absorptivity
320.07
141.02
295.75
Table 32: Calibration data of VALS at 237.6 nm, 249.2nm at 270.2 nm
2) Precision Intraday precision and Interday precision for AMLO, HCTZ and VALS was done by analyzing three different concentrations (g/ml) within linearity ranges and % RSD less than 2.
WAVELENGTH
CONC. g/ml 2
MEAN CONC.S.D* 1.990.0281 0.0281 3.880.0168 5.050.0129 0.0168 1.870.0135 0.0129 4.170.0132 0.0135 0.0132 5.020.0152 0.0152
% R.S.D 1.41 0.43 0.25 0.72 0.31 0.30
237.6nm
4 5 2
270.2nm
4 5
Page 116
Chapter1
Introduction
2 249.2nm 4 5 Table 33: Intraday precision for AMLO Table 34: Interday precision for AMLO CONC. g/ml 2 237.6nm 4 5 2 270.2nm 4 5 2 249.2nm 4 5 Table 35: Intraday precision for HCTZ CONC. g/ml 15 237.6nm 20 25
2.130.0144 4.120.0211 5.230.0221
0.676 0.512 1.837
WAVELENGTH
MEAN CONC.S.D* 2.020.00114 4.310.00154 4.220.00137 2.180.00305 4.070.00120 5.060.00260 2.180.00340 4.210.00231 5.350.00162
% R.S.D 1.10 0.45 0.27 1.17 0.56 0.26 1.05 0.50 0.31
WAVELENGTH
MEAN CONC.S.D* 15.210.0084 21.010.0043 24.870.0044
% R.S.D 0.55 0.68 0.57
Page 117
Chapter1
Introduction
15 270.2nm 20 25 15 249.2nm 20 25 Table 36: Interday precision for HCTZ WAVELENGTH CONC. g/ml 15 237.6nm 20 25 15 270.2nm 20 25 15 249.2nm 20 25
14.950.0034 20.090.0032 24.670.0042 15.020.0062 21.170.0055 26.010.0048
0.90 0.65 0.57 0.94 0.64 0.49
MEAN Conc. S.D*
% R.S.D
14.560.0018 20.170.0040 24.880.0050 14.760.0011 20.140.0016 25.180.0012 15.090.0026 20.310.0026 25.080.0025
0.81 1.99 2.02 0.75 0.57 0.44 0.83 1.11 0.89
WAVELENGTH
CONC. g/ml 15
MEAN CONC.S.D* 15.210.0084
% R.S.D 0.55
Page 118
Chapter1
Introduction
237.6nm
20 25 15
21.010.0043 24.870.0044 14.950.0034 20.090.0032 24.670.0042 15.020.0062 21.170.0055 26.010.0048
0.68 0.57 0.90 0.65 0.57 0.94 0.64 0.49
270.2nm
20 25 15
249.2nm
20 25
Table 37: Intraday precision for VALS Table 38: Interday precision for VALS
WAVELENGTH
CONC. g/ml 15
MEAN CONC.S.D* 14.560.0018 20.170.0040 24.880.0050 14.760.0011 20.140.0016 25.180.0012 15.090.0026 20.310.0026 25.080.0025
% R.S.D 0.81 1.99 2.02 0.75 0.57 0.44 0.83 1.11 0.89
237.6nm
20 25 15 20
270.2nm
25 15 20
249.2nm 25 Table 39: Repeatibilty
Page 119
Chapter1
Introduction
CONC. WAVE LENGTH DRUG g/ml AMLO 237.6nm HCTZ VALS AMLO 270.2nm HCTZ VALS AMLO 249.2nm HCTZ VALS 3) LOD and LOQ 4 10 20 4 10 20 4 10 20
MEAN CONC. g/ml 4.2 10.12 20.13 3.94 9.93 19.78 4.15 10.21 20.11
% R.S.D
0.27 0.32 1.21 0.53 0.46 1.64 0.51 0.28 1.59
From determination calibration curve for AMLO, HCTZ and VALS was repeated six times and LOD and LOQ value were measured by mathematical equation. Table 40: LOD and LOQ value for AMLO, HCTZ and VALS
Limit of detection
AMLO
HCTZ
VALS
LOD
0.025 g/mL
0.013 g/mL
0.029 g/mL
LOQ
0.078 g/mL
0.041 g/mL
0.089 g/mL
Page 120
Chapter1
Introduction
4) Accuracy Standard edition was done at three level 80%, 100% and 120% of a concentration of sample in the linearity range and % recovery was found 98 to 100%. Table 41: Recovery study of AMLO, HCTZ and VALS Sample conc. g/ml Amt of std. added g/ml 4 5 6 8 10 12 16 20 24 Total Conc. g/ml 9 10 11 18 20 22 36 40 44 Amt recovered g/ml
DRUG %level
% Recovery
80 AMLO 100 120 80 HCTZ 100 120 80 VALS 100 120
5 5 5 10 10 10 20 20 20
8.856 10.05 10.93 17.82 19.78 21.89 35.47 39.86 43.65
98.4 100.5 99.61 99.00 98.9 99.5 98.53 99.67 99.22
Page 121
Chapter1
Introduction
Table 42: Validation parameters for AMLO, HCTZ and VALS PARAMETERS max Linear Range g/ml Correlation coefficient R2 Repeatability% RSD Intraday precision % RSD Interday precision % RSD LOD g/ml LOQ g/ml % Recovery AMLO 237.6nm 2-20 0.9997 0.705 0.523 0.727 0.025 0.078 99.19 HCTZ 270.2nm 5-25 0.999 0.154 0.781 1.021 0.013 0.041 99.13 VALS 249.2nm 10-50 0.999 1.413 0.539 0.489 0.029 0.089 99.14
5.2.3.2 Analysis of Tablet Dosage form The developed method was used to estimate AMLO, HCTZ AND VALS in the tablet dosage form. Marketed formulation was procured for the analysis by proposed method. Table 43: Analysis of Marketed Dosage Form
DRUG
LABLE CLAIM (mg)
% ASSAYSD*
AMLO HCTZ VALS
5 12.5 160
98.250.0781 98.820.0458 98.930.0404
Page 122
Chapter1
Introduction
5.2.4 Conclusion
The proposed UV-VIS spectrophotometric method was accurate, precise and sensitive for the determination of AMLO, HCTZ and VALS in combined dosage form. High recoveries show that the method is free from the interference from the excipients used in the commercial pharmaceutical preparations. Hence, it can be successful applied for the routine estimation for AMLO, HCTZ and VALS in quality control laboratories. The result of validation parameters are satisfactory level indicates the accuracy of proposed method for estimation of AMLO, HCTZ and VALS.
Page 123
Chapter1
Introduction
5.3 DEVELOPMENT AND VALIDATION OF HPTLC METHOD FOR SIMULTANEOUS ESIMATION OF AMLO, HCTZ AND VALS IN THEIR COMBINED DOSAGE FORM
5.3.1 Instrumentation 1) 2) HPTLC Camag Applicator Linomat 5: Semiautomatic application, Band application by spray on technique (2 - 500l) Camag twin trough glass chamber: ( 20 x 10 cm) Camag TLC scanner 3 : Scanning speed up to 100mm/s, Spectral range 190 800nm Camag U.V cabinet with dual wavelength U.V lamp: Dual wavelength 254 / 366nm Stationary Phase: Pre- coated Silica gel on aluminum sheet G60 F254 Camag 100 l Applicator syringe (Hamilton, Bonaduz, Schweiz) Data Resolution: 100m/step Spectrometer Model : SHIMADZU 2450 double beam spectrometer, version 2.21 Slit width : 1 nm 3) Analytical Balance Model : keroy Manufacturer: keroy (Balance) pvt. Ltd. Capacity : 0.0001 to 100 g 4) Sonicator Model : Trans-O-sonic, D-compact Capacity : 2L 5.3.2 Material and methods 5.3.2.1 Reagents and chemicals Methanol (AR Grade, S.D. Fine chemicals Ltd., Mumbai , India Ethyl Acetate (AR Grade, S.D. Fine chemicals Ltd., Mumbai , India) Ammonia (25%) Toluene AR Grade Tablet containing AMLO(5 mg), HCTZ (12.5 mg) and VALS(160 mg)
Institute of pharmacy, Nirma university Page 124
Chapter1
Introduction
Brand name: Exforge HCTZ, Name of manufacturer 5.3.2.2 5.3.2.3 API Amlodipine Besylate (AMLO) gifted sample from API Hydrochlorthiazide (HCTZ) gifted sample API Valsartan (VALS) gifted sample HPTLC conditions Mobile phase : Ethyl Acetate : Methanol : Toluene : Ammonia (7.5: 3:2: 0.8, v/v/v/v) Chamber saturation time : 25 min Distance run : 70 mm Ambient temperature : 25-26C Wavelength of detection : 242 nm Slit dimension : 3x 0.20 mm (micro) Band width : 4 mm Syringe capacity : 100 L preparation of Mobile phase
A mixture of 7.5 ml of Ethyl Acetate, 3 ml of methanol, 2 ml of toluene and 0.8 ml of ammonia (25%) were mixed properly and it was used as a mobile phase. 5.3.2.4 Preparation of Standard Stock Solution of AMLO aliquots of the
25 mg AMLO was weighed accurately and dissolved in 25 ml methanol. 1 ml
above solution were diluted to 10 ml with methanol to produce 100 g/mL of AMLO in methanol. 5.3.2.5 Preparation of Standard Stock Solution of HCTZ
25 mg HCTZ was weighed accurately and dissolved in 25 ml methanol. 1 ml aliquots of the above solution were diluted to 10 ml with methanol to produce 100 g/mL of HCTZ in methanol. 5.3.2.6 Preparation of Standard Stock Solution of VALS aliquots of the
25 mg VALS was weighed accurately and dissolved in 25 ml methanol. 1 ml
above solution were diluted to 10 ml with methanol to produce 100 g/mL of VALS in methanol.
5.3.2.6
Preparation of Ternary mixtures of AMLO, HCTZ and VALS
Page 125
Chapter1
Introduction
Suitable aliquots of standard stock solution of AMLO, HCTZ and VALS are mixed and diluted to volume with methanol to obtain different Ternary mixture solutions containing AMLO, HCTZ and VALS in the range 100 - 3200 ng/spot were applied to the plate for the calibration curve of three drugs.
5.3.2.7
HPTLC Analysis
1) Activation of Silica gel plate Analysis was performed on 20 cm x 2o cm TLC silica gel 60 F
254
plates (EM science,
