4.1 Article

Stability-Indicating HPTLC Method for Quantitative Estimation of Asenapine Maleate in Pharmaceutical Formulations, Equilibrium Solubility, and ex vivo Diffusion Studies

期刊

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS INC
DOI: 10.1080/10826076.2015.1092448

关键词

Asenapine maleate; equilibrium solubility study; ex vivo diffusion study; HPTLC; stability indicating method; validation

资金

  1. Science and Engineering Research Board, Department of Science and Technology, Government of India, New Delhi [SR/FT/LS-135/2012]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

New high-performance thin layer chromatography (HPTLC) has been successfully developed and validated for quantitative estimation of Asenapine maleate in both marketed tablets and in-house developed formulations (solution, microemulsion, nanoemulsion, and mucoadhesive nanoemulsion) as well as for equilibrium solubility study and ex vivo diffusion study of developed formulation through natural membrane. As suggested by the International Conference on Harmonization, different stress test conditions (alkali, acid, thermal, photolytic, and humidity) were used to degrade Asenapine maleate. The samples produced from this study were utilized to develop a stability indicating HPTLC method. The Asenapine maleate was separated well from degradation products using HPTLC plate; precoated with silica gel G 60F(254) on aluminum sheet as a stationary phase and methanol as a mobile phase. Using densitometric analysis, Asenapine maleate was quantified at 235nm. The method produced compact band for the drug (R-f=0.43+0.02). The HPTLC method was validated and statistical analysis of the data confirmed the method to be specific, linear, accurate, precise, reproducible, and selective for Asenapine maleate's analysis. This method was successfully used for assay of Asenapine maleate in both marketed tablets and in-house developed formulations, determining equilibrium solubility in various excipients as well as its ex vivo diffusion study through sheep nasal mucosa from the formulations developed in-house.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.1
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据