Advertisement

Robust Optimization of Chaotropic Chromatography Assay for Lamotrigine and its Two Impurities in Tablets

  • Jelena Čolović
  • Milena Rmandić
  • Anđelija Malenović
Original
  • 13 Downloads

Abstract

In this study robust optimization was applied for the development of a reliable analytical assay for lamotrigine, its impurity A, and impurity G in tablets by chaotropic chromatography. The influence of the critical method parameters (acetonitrile content, concentration of chaotropic agent, and pH of the water phase) on the set of selected critical method attributes (retention factor of impurity A, separation factor between lamotrigine and impurity G, and retention factor of impurity G) is studied by Box–Behnken design. Monte Carlo simulations were applied to propagate the errors originating from the model coefficients’ calculation to the selected responses and obtain their predictive distribution. Design space was defined (π ≥ 95%) and a working point selected: 23% of acetonitrile in the mobile phase, 77% of water phase containing 140 mM of perchloric acid, and pH of the water phase adjusted to 2.50. Further robustness testing was performed by Plackett–Burman design to evaluate the quantitative performance of the developed method. The obtained models included not only active main effects but also interactions that were identified as active with the aid of an alias matrix approach and examination of resulting alias plots. The method was validated and its reliability for routine pharmaceutical analysis confirmed.

Graphical Abstract

Keywords

Chaotropic chromatography Lamotrigine Impurities Analytical quality by design Robustness testing of quantitative method performance 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors thank to the Ministry of Education, Science and Technological Development of the Republic of Serbia for supporting this investigation through Project 172052.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

Authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.