Gibbstown, NJ, USA, an affiliate of Merck KGaA, Darmstadt, Germany). Layers were cleaned by predevelopment to the top with methanol and dried in a hot air oven at 105C for 20 minutes. 2) Spotting Standard zones were applied to the layer as bands by Means of a camag (Wilmington, NC, USA) Linomat V semi-automated spray-on applicator equipped with a 100 100- l syringe and operated with setting band length 4 mm, application rate 15 nl/s, distance from the bottom of the plate 80 mm. 3) Development Spotted plates were developed in saturated HPTLC twin-through chamber (20 cm x 20 cm) up to 70 mm solvent front. HPTLC twin- through chamber is presaturated with mobile phase for 25 minutes with help of filter paper and after development; plates were removed immediately in oven at 60 C for 5 minutes. 4) Scanning of plates The developed plates were scanned with help camag TLC scanner III with a deuterium and tungsten source. Slit dimension was 3 x 0.20 mm, and a scanning rate of 10 mm S-1 using WINCATS-3 software.
Page 126
Chapter1
Introduction
5.3.2.8 Method validation 1) Preparation of Linearity curve of AMLO, HCTZ and VALS Suitable aliquots of standard stock solution of AMLO, HCTZ and VALS are mixed and diluted to volume with methanol to obtain different Ternary mixture solutions containing AMLO, HCTZ and VALS in 1:1.5:8 ratios. Concentration of solutions in the range 100 3200 ng/spot were applied to the plate for the calibration curve of these drugs. Peak area of the spots was measured at 242 nm in the absorbance mode with camag TLC scanner III. 2) Precision Intraday and interday precision For intraday precision, the experiment was repeated three times in a day using three different concentrations for AMLO (400, 500, 600 ng/spot), HCTZ (450,600,750 ng/spot), and for VALS (1600, 2000, 2400 ng/spot) For interday precision, the experiment was repeated on three different days using different concentrations for AMLO (400, 500, 600 ng/spot), HCTZ (450,600,750 ng/spot), and for VALS (1600, 2000, 2400 ng/spot) .Precision measured in terms of %RSD Repeatibilty In the repeatability the standard solution of AMLO, HCTZ (500 ng/spot) and for VALS 2000 (ng/spot) was spotted 7 times on the same plate and peak area was recorded. Repeatability was measured in terms of %RSD. 3) LOD AND LOQ From the linearity curve equations, the standard deviations (SD) of the intercepts (response) were calculated. Then LOD and LOQ were measured for all the three drugs by using mathematical expressions. 4) Accuracy Accuracy of the method was determined by recovery study by standard addition method at three different levels (80%, 100% and 120%). 5) Specificity
Page 127
Chapter1
Introduction
The purity of the chromatographic peaks was analyzed by scanning all the three separated peaks in spectral scanning mode of the WinCATs 1.4.2.8121 software. The peak purity for AMLO, HCTZ and VALS was tested by correlation of spectra
acquired at the peak start (s), peak maximum (m), and peak end (e) positions. 6) Flow Constant The flow constant or velocity constant (K) is a measure of the migration rate of the
solvent front. It is an important parameter for the HPTLC and can be used to calculate development times with different separation distances, provided that the absorbent, solvent system, chamber type and temperature remain constant. The flow is given by the following equation: K = ZF/t K= Flow constant (mm2/s) ZF= distance between the solvent front and the solvent level (mm) t = Development time (s)
5.3.2.9 Analysis of marketed dosage form Total 14 tablets were weighed accurately and powdered. An amount equivalent to one tablet (containing 5 mg of AMLO, 12.5 HCTZ and 160 mg of VALS) was taken.Transfer to 100 ml volumetric flask and added 50ml methanol sonicated for 15 minutes and made up volume up to mark Solution was filtered by using Whatmann filter paper N o.41 .Above solution containing 50 g/ml concentration of AMLO, 125 g/ml HCTZ and 1600 g/ml concentration of VALS. From this solution, aliquots of 2 ml sol. Transfer to 10 ml volumetric flask and diluted up to mark with methanol and apply 10 l of this solution was spotted on activated TLC plate
5.3.3 RESULT AND DISCUSSION Selection and optimization of solvent and mobile phase: Selection and optimization of a proper mobile phase is a challenging task in HPTLC method development. Several factors affects the selection of mobile phase such as polarity of the drugs, desired Rf values, practical problems such as diffusion of spots, tailing, proper peak shape after scanning.
Page 128
Chapter1
Introduction
Table 44: Observation and remarks of mobile phase optimization Sr. No. Trials Chloroform : methanol : toluene : glacial acid (6:2:1:0.1, v/v/v/v),Run length =80mm Acetone :chloroform :Ethyl acetate : methanol (3:3:3:0.5, v/v/v/v),Run length =80mm Ethyl Act: methanol:Amm.sol (7.5:2.5:0.5, v/v/v/v),Run length = 80mm Chloroform: Methanol : Amm.sol (7.5:2:5:0.5, v/v/v/v),Run length = 80mm Observation AMLO, HCTZ and VALS were close to solvent front,Improper resolution Improper resolution and HCTZ run slovent front, poor Rf values of VALS Very good separation but Diffused spot of VALS Remarks
Not satisfactory
Not satisfactory
Good but Not satisfactory
Not Good resolution,
Not Satisfactory
Ethyl Acetate :Methanol : TEA 5 (7.5: 2.5:0.5, v/v/v/v), Run length =80mm
VALS spot was less diffused but poor Rf value of VALS
Not satisfactory
ACN :Methanol: TEA 6 (7.5:2.5:0.5, v/v/v),Run length= 80mm
Closeness b/w HCTZ and VALS and diffused spot of VALS
Not satisfactory
Ethyl Acetate :Methanol:1,4 dioxane :Ammonia (7:3:1:0.5, v/v/v/v), Run length =80mm
Less resolution b/w AMLO and HCTZ
Not satisfactory
Cyclohexane : Methanol:Ammonia 8 ( 7.5:2.5:0.5, v/v/v/v),Run length =80mm
Diffused spot of AMLO and high Rf value of VALS and HCTZ
Not satisfactory
Page 129
Chapter1
Introduction
ACN :Methanol: TEA 9. (7.5:2.5:0.5, v/v/v),Run length= 80mm
Closeness b/w HCTZ and VALS and diffused spot of VALS Good resolution but VALS having less tailing VALS spot was not diffused but poor Rf value of AMLO AMLO spot was splitted
Not satisfactory
10
Ethyl Acetate :Methanol: Toluene: Ammonia (6:3:3:0.5, v/v/v/v),Run length= 80mm
Not good separation
11
Ethyl Acetate :Methanol :Toluene :glacial acid (7.5:3.5:2.5:0.1, v/v/v/v), Run length= 80mm
Not satisfactory
12
Chloroform :Methanol :Toluene :glacial acid (7.5:3:2.5:0.1, v/v/v/v),Run length: 80mm
Not satisfactory
13
Ethyl acetate : Methanol: Toluene :Ammonia (7.5:3:2.5:1, v/v/v/v),Run length= 80mm
Good resolution but was not reproducible Good resolution and reproducible but VALS still having less tailing Good resolution and VALS was not diffused
Resolution was less b/w AMLO and HCTZ
14
Ethyl acetate :Methanol : Toluene :Ammonia (7.5:3:2:0.8, v/v/v/v),Run length =80mm
Very good separation
15
Ethyl acetate :Methanol : Toluene :Ammonia (7.5:3:2:0.8, v/v/v/v), Run length =70mm
Satisfactory Optimized Mobile Phase
5.3.3.1 Validation parameters 1) Linearity The correlation coefficient (r2) was found to be 0.9945, 0.9926 and 0.9918 for AMLO, HCTZ and VALS respectively. Table 45: Calibration data of AMLO by HPTLC with UV detection Conc. (ng/spot) Peak Area(n=6) Mean SD* %RSD Rf
Sr. No.
Page 130
Chapter1
Introduction
1 2 3. 4. 5. 6.
100 200 300 400 500 600
108918.0 1873.16710.2 2646.551.3 3182.858.84 3819.5136.63 4375.93379.0
1.652 0.548 1.962 1.849 0.959 1.807
0.54 0.54 0.54 0.54 0.54 0.54
5000 4500 4000 3500 3000 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 0 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700
y = 6.534x + 547.4 R = 0.994
Fig.14: Linearity curve for AMLO
Page 131
Chapter1
Introduction
Sr. No. 1 2 3 4 5. 6.
Conc. (ng/spot) 150 300 450 600 750 900
Peak Area Mean SD* 1470.426.43 2547.93320.66 3650.33345.23 4284.16733.74 5245.26737.84 5953.137.03 %RSD 1.79 0.81 1.23 0.78 0.72 0.52
Rf 0.64 0.64 0.63 0.63 0.65 0.65
Fig.15: Linearity curve for AMLO from Win CATS software Table 46: Calibration data of HCTZ by HPTLC with UV detection
7000 6000 5000 4000 3000 2000 1000 0 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000
y = 5.931x + 744.6 R = 0.992
Concentration (ng/spot)
Fig. 16: Linearity Curve for HCTZ

