Development and validation of spectrophotometric, TLC and HPLC methods for the determination of lamotrigine in presence of its impurity.

Three reliable, rapid and selective methods have been developed and validated for the determination of lamotrigine in the presence of its impurity, 2,3-dichlorobenzoic acid. The first method is spectrophotometric method using p-chloranilic acid forming a colored product with lambda(max) 519+/-2 nm. All variables affecting the reaction have been investigated and the conditions were optimized. Beer's law was obeyed over a concentration range of 10-200 microg ml(-1) with mean accuracy 100.13+/-0.44%. The molar ratio of the formed ion-association complex is found to be 1 : 1 as deduced by Job's method. The conditional stability constant (K(f)), standard free energy (DeltaG), molar absorptivity(epsilon), and sensitivity index were evaluated. The second method is based on TLC separation of the cited drug (Rf=0.75+/-0.01) from its impurity (Rf=0.23+/-0.01) followed by densitometric measurement of the intact drug spots at 275 nm. The separation was carried on silica gel plates using ethyl acetate : methanol : ammonia 35% (17 : 2 : 1 v/v/v) as a mobile phase. The linearity range was 0.5-10 microg/spot with mean accuracy 99.99+/-1.33%. The third method is accurate and sensitive stability-indicating HPLC method based on separation of lamotrigine from its impurity on a reversed phase C(18) column, using a mobile phase of acetonitrile : methanol : 0.01 M potassium orthophosphate (pH 6.7+/-0.1) (30 : 20 : 50 v/v/v) at ambient temperature 25+/-5 degrees C and UV detection at 275 nm in an overall analysis time of about 6 min., based on peak area. The injection repeatability, intraday and interday repeatability were calculated. The procedure provided a linear response over the concentration range 1-12 microg ml(-1) with mean accuracy of 99.50+/-1.30%. The proposed methods were successfully applied for the determination of lamotrigine in bulk powder, in dosage form and in presence of its impurity. The results obtained were analyzed by ANOVA to assess that no significant difference between each of the three methods and the reported one. The validation was performed according to USP guidelines.