Int J App Pharm, Vol 14, Issue 2, 2022, 186-192Original Article

RAPID DETERMINATION OF CARBOPLATIN AND DOCETAXEL USİNG RP-HPLC WİTH PDA DETECTOR

POTTURI RAMA DEVI*, KANTIPUDI RAMBABUa

*aDepartment of Chemistry, RVR and JC College of Engineering, Guntur 522019, A. P., India
Email: ramadeviresearchanu@gmail.com

Received: 16 Nov 2021, Revised and Accepted: 05 Jan 2022

ABSTRACT

Objective: In the current investigation, to separated and validate the cancer healing drugs (Carboplatin and Docetaxel) through the HPLC (e-2695) instrument containing a PDA detector.

Methods: A simple, selective, validated and well-defined stability that shows isocratic RP-HPLC methodology for the quantitative determination of Carboplatin and Docetaxel. The chromatographic strategy utilized Symmetry C18 column of dimensions 150x4.6 mm, 3.5 micron, using isocratic elution with a mobile phase of acetonitrile and 0.1% ortho phosphoric acid (40:60). A flow rate of 1 ml/min and a detector wavelength of 225 nm utilizing the PDA detector were given in the instrumental settings. Recovery, specificity, linearity, accuracy, robustness, ruggedness were determined as a part of method validation and the results were found to be within the acceptable range. Validation of the proposed method was carried out according to an international conference on harmonization (ICH) guidelines.

Results: LOD and LOQ for the two active ingredients were established with respect to test concentration. The calibration charts plotted were linear with a regression coefficient of R2>0.999.

Conclusion: The proposed method to be fast, simple, feasible and affordable in assay condition. During stability tests, it can be used for routine analysis of production samples and to verify the quality of drug samples during stability studies.

Keywords: Carboplatin, Docetaxel, RP-HPLC, Development, Validation

© 2022 The Authors. Published by Innovare Academic Sciences Pvt Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)
DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.22159/ijap.2022v14i2.43633. Journal homepage: https://innovareacademics.in/journals/index.php/ijap

INTRODUCTION

In March 1989, the FDA authorised the medication carboplatin. Paraplatin is the trade name for carboplatin, which comes in injection form (150 mg/ml or 10 mg/ml) and is an organo platinum alkylating representative. Carboplatin is a cancer-fighting (chemotherapy) [1, 2] medication [3] that is used to treat ovarian cancer [4, 5]. The treatment of innovative ovarian cancer with a combination of carboplatin and chemotherapeutic agents. Carboplatin resembles cisplatin in terms of vomiting and nephrotoxicity [6, 7]. Carboplatin primarily reacts with alkyl groups on nucleotides [8, 9], which is necessary for DNA fragmentation [10, 11], and simple adducts after restoration enzymes correct the error. Carboplatin and plasma protein [12] have no affinity for each other. Only 40% of free platinum, on the other hand, is irreversibly attached to plasma proteins. Carboplatin is mostly eliminated in the same way as the unmodified mother compound is removed. Patients who are overdue for carboplatin may experience severe hepatotoxicity [13, 14] and neutropenia [15, 16].

Docetaxel, also known as Taxotere, is a chemotherapy medication that comes in injection (10 and 20 mg/ml) form and is used to treat a variety of cancers. Breast cancer [17, 18], head and neck cancer [19, 20], stomach cancer [21], prostate cancer [22, 23], and non-small cell lung cancer [24, 25] are some of the most common cancers. It can be used alone or in combination with other chemotherapy medications. It's given as a gradual injection into a vein. Hair loss, cytopenia (low blood cell count), numbness, shortness of breath [26], vomiting, and muscle soreness [27] are all common adverse effects. Allergies and potential malignancies are two more significant adverse effects. People with liver disorders [28, 29] are more likely to experience side effects. Using it when pregnant can harm the foetus. Docetaxel belongs to the taxane family of drugs. It operates by interfering with the normal function of microtubules [30, 31], preventing cell division. Both drug structures are shown in fig. 1. The aim of the study is to separate the pharma ingredients carboplatin and docetaxel by using RP-HPLC.