Chapter1
Introduction
Peak Area Sr. No. Conc (ng/spot) Mean SD* 1 1200 108933.52 %RSD 1.65 0.23 Rf
Fig.17: Linearity curve for HCTZ from Win CATS software Table 47: Calibration data of VALS by HPTLC with UV detection
Page 133
Chapter1
Introduction
2 3 4 5 6
1600 2000 2400 2800 3200
1873.1619.51 2646.593.04 3182.8134.8 3819.5175.6 4375.93144
0.54 1.96 1.84 0.95 1.80
0.23 0.23 0.23 0.27 0.27
16000 14000 12000 10000 8000 6000 4000 2000 0 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500
Fig.18:
y = 3.480x + 2356 R = 0.991
Linearity Curve for VALS
Page 134
Chapter1
Introduction
Fig.19: Linearity curve for VALS from Win CATS software
Fig.20:
HPTLC Chromatogram of AMLO (Rf = 0.54)
Page 135
Chapter1
Introduction
Fig.21: HPTLC Chromatogram of HCTZ (Rf = 0.64)
Page 136
Chapter1
Introduction
Fig.22: HPTLC Chromatogram of VALS (Rf = 0.23)
Fig.23: HPTLC chromatogram of VALS HCTZ (Rf =0.64) in standard mixture.
(Rf = 0.23), AMLO (Rf = 0.54) and
Page 137
Chapter1
Introduction
Fig.24: HPTLC chromatogram (3D view) for Mix linearity of AMLO (Rf=0.54), HCTZ (Rf=0.64) AND VALS (Rf=0.23)
Drug
Conc. (ng/spot)
Peak Area Rf SD* Mean SD

