Abo-Talib Nisreen F, El-Ghobashy Mohamed R, Tammam Marwa H
National Organization for Drug Control and Research, Bioavailability Center, 51 Wezaret El-Zeraa St, Dokki, 11562 Cairo, Egypt.
Cairo University, Faculty of Pharmacy, Analytical Chemistry Department, Kasr El-Aini St, ET-11562 Cairo, Egypt.
J AOAC Int. 2017 Jul 1;100(4):976-984. doi: 10.5740/jaoacint.16-0330. Epub 2017 Feb 10.
Sofosbuvir and ledipasvir are the first drugs in a combination pill to treat chronic hepatitis C virus. Simple, sensitive, and rapid spectrophotometric methods are presented for the determination of sofosbuvir and ledipasvir in their combined dosage form. These methods were based on direct measurement of ledipasvir at 333 nm (due to the lack of interference of sofosbuvir) over a concentration range of 4.0-14.0 µg/mL, with a mean recovery of 100.78 ± 0.64%. Sofosbuvir was determined, without prior separation, by third-derivative values at 281 nm; derivative ratio values at 265.8 nm utilizing 5.0 µg/mL ledipasvir as a divisor; the ratio difference method using values at 270 and 250 nm using 5.0 µg/mL ledipasvir as a divisor; and the ratio subtraction method using values at 261 nm. These methods were found to be linear for sofosbuvir over a concentration range of 5.0-35.0 µg/mL. The suggested methods were validated according to International Conference on Harmonization guidelines. Statistical analysis of the results showed no significant difference between the proposed methods and the manufacturer's LC method of determination with respect to accuracy and precision. These methods were used to compare the equivalence of an innovator drug dosage form and two generic drug dosage forms of the same strength.
索磷布韦和来迪派韦是复方药丸中首批用于治疗慢性丙型肝炎病毒的药物。本文介绍了用于测定复方剂型中索磷布韦和来迪派韦的简单、灵敏且快速的分光光度法。这些方法基于在333 nm处直接测定来迪派韦(由于索磷布韦无干扰),浓度范围为4.0 - 14.0 µg/mL,平均回收率为100.78 ± 0.64%。索磷布韦在未经预先分离的情况下,通过281 nm处的三阶导数值、以5.0 µg/mL来迪派韦作为除数时265.8 nm处的导数比值、以5.0 µg/mL来迪派韦作为除数时使用270和250 nm处的值的比值差法以及使用261 nm处的值的比值减法来测定。发现这些方法对于索磷布韦在5.0 - 35.0 µg/mL的浓度范围内呈线性。所建议的方法根据国际协调会议指南进行了验证。结果的统计分析表明,所提出的方法与制造商的液相色谱测定方法在准确性和精密度方面没有显著差异。这些方法用于比较同一强度的创新药物剂型和两种仿制药剂型的等效性。