References

  1. 1.
    EDQM Council of Europe (2017) Pharmacopoeia European, 9th edn. EDQM Council of Europe, Strasburg, p. 2873–2874Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Srinivasulu P, Mukkanti K, Reguri BR, Srinivas KSV (2009) Development of a validated stability indicating LC method for lamotrigine. Chromatographia 70:271–276CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Ashton DS, Ray AD, Valko K (1999) Detection of the principal synthetic route indicative impurity in lamotrigine. Int J Pharm 189:241–248CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    The United States Pharmacopeia (2011) 35/National Formulary 30. United States Pharmacopeia Convention, RockvilleGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Emami J, Ghassami N, Ahmadi F (2006) Development and validation of a new HPLC method for determination of lamotrigine and related compounds in tablet formulations. J Pharm Biomed Anal 40:999–1005CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Vemić A, Kalinić M, Čolović J, Erić S, Malenović A (2017) Recent progress in fundamental understanding and practice of chaotropic chromatography: rationalizing the effects of analytes’ structure with pharmaceutical applications. Adv Chromatogr 2017:1–41Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kazakevich Y, LoBrutto R (2007) HPLC for pharmaceutical scientists, vol 432, 1st edn. Wiley, New JerseyCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    LoBrutto R, Jones A, Kazakevich Y, McNair HM (2001) Effect of the eluent pH and acidic modifiers on the HPLC retention of basic analytes. J Chromatogr A 913 435:173–187CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    LoBrutto R, Jones A, Kazakevich Y (2001) Effect of counter-anion concentration on retention in high-performance liquid chromatography of protonated basic analytes. J Chromatogr A 913:189–196CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Pan L, LoBrutto R, Kazakevich YV, Thompson R (2004) Influence of inorganic mobile phase additives on the retention, efficiency and peak symmetry of protonated basic compounds in reversed-phase liquid chromatography. J Chromatogr A 1049:63–73CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Roberts JM, Diaz AR, Fortin DT, Friedle JM, Piper SD (2002) Influence of the Hofmeister series on the retention of amines in reversed-phase liquid chromatography. Anal Chem 74:4927–4933CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Flieger J, Siwek A, Pizoń M (2013) Usefulness of chaotropic salt additive in RP-HPLC of organic nonionized compounds. J Sep Sci 36:469–476CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Jones RA, LoBrutto R, Kazakevich YV (2002) Effect of the counter-anion type and concentration on the liquid chromatography retention of β-blockers. J Chromatogr A 964:179–187CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Pilorz K, Choma I (2004) Isocratic reversed-phase high-performance liquid chromatographic separation of tetracyclines and flumequine controlled by a chaotropic effect. J Chromatogr A 1031:303–311CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Flieger J (2007) Effect of mobile phase composition on the retention of selected alkaloids in reversed-phase liquid chromatography with chaotropic salts. J Chromatogr A 1175:207–216. 445CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Flieger RJ, S´wieboda R (2008) Application of chaotropic effect in reversed-phase liquid chromatography of structurally related phenothiazine and thioxanthene derivatives. J Chromatogr A 1192:218–224. 448CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Flieger J, Czajkowska-Z˙elazko A (2011) Comparison of chaotropic salt and ionic liquid as mobile phase additives in reversed phase high-performance liquid chromatography of biogenic amines. J Sep Sci 34:733–739CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Lu J, Wei Y, Rustum AM (2010) A stability-indicating reversed-phase high performance liquid chromatography method for simultaneous assay of two corticosteroids and estimation of their related compounds in a pharmaceutical injectable formulation. J Chromatogr A 1217:6932–6941CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Vemić A, Jančić Stojanović B, Stamenković I, Malenović A (2013) Chaotropic agents in liquid chromatographic method development for the simultaneous analysis of levodopa, carbidopa, entacapone and their impurities. J Pharm Biomed Anal 77:9–15CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Vemić A, Malenović A, Medenica M (2014) The influence of inorganic salts with chaotropic properties on the chromatographic behavior of ropinirole and its two impurities. Talanta 123:122–127CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Vemić A, Rakić T, Malenović A, Medenica M (2015) Chaotropic salts in liquid chromatographic method development for the determination of pramipexole and its impurities following quality-by-design principles. J Pharm Biomed Anal 102:314–320CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Pantović J, Malenović A, Vemić A, Kostić N, Medenica M (2015) Development of liquid chromatographic method for the analysis of dabigatran etexilate mesilate and its ten impurities supported by quality-by-design methodology. J Pharm Biomed Anal 111:7–13CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Milošević N, Vemić A, Čolović J, Kostić N, Malenović A (2017) Design of experiments–design space approach for development of chaotropic chromatography method for determination of trimetazidine dihydrochloride and two impurities. Chromatographia 80:585–592CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Dispas A, Avohou H, Lebrun P, Hubert P, Hubert C (2018) ‘Quality by Design’ approach for the analysis if impurities in pharmaceutical drug products and drug substances. Trends Anal Chem 101:23–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Debrus B, Lebrun P, Rozet E, Schofield T, Mbinze JK, Marini RD, Rudaz S, Boulanger B, Hubert P (2013) A new method for quality by design robust optimization in liquid chromatography. LC GC Eur 26:370–377Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Debrus B, Guillarme D, Rudaz S (2013) Improved quality-by-design compliant methodology for method development in reversed-phase liquid chromatography. J Pharm Biomed Anal 84:215–223CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Nistora I, Lebrun P, Ceccato A, Lecomte F, Slama I, Oprean R, Badarau E, Dufour F, Dossou KSS, Fillet M, Liégeois JF, Hubert P, Rozet E (2013) Implementation of a design space approach for enantiomeric separations in polar organic solvent chromatography. J Pharm Biomed Anal 74:273–283CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Turpin J, Lukulay PH, Verseput R, Krull I, Swartz M (2008) A quality-by-design methodology for rapid LC method development, Part I. LC GC N Am 26:1190–1197Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Turpin J, Lukulay PH, Verseput R, Krull I, Swartz M (2009) A quality-by-design methodology for rapid LC method development, Part II. LC GC N Am 27:48–61Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Turpin J, Lukulay PH, Verseput R, Krull I, Swartz M (2009) A quality-by-design methodology for rapid LC method development, Part III. LC GC N Am 27:328–340Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Dobričić V, Vukadinović D, Jančić-Stojanović B, Vladimirov S, Čudina O (2017) AQbD-oriented development of a new LC method for simultaneous determination of telmisartan and its impurities. Chromatographia 80(8):1199–1209CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Grigori K, Loukas YL, Malenović A, Samara V, Kalaskani A, Dimovasili E, Kalovidouri M, Dotsikas Y (2017) Chemometrically assisted development and validation of LC–MS/MS method for the analysis of potential genotoxic impurities in meropenem active pharmaceutical ingredient. J Pharm Biomed Anal 145:307–314CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Iliou K, Malenović A, Loukas Y, Dotsikas Y (2018) Analysis of potential genotoxic impurities in rabeprazole activepharmaceutical ingredient via liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry, following quality-by-design principles for method development. J Pharm Biomed Anal 149:410–418CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Dispas A, Lebrun P, Andri B, Rozet E, Hubert P (2014) Robust method optimization strategy—a useful tool for method transfer: the case of SFC. J Pharm Biomed Anal 88:519–524CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Andri B, Lebrun P, Dispas A, Klinkenberg R, Streel B, Ziemons E, Marini RD, Hubert PH (2017) Optimization and validation of a fast supercritical fluid chromatography method for the quantitative determination of vitamin D3 and its related impurities. J Chromatogr A 1491:171–181CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Furlanetto S, Orlandini S, Pasquini S, Del Bubba M, Pinzauti S (2013) Quality by design approach in the development of a solvent-modified micellar electrokinetic chromatography method: finding the design space for the determination of amitriptyline and its impurities. Ana Chim Acta 802:113–124CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Krait S, Douša M, Scriba GKE (2016) Quality by design-guided development of a capillary electrophoresis method for the chiral purity determination of ambrisentan. Chromatographia 79(19–20):1343–1350CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Lawson J (2002) Regression analysis of experiments with complex confounding patterns guided by the alias matrix. Comput Stat Data Anal 39:227–241CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Hamada M, Wu CFJ (1992) Analysis of designed experiments with complex aliasing. J Qual Technol 24:130–137CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Box GEP, Meyer RD (1993) Finding the active factors in fractionated screening experiments. J Qual Technol 25:94–105CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Chipman H, Hamada M, Wu CFJ (1997) A bayesian variable-selection approach for analyzing designed experiments with complex aliasing. Technometrics 39:372–381CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Cela R, Claeys-Bruno M, Phan-Tan-Luu R (2009) Screening strategies. In: Brown S, Tauler R, Walczak B (eds) Comprehensive chemometrics: chemical and biochemical data analysis. Elsevier, Amsterdam, p. 251–298CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Schoenmakers P (1986) Optimization of chromatographic selectivity: a guide to method development. Elsevier, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Jensen WA (2016) Confirmation runs in design of experiments. J Qual Technol 48:162–177CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Dewe W, Marini RD, Chiap P, Hubert PH, Crommen J, Boulanger B (2004) Development of response models for optimizing HPLC methods. Chemom Intell Lab Syst 74:263–268CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Crowther JB (2001) Validation of pharmaceutical test methods. In: Ahuja S, Scypinski S (eds) Handbook of modern pharmaceutical analysis. Academic, New York, p. 415–443CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Drug Analysis, Faculty of PharmacyUniversity of BelgradeBelgradeSerbia

Personalised recommendations