*
%RSD
2) Precision
Page 138
Chapter1
Introduction
200 AMLO 500 600 450 HCTZ 600 750 1600 VALS 2000 2400
3201.664.16 3673.86760.64 4171.33341.56 3812.83325.8 4216.63350.91 5502.161.85 8076.2819.17 9343.433171.65 10297.73144.49
2.00 1.65 0.99 0.67 1.20 1.12 0.23 1.83 1.40
0.540.015 0.550.011 0.540.013 0.660.010 0.640.012 0.640.011 0.260.02 0.270.011 0.270.015
Table 48: Intraday precision AMLO, HCTZ AND VALS by HPTLC with UV
Table 49: Interday precision AMLO, HCTZ AND VALS HPTLC with UV detection Concentration (ng/spot) 200 AMLO 500 600 450 HCTZ 600 750 1600 VALS 2000 2400 Peak Area Mean SD* 3201.631.50 3673.86718.43 4171.33325.79 3741.726.99 3624.918.43 365599.26 8076.2894.57 9343.43323.95 10297.73133.15 %RSD 1.98 1.65 0.99 0.67 1.20 1.12 0.23 1.83 1.40 RfSD* 0.540.015 0.560.013 0.540.011 0.660.012 0.640.014 0.640.010 0.230.021 0.250.22 0.240.024
Drug
Page 139
Chapter1
Introduction
Table 50: Repeatibilty study of AMLO, HCTZ AND VALS
Sr.no. 1 2. 3.
Drug AMLO (500ng/spot) HCTZ(500ng/spot) VALS (2000ng/spot)
Peak AreaSD* 291733.30 3609.7825.65 7061.6199.95
%RSD 1.98 1.86 0.84
Accuracy Recovery study was determined by standard addition method. Standard addition was done at three levels, 80%, 100% and 120% of sample concentration in linearity range. Table 51: Recovery study of AMLO, HCTZ and VALS Accuracy DRUG INITIAL CONC. ng/spot STD. Added ng/spot 44 AMLO 55 55 66 78.57 HCTZ 98.21 98.21 TOTAL CONC. ng/spot 99 110 121 177.47 196.42 Conc. Recovered Mean SD* 99.141.07 109.390.66 120.810.76 176.80.34 199.122.12 1.08 0.60 0.62 0.19 1.08 %RSD %Recovery Mean SD* 100.14 1.32 99.440.745 99.840.765 99.090.932 99.790.761
Page 140
%RS
1.32
0.74
0.76
0.92
0.76
Chapter1
Introduction
117.8 1005.6 VALS 1257.1 1257.1 1508.56
216.81 2262.74 2514.28 2765.7
215.980.94 2357.417.09 2551.7719.24 2796.6416.25
0.43 0.13 1.31 0.51
100.140.675 101.400.785 99.650.907 99.300.703
0.67
0.77
0.91
0.70
Table 52: LOD and LOQ values of AMLO, HCTZ and VALS
Parameter LOD
AMLO (ng/spot) 2.95
HCTZ(ng/spot) 17.89
VALS(ng/spot) 70.90
LOQ
8.94
53.9
214.85
Table 53: Robustness Study of AMLO, HCTZ and VALS Peak Area SD * Sr.no. Parameter AMLO Mobile Phase composition Ethyl Acetate (5%) HCTZ VALS
AMLO HCTZ VALS
%RSD
1.
1107.8 14.47
2119.938.8 13749.4175.3
1.3
1.64
1.2
2.
Wavelength (2422nm) Development Distance
1119.63 9.99
1743.617.2
1082125.29
0.89
0.98
1.15
3. (705mm)
1073.4310.6
1132.431.0
13430.1133
0.93
1.02
0.99
Page 141
Chapter1
Introduction
Specificity: Fig.25:
Peak purity spectra of AMLO
Fig.26: Peak purity
spectra of HCTZ
Page 142
Chapter1
Introduction
Fig.27: Peak purity spectra of VALS Table: 54 specificty data of AMLO, HCTZ and VALS Drugs AMLO HCTZ VALS Co-relation r(s,m) 0.99906 0.99958 0.99966 Co-relation r (m,e) 0.9994 0.9976 0.999 Peak purity Pass pass pass
Table 55: Summary of Validation parameters by HPTLC with UV detection
Sr.no 1 2 3 4 5 6
Parameters Linearity range (ng/spot) Regression equation Correlation coefficient (r2) Intercept Slope Precision Intraday % RSD (n = 3) Interday % RSD (n = 3) Repeatability of measurements% RSD (n=6)
AMLO 100-600 y = 6.534x+547.48 0.9945 6.534 547.48 0.99 to 2.0 0.48 to 0.98 1.98
HCTZ 150-900 y =5.931x+744.6 0.9926 5.931 744.6 0.67 to 1.2 0.43 to 1.92 1.86
VALS 1200-3200 Y=3.48x+2356 0.9918 3.48 2356 0.23 to 1.83 0.25 to 1.26 0.84
Limit of detection
2.95 (ng/spot)
17.84 (ng/spot)
70.90 (ng/spot)
Page 143
Chapter1
Introduction
8 9
Limit of quantification Specificity
8.94(ng/spot) Pass
53.9 (ng/spot) Pass
214.85(ng/spot) pass
5.3.3.2 Analysis of marketed sample The developed method was used to estimate AMLO, HCTZ and VALS in combined dosage form. The percentage of AMLO, HCTZ and VALS was found from the calibration curve.
Fig.28: HPTLC CHROMATOGRAM OF STANDARD MIXTURE
Page 144
Chapter1
Introduction
Fig.29: HPTLC CHROMATOGRAM OF MARKETED SAMPLE
Fig.30: HPTLC
chromatogram (3D view) for sample in Mix linearity of AMLO, HCTZ AND VALS (Track 2, 3 for Sample Spot) Table 56: Analysis of Marketed Formulation for Exforge HCTZ Drug AMLO Label claim(mg) 5 5 5 HCTZ 12.5 12.5 12.5
Amt estimated(mg) 5.01 5.06 4.96 12.74 12.65 12.40
Assay results S.D*
100.321.02
100.81.43
Page 145
Chapter1
Introduction
VALS
160 160 160
162.27 161.37 157.49 100.271.57
5.3.4 Conclusion :
By the virtue developed method, it can be concluded that high performance thin layer chromatography method is reliable technique for the analysis of commercial formulations of AMLO, HCTZ and VALS in tablet dosage form. The developed method is simple , sensitive, and specific which renders it suitable analysis of AMLO, HCTZ and VALS in combined dosage form and this method is specific which show developed method is free from the interference of excipients used in formulation.
Page 146
Chapter1
Introduction
5.4 DEVELOPMENT AND VALIDATION OF RP-HPLC METHOD FOR SIMULTANEOUS ESIMATION OF AMLO, HCTZ AND VALS IN THEIR COMBINED DOSAGE FORM
5.4.1 Instrumentation 5.4.1.1 High performance liquid chromatography Model: JASCO 200 Series Manufacturer: JASCO, Inc. JAPAN Pump: JASCO PU-2080 plus Mixer : JASCO MX-2080-31 Injector: Rheodyne model 7125 with 20 l fixed loop Detector: JASCO-UV-2075 PLUS Software: Borwin software version 1.50 was used 5.4.1.2 PH Meter Model : 11 E/101E Manufacturer: Analabs scientific instrument Ltd. PH : 0 to 14 Resoultion : 0.01 PH Accuracy : 0.01 PH 14 digit
5.4.1.3 Analytical Balance: Model: KEROY Manufacturer: Keroy (balance) pvt. Ltd. Varanasi, India. Weighing capacity: 100gm
Chapter1
Introduction
5.4.1.4
Sonicator:
Model: TRANS-O-SONIC; D-compect. Capacity: 2 Lit.
5.4.2
Materials and methods
