RESUMEN

In the treatment of organophosphate poisoning atropine sulphate monohydrate (AT) and obidoxime dichloride (OB) play a vital role. Currently, the Austrian Armed Forces use the DOUBLEPEN OA two-chamber autoinjector (ChemProtect) to administer these two drugs. The autoinjector is a part of military standard equipment as a "Basic CBRN-First Aid Kit" and contains OB and AT with a declared concentration of 220 mg/2 ml and 2 mg/2 ml, respectively. Especially in the two-chamber autoinjectors, it is highly possible that not all the content of the antidote solution is administered when the autoinjector is triggered. The purpose of the study was to analyze one hundred DOUBLEPEN OA autoinjectors from two different production batches (1707068 and 1707067) for volume loss, drug content and uniformity of dosage unit. Uniformity of dosage units, assessed by the content uniformity method (Chapter 2.9.40 of the European Pharmacopeia), requires the calculation of an acceptable value to quantify the uniformity of the drug product. An acceptance value for the first 10 dosage units of 15.0% or below is considered acceptable. The loss of volume was calculated by determining the density and mass of the solution after triggering the autoinjector. A quantitative high-performance liquid chromatography method has been developed and in-house validated for the determination of the content of two drugs. According to International Council for Harmonisation guidelines, the analytical method was proven to be accurate and repeatable. The obtained results show that the average loss of volume after injection was 5%, and the average content of OB and AT for batch 1707068, was 216.5 and 1.9 mg, while for batch 1707067 it was 224.2 and 2.0 mg, respectively. Although the loss of volume and content were observed, the calculated acceptance value for both production batches met the requirements of uniformity of dosage unit by the European Pharmacopeia.

RESUMEN

This paper addresses the issue of pharmaceutical solid dosage form quantitation using handheld Raman spectrophotometers. The two spectrophotometers used are designed with different technologies: one allows getting a more representative sampling with the Orbital Raster Scanning technology and the other one allows setting acquisition parameters. The goal was to evaluate which technology could provide the best analytical results. Several parameters were optimized to get the lowest prediction error in the end. The main objective of this study was to evaluate if this kind of instrument would be able to identify substandard medicines. For that purpose, two case-study were explored. At first, a full ICH Q2 (R1) compliant validation was performed for moderate Raman scatterer active pharmaceutical ingredient (API) in a specific formulation. It was successfully validated in the ±15% relative total error acceptance limits, with a RMSEP of 0.85% (w/w). Subsequently, it was interesting to evaluate the influence of excipients when the API is a high Raman scatterer. For that purpose, a multi-formulation model was developed and successfully validated with a RMSEP of 2.98% (w/w) in the best case. These two studies showed that thanks to the optimization of acquisition parameters, Raman handheld spectrophotometers methods were validated for two different case-study and could be applied to identify substandard medicines.

RESUMEN

Simple, rapid, sensitive, accurate, precise and earth-friendly spectrophotometric methods were developed for the simultaneous analysis of ledipasvir (LED) and sofosbuvir (SOF) without interference of both sunset yellow dye and copovidone excipients (the most probable interferents) in their combined dosage form. These proposed methods were based on measurement of LED in synthetic mixtures and combined dosage form by first derivative (1D) spectrophotometry at 314 nm over the concentration range of 2-50 µg mL-1 with coefficient of determination (R2) > 0.9999, mean percentage recovery of 99.98 ±â€¯0.62. On the other hand, SOF in synthetic mixtures and combined dosage form was determined by five methods. Method I is based on the use of 1D spectrophotometry at 274.2 nm (zero crossing point of LED). Method II involves the application of conventional dual wavelength method (DW) at the absolute difference between SOF zero order amplitudes at 261 nm (λmax of SOF) and 364.7 nm. At these wavelengths, the absolute difference between LED zero order amplitudes was observed to equal zero. Method III depends on isosbestic point method (ISP) in which the total concentration of both drugs was measured at isosbestic point at 262.7 nm. Concentration of SOF could be obtained by subtraction of LED concentration. While, method IV depends on absorbance correction method (absorption factor method), which is based on determination of SOF concentration at 262.7 nm (λISP) and LED at 333 nm (λmax of LED). Finally, method V depends on absorbance ratio method (Q-analysis) in which 262.7 nm (λISP) and 261 nm (λmax of SOF) were selected to determine SOF concentration. The linearity range for all methods for SOF determination was 2-50 µg mL-1 with coefficient of determination (R2) > 0.9999. Methods I, II & III were also applied for determination of SOF concentration in single dosage form. Their mean percentage recoveries were 100.35 ±â€¯1.85, 99.97 ±â€¯0.54 and 100.03 ±â€¯0.49, for the three methods respectively. The proposed methods were validated according to international conference of harmonization (ICH) requirements and statistically compared to published reference methods. The ANOVA test confirmed that there is no significant differences between the proposed methods, and can be used for routine analysis of LED and SOF in commercial tablets. These developed methods were applied to estimate the average content and uniformity of dosage unit for LED/SOF combined dosage form and SOF single dosage form according to British pharmacopeia (BP) requirements.

Asunto(s)

Bencimidazoles/análisis , Fluorenos/análisis , Tecnología Química Verde/métodos , Sofosbuvir/análisis , Espectrofotometría/métodos , Bencimidazoles/química , Fluorenos/química , Límite de Detección , Modelos Lineales , Reproducibilidad de los Resultados , Comprimidos , Uridina Monofosfato/análogos & derivados , Uridina Monofosfato/química

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE:To compare the quality of domperidone tablets produced by 3 different factories METHODS:The quality of different products was investigated according to the standards of Ministry of Public Health and manufacture factories,including dissolubility,uniformity of dosage units,related substances and seals of blister packaging RESULTS:In 3 batches of products manufactured by Y,W and L,the contents of domperidone were 98 23%～99 74%,96 92%～98 31% and 97 42%～98 72%,and content uniformity A+1 8S was 2 11～3 38,3 97～5 25 and 5 49～7 47 respectively,which were in keeping with the Chinese pharmacopoeia;impurity R061668 was not found,and contents of impurity R052211 were 0 004%～0 024%,0 029%～0 072% and 0 003%～0 056%;the total impurity substances were 0 030%～0 095%,0 102%～0 128% and 0 232%～0 489%;the dissolubity(45min) was 95 09%～95 77%,91 25%～96 43% and 95 48%～96 58% respectively In experimental condition,no leakage was found from blister package of Y and W products,however,the leak rate of L product reached more than 38% CONCLUSION:According to this survey,the quality of product Y is the best,W is better