5.4.2.1 Chemicals and Materials Methanol (AR Grade, S.D. Fine chemicals Ltd., Mumbai , India Acetonitrile (HPLC Grade, S.D. Fine chemicals Ltd., Mumbai , India) Water HPLC & Spectroscopy ( central drug house (p) Ltd., New Delhi Tablet containing AMLO(5 mg), HCTZ (12.5 mg) and VALS(160 mg) Brand name: Exforge HCTZ, Name of manufacturer API Amlodipine Besylate (AMLO) gifted sample from API Hydrochlorthiazide (HCTZ) gifted sample API Valsartan (VALS) gifted sample
5.4.2.2 Chromatographic Conditions 5.4.2.2.1 Optimized Chromatographic Conditions Stationary phase: Kromasil Column KR-5C 18 (250 mm 4.6mm i.d., 5m) Mobile phase: Acetronitrile : potassium dihyrogen ortho phosphate buffer with ) 0.2% TEA(44 :56, v/v) , PH 3.7 adjusted with OPA Wavelength: 232 nm Runtime: 15 Min. Flow rate: 1ml/min Diluent : ACN and Millipore Water(50:50, v/v) Retention time for HCTZ : 3.78 Min Retention time for AMLO: 3.15 Min Retention time for VALS : 10.15 Min
Page 148
Chapter1
Introduction
Optimization of the chromatographic condition was studied by checking the effect of chromatographic variables such as temperature, back pressure, flow rate and solvent ratio. The resulting chromatograms were recorded and the chromatographic parameters which give the best peak resolution were selected for analysis. 5.4.2.3 Preparation of Mobile phase Mobile phase A: HPLC grade Acetonitrile was degassed with sonicator for 15 min. Mobile phase B: 3402.25 mg of KH2PO4 (potassium dihydrogen ortho phosphate ) was dissolved in 500 triple dist. Water and add 1 ml HPLC grade triethylamine (0.2%) and pH 3.7 adjusted with ortho phosphoric acid. 5.4.2.4 Preparation of Standard Stock Solution of AMLO, HCTZ and VALS 25 mg AMLO, HCTZ and VALS was weighed accurately and dissolved each standard drug in separately in 25 ml methanol in different volumetric flasks. 1 ml aliquots of the above solutions were diluted to 10 ml with methanol in different volumetric flasks to produce 100 g/ml of AMLO and 100 g/ml of HCTZ 5.4.2.5 Preparation of ternary mixtures of AMLO, HCTZ and VALS Suitable aliquots of standard stock solution of AMLO, HCTZ and VALS are mixed and diluted to volume with ACN and Millipore water (50:50) to obtain different ternary mixture solutions containing AMLO, HCTZ and VALS in different ratio Concentration of solution in the range 2 to 150 g/ml was prepared for the calibration curve of three drugs. Table 57: Observation and remarks of mobile phase optimization
Sr. no.
Mobile phase composition ACN :0.025 M potassium dihydrogen ortho phosphate (60:40v/v) PH 3.7
Inference
Conclusion
Peak was not suitable for quantitative
M.P was not suitable
Page 149
Chapter1
Introduction
ACN :0.025 M potassium dihydrogen ortho phosphate (50:50v/v), PH 3.7
VALS RT greater than 10 min
ACN :0.025 M potassium dihydrogen ortho phosphate (57:43v/v) , TEA 0.1%, PH 3.7 ACN : 0.025 M potassium dihydrogen ortho phosphate (43:57v/v) TEA 0.2%, PH 3.7
Asymmetry greater than 1.5
4.
Asymmetry was less as compare to 0.1% TEA
5.
ACN : 0.050 M potassium dihydrogen ortho phosphate (44:56v/v) , TEA 0.2%, PH 3.7
Peak was suitable for quantitative
M.P was suitable (Optimized)
Fig.31: HPLC Chromatogram of Blank (diluents) ACN: Water (50:50, V/V)
Page 150
Chapter1
Introduction
Fig.32: HPLC Chromatogram of HCTZ Fig.33: HPLC chromatogram of standard drug of AMLO
Fig.34: HPLC Chromatogram of standard mixture of AMLO, HCTZ and VALS
Page 151
Chapter1
Introduction
Table 58: System suitability parameter by RP-HPLC method Sr. no Parameters AMLO HCTZ VALS
1 2. 3. 4. 5.
Capacity Factor Tailing factor Resolution factor Theoretical plates % RSD of Peak Area
0.3695 1.30 3.175 5378 0.48
0.6434 1.41 6357 1.85
3.4130 1.05 10.37 4886 0.52
5.4.2.6 Method validation 1) Preparation of Linearity curve For estimation of AMLO, calibration curve (n=3) was plotted in the range of (2-25 g/mL). For estimation of HCTZ calibration curve (n=3) was plotted in the range of (5-45 g/mL). For estimation of VALS calibration curve (n=3) was plotted in the range of (20-150
g/mL).Calibration curve of peak area v/s concentration was plotted for the drug. 2) Precision Intraday and Interday precision For intraday precision, the experiment was repeated three times in a day using three different concentrations for AMLO (5, g/ml 10, 15 g/ml), for HCTZ (10, 15, 20 g/ml) and for VALS (80,100,120 g/mL) For Interday precision, the experiment was repeated on three different days using three
different concentrations respectively AMLO, HCTZ and for VALS Precision find out in terms of %RSD.
Chapter1
Introduction
Repeatability In the repeatability the peak area of sample solutions for AMLO, HCTZ, VALS (5, 15, 100 g/ml) were taken by 6 times and find out the % RSD.
3) LOD AND LOQ From the linearity curve equations, the standard deviations (SD) of the intercepts (response) were calculated. Then LOD and LOQ were measured for all the three drugs by using mathematical expressions.
4) Accuracy Sample concentration was taken 2 g/mL for AMLO, 4 g/ml for HCTZ and for VALS 64 g/ml. After that accuracy of the method was determined by standard addition method at three different levels (80%, 100% and 120%). 5.4.2.7 Analysis of marketed dosage form Total 14 tablets were weighed accurately and powdered.An amount equivalent to one tablet (containing 5 mg of AMLO, 12.5 mg of HCTZ and 160 mg of VALS) was taken and dissolved in 100 ml methanol in 100 ml volumetric flask Solution was sonicated for 15 minutes. After solution was filtered by using Whatmann filter paper No.41.From this solution, 5 ml of sample solution was taken in 50 ml volumetric flask and diluted with diluent ACN:Water (50:50) final solution containing 5 g/ml concentration of AMLO ,12.5 g/ml HCTZ and 160 g/ml concentration of VALS.
5.4.3 Results and Discussion

5.4.3.1 Validation parameters 1) Linearity The correlation coefficient (r2) was found to be 0.9945, 0.9965, and 0.9971 for AMLO, HCTZ and VALS respectively.
Page 153
Chapter1
Introduction
Table 59: Calibration data of AMLO by RP-HPLC with UV PDA detection Peak Area Sr. No. Conc. (g/ml) Mean SD* 1 2 3 4 5 6 2 5 10 15 20 25 144942 1936.48 327329.51376.5 50262 2063 796769.36361.674 11170131489.079 13725909579.747 %RSD 1.33 0.42 0.41 0.79 0.13 0.69
1600000 1400000 1200000 1000000 800000 600000 400000 200000
y = 53407x + 24828 R = 0.994

0 5 10
15
20
25
30
Page 154
Chapter1
Introduction
Fig.35: Linearity curve for AMLO
Table 60: Calibration data of HCTZ by RP-HPLC with UV PDA detection Peak Area Mean SD* 1 2 3 4 5 6 5 10 15 25 35 45 826897.34122.691 148119517761.38 197599515134.72 35574276076.3 503966041762.14 606955936571.47 %RSD 0.49 1.19 0.76 0.45 0.82 0.60
Sr. No.
Conc. (g/ml)
7000000 6000000 5000000 4000000 3000000 2000000 1000000 0 0 10 20 30 40 50
y = 13528x + 11458 R = 0.996
Page 155
Chapter1
Introduction
Fig.36: Linearity curve for HCTZ
Peak Area Sr. No. Conc (g/ml) Mean SD* 1 2 3 4 5 6 20 40 60 80 120 150 161341316557.68 325834232479.94 617468382500.03 80224449798.269 1303326245680.19 1589395296053.33 %RSD 1.02 0.99 1.33 0.12 0.35 0.60
Table 61: Calibration data of VALS by RP-HPLC with PDA UV detection
18000000 16000000 14000000 12000000 10000000 8000000 6000000 4000000 2000000 0 0
y = 11282x - 83839 R = 0.997

50 100 150 200
Page 156
Chapter1
Introduction
Fig. 37: Linearity curve for VALS
Fig. 38
MIXTURE LINEARTY CURVE OF AMLO, HCTZ AND VALS BY HPLC
Peak Area Drug Concentration (g/ml) 5 AMLO 10 15 Mean SD* 306648.72519.684 562226.71300.598 865629.75262.363 %RSD 0.82 0.23 0.60
Page 157
Chapter1
Introduction
10 HCTZ 15 20 80 VALS 100 120 2) Precision
13668687087.164 219059445155.87 271234923962.09 772358530225.43 989746860556.46 13142484202472.7
0.51 2.06 0.88 0.39 0.61 1.54
Table 62- Intraday precision data of AMLO, HCTZ AND VALS by HPLC Table 63: Intraday precision data of AMLO, HCTZ AND VALS by HPLC Peak Area Drug Concentration (g/ml) 5 AMLO 10 15 10 HCTZ 15 20 80 VALS 100
Mean SD* 309600.73256.28 502668.32644.688 773136.3253.4213 136914910733.71 211000710417.99 267864933853.87 777402543345.03 993643953407.12
%RSD 1.05 0.52 0.33 0.78 0.49 1.26 0.55 0.53

Page 158
Chapter1
Introduction
120
1301815934631.55
0.26
Table 64: Repeatibilty study of AMLO, HCTZ and VALS
Drug
Conc. (g/ml)
Peak AreaSD*
%RSD
AMLO
29171968.42
0.71
HCTZ
15
18334406751.29
0.36
VALS
100
938193792487.03
0.98
Table 65: % Recovery study of AMLO, HCTZ and VALS
ACCURACY INITIAL CONC. g/ml STD. Added g/ml TOTAL CONC. After spiking g /ml
DRUG
Conc. Recovered MeanSD*
%RSD
%Recovery %RSD Mean SD*
1.6
3.6
3.58330.049
1.13
99.573330.32
1.33
AMLO
2 2.4
4 4.4
4.01460.046 4.45660.037
1.42 0.69
101.42330.75 101.42330.07
0.75 0.76
Page 159
Chapter1
Introduction
8.8766056
0.82
98.353330.01
0.95
HCTZ
5 6
10 11
9.95330.037 10.90330.08
0.49 0.95
98.353330.04 99.166670.76
1.47 0.76
51.2
115.2
117.8060.101
0.18
102.01670.074
0.74
VALS
64
64 76.8
128 140.8
129.4662.085 140.37330.883
1.61 0.62
101.09670.056 99.690.0637
1.56 0.63
Table 66: LOD and LOQ Parameter AMLO HCTZ VALS
LOD
0.23 g/ml
0.48 g/ml
1.1
LOQ
0.71 g/ml
1.47 g/ml
3.3
Table 67- Robustness study of AMLO
Parameters
Change
Mean of Peak Area %RSD
%Assay
Flow Rate (0.2 ml/min)
0.8
2936241.74
98.25
Page 160
Chapter1
Introduction
1.2
2904940.52
100.0
3.65 PH ( 0.05) 3.75
382701.71.53
99.82
210569.21.74
100.2
230 Wavelength ( 2 nm) 234
12836530.29
100.42
12489260.51
101.04
Table 68: Robustness study of HCTZ
Parameters
Change
Mean %RSD
%Assay
Flow Rate (0.2ml/min.)
0.8
19520661.17
98.44
1.2
681237.70.88
99.38
3.65 PH (0.05) 3.75
13658011.55
101.59
12805860.56
98.15
Wave Length
230
14799090.95
99.77
Page 161
Chapter1
Introduction
( 2nm)
234
15599061.79
98.51
Table 69 Robustness study of VALS Parameters Change Mean %RSD %Assay
Flow Rate (0.2 ml/min)
0.8 1.2 3.65
178625950.8 162600241.0 136887281.3
98.60 98.79 98.48
P ( 0.05) 3.75 118075061.4 101.76
Wave Length (2 nm)
230
117413080.8
98.45
234
97272071.30
98.43
Table 70: Summary of Validation parameters of RP-HPLC
Sr.no 1.
Parameters Linearity range (g/ml)
AMLO 2-25
HCTZ 5-45
VALS 20-150 y = 112822x83839 0.9971
2.
Regression equation
y =53047x+24828
y=135283x+114584
3.
Correlation coefficient (r2)
0.9945
0.9967
Page 162
Chapter1
Introduction
Precision Intraday % RSD (n = 3) 4. Interday % RSD (n = 3) Repeatability of measurements % RSD 5. 6. 7. Specificity LOD (g/ml) LOQ (g/ml) 0.23-1.82 0.03-1.05 0.5-1.4 0.5-2.0 0.49-1.26 0.24-0.36 0.39-1.54 0.26-0.55 0.77-1.01
Specific 0.23 0..71 99.571.33 to 101.420.75
Specific 0.48 0.1.47 98.350.19 to 99.16 0.76
Specific 1.1 3.3 99.69 0. 63 to 1002.010.074
8.
% Recovery
Table 71: Analysis of Marketed Dosage Form Amt estimated(mg) 4.95 4.91 4.92 12.66 12.44 99.870.87 98.660.36 Assay results % recovery S.D*
Drugs
Label claim(mg) 5
AMLO
5 5 12.5
HCTZ
12.5
Page 163
Chapter1
Introduction
12.5 160 VALS 160 160
12.39 158.31 161.77 162.92 100.621.49
Fig.39: HPLC Chromatogram of Marketed Dosage Form
5.4.4 Conclusion By the virtue developed method, it can be concluded that high performance Liquid chromatography method is reliable technique for the analysis of commercial formulations of AMLO, HCTZ and VALS in tablet dosage form. The developed method is simple, sensitive, and specific which renders it suitable analysis of AMLO, HCTZ and VALS in
combined dosage form and this method is specific which show developed method is free from the interference of excipients used in formulation
Page 164
Chapter1
Introduction
5.5 COMPARISON OF UV-VIS SPECTROPHOTOMETRIC, HPTLC AND RP-HPLC METHOD

Table72: COMPARISON OF UV-VIS SPECTROPHOTOMETRIC, HPTLC AND RP-HPLC METHODS FOR ESTIMATION OF AMLO, HCTZ and VALS IN TABLET DOSAGE FORM
Page 165
Chapter1
Introduction
% Assay results Brand name Drugs U.V 98.66 AMLO 98.45 100.3 98.82 Exforge HCTZ HCTZ 98.40 98.20 98.33 VALS 98.75 99.20 HPTLC 100.28 101.37 98.79 101.97 101.23 99.26 98.59 99.15 101.61 RP-HPLC 99.07 98.36 98.55 100.8 99.52 99.13 101.10 101.82 98.94
Table 49 - Comparison of three Methods by ANOVA Test Brand name Exforge HCTZ Drugs AMLO Fcal 1.63 F crit 4.066
Page 166
Chapter1
Introduction
HCTZ VALS
3.68 1.18
4.066 4.066
5.5.2 Conclusion ANOVA result was performed by using Microsoft excel and graph pad instate, version 3.05, 32 bit. So developed methods were compared statistically by ANOVA test. The results show that there is no significant statistical difference between the results obtained by above mentioned methods. In the cases, Fcal is less than Critical.
Page 167
Chapter1
Introduction
Page 168
Chapter1
Introduction
Page 169
Chapter1
Introduction
Page 170
Chapter1
Introduction
Page 171

Experimental Work

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originalbeschreibung:

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Experimental Work

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Chapter1

CHAPTER 5 EXPERIMENTAL WORK

Institute of pharmacy, Nirma university

Drug AMLO HCTZ VALS

Reported melting point (0C) 199-201 273-275 116-117

Observed melting point (0C) 200-202 274-275 117-118

Institute of pharmacy, Nirma university

Fig. 5: UV spectrum of AMLO (20g/mL) in methanol

Institute of pharmacy, Nirma university

Fig.6: UV spectrum of HCTZ (20g/mL) in methanol

Fig.7: UV spectrum of VALS (20g/mL) in methanol

Institute of pharmacy, Nirma university

Drug AMLO HCTZ VALS

Reported maxima 239nm, 238nm 225nm, 271nm, 317nm 249nm

Recorded maxima 237.6nm,210.8nm 270.2nm,316.6nm 249.2nm, 206nm, 243.8nm

Table 26: Wavelength maxima for AMLO, HCTZ and VALS

5.1.3 Determination of Infrared (IR) Spectra

THEORITCAL WAVE NUMBER(CM-1) (85)

RECORDED WAVE NUMBER(CM-1) 3372 752.102

-NH2 stretching -C-Cl

C-H bending C=O Ester -C-O Ether

1465-1375 1750-1730 1300-1000

1440.56 1765.99 1265.07

SPECIFICATION FOR HCTZ

THEO RITICAL WAVE NUMBER (CM-1) (85)

RECORDED WAVE NUMBER (CM-1)

(S=O) C-H stretch Mono substituted benzene

1050 3000-2850 900-690

1078.98 2963.09 996.053

Institute of pharmacy, Nirma university

-C-N - Amine Amide group

SPECIFICATION OF FOR VALS

THEORITICAL WAVE NUMBER (CM-1)(85) 3000-2850

RECORDED WAVE NUMBER (CM-1) 2834.85

Institute of pharmacy, Nirma university

ketone (C=O) stretch -NH2 stretching

METHOD FOR SIMULTANEOUS

ESIMATION OF AMLO, HCTZ AND VALS IN THEIR COMBINED DOSAGE FORM

Institute of pharmacy, Nirma university

Institute of pharmacy, Nirma university

is the concentration of AMLO, CHCTZ is the

Institute of pharmacy, Nirma university

Institute of pharmacy, Nirma university

Institute of pharmacy, Nirma university

5.2.3 Results and Discussion

Institute of pharmacy, Nirma university

Fig 12: Linearity Curve for AMLO at 237.6 nm

Institute of pharmacy, Nirma university

Fig. 12: Linearity Curve for HCTZ at 270.2 nm

270.2nm Mean Abs. S.D* %RSD

249.2nm Mean Abs. %RSD S.D*

0.2970.0021 0.6180.0023 0.9250.0015

0.70 0.37 0.16 0.12 0.12

0.0320.0012 0.0830.0013 0.1370.0016 0.1920.0015 0.2650.0020 88.086

1.56 1.16 0.78 0.37

1.2450.0035 1.5640.0032 615.55

Institute of pharmacy, Nirma university

Fig.13: Calibration Curve of VALS at 249.2 nm

237.6nm Conc. g/ml Mean Abs.S.D* %RSD

0.98 0.34 0.25 0.30 0.97

0.1460.0015 0.2790.0035 0.4330.0017 0.5530.0031 0.6820.0021

1.02 0.53 0.34 0.56 0.30

0.3100.027 0.5830.025 0.8950.021 1.1670.032 1.4620.021