Fig. 1: Structure of (a) Carboplatin and (b) Docetaxel

Till today there are no HPLC method was reported in the literature. Hence we developed method for the simultaneous quantification of carboplatin and docetaxel. The developed HPLC method was utilized for the estimation of the combined drugs by in vitro method.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Chemicals

Acetonitrile, HPLC-grade orthophosphoric acid, water were purchased from Merck India Ltd, Mumbai, India. APIs of Carboplatin and Docetaxel standards were procured from Glenmark, Mumbai.

The Instrumentation

Waters alliance liquid chromatography (model 2695) [32] monitored with empower 2.0 data handling system and a detector of photo diode array (model 2998) [33] was used for this study.

Method optimization

To optimize the chromatographic conditions, different ratios of phosphate buffer and the acetonitrile in the mobile phase with isocratic and gradient mode was tested. However the mobile phase composition was modified at each trial to enhance the resolution and also to achieve acceptable retention times. Finally 0.1% OPA buffer and acetonitrile with isocractic elution was selected because it results in a greater response of active pharmacy ingredients. During the optimization of the method various stationary phases such as C8, C18 phenyl and amino, Symmetry C18 columns were tested. From these trials the peak shapes were relatively good with a Symmetry C18 column of 150 x 4.6 mm, 3.5 µ with a PDA detector. The mobile phase flow rate has been done at 225 nm in order to obtain enough sensitivity. By using above conditions we get retention times of Carboplatin and Docetaxel were about 2.772 and 7.386 min with a tailing factor of 1.12 and 1.04. The number of theoretical plates for Carboplatin and Docetaxel were 3072, 10999 which indicate the column’s successful output. The proposed approach suggests that it is extremely precise. According to ICH guidelines, the method established was validated.

Validation procedure

According to ICH Q2 (R1) guidelines [34, 35], analytical parameters were validated [36-40] such as system appropriateness, precision, specificity, accuracy, linearity, robustness, LOD, LOQ, forced deterioration, and stability.

Preparation of buffer

1 ml of ortho phosphoric acid was added to 1 L of HPLC grade water and filtered through 0.45 µ filter paper.

Chromatographic conditions

The HPLC analysis was performed on reverse phase HPLC system with isocratic elution mode using a mobile phase of acetonitrile and 0.1% OPA and Symmetry C18 column (150x4.6 mm, 3.5 μ) column with a flow rate of 1 ml/min.

Diluent

Mobile phase was used as diluent.

Preparation of the standard stock solution

For standard stock solution preparation, 70 ml of diluents was added to 50 mg of Carboplatin and 20 mg of Docetaxel taken in a 100 ml volumetric flask and sonicated for 10 min to dissolve the contents completely and then volume was made upto the mark with diluent.

Preparation of Standard solution

5 ml of solution was drawn from the above stock solution into a 50 ml volumetric flask and diluted up to the mark.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The main analytical challenge during development of a new method was to separate active Pharma ingredients. In order to provide a good performance the chromatographic conditions were optimized.

System suitability

In System suitability [41] injecting standard solution and reported USP tailing and plate count values are tabulated in table 1.

Specificity

In this test method placebo, sample and standard solutions were analyzed individually to examine the interference [42]. The below fig. shows that the active ingredients were well separated from blank and their excipients and there was no interference of placebo with the principal peak. Hence the method is specific.

Linearity

The area of the linearity peak versus different concentrations has been evaluated for Carboplatin, Docetaxel as 10, 25, 50, 100, 125, 150 percent respectively [43, 44]. Linearity was performed in the range of 5-75µg/ml of Carboplatin and 2-30µg/ml of Docetaxel. The correlation coefficients achieved greater than 0.999 for all.

Table 1: Results of system suitability

System suitability parameter Acceptance criteria Carboplatin Docetaxel
Mean Std dev Mean Std dev
USP Plate Count NLT 2000 3067 11.089 10971 26.912
USP Tailing NMT 2.0 1.09 0.044 1.08 0.221
USP Resolution NLT 2.0 - - 19.23 0.089
Retention time NLT 2.0 2.774 0.003 7.385 0.002

n=6

Fig. 2: Chromatogram of system suitability

Fig. 3: Chromatogram of blank

Table 2: Linearity of carboplatin and docetaxel

S. No. Parameter Obtained values
Carboplatin Docetaxel
1 Residual sum of squares 0.9997 0.9991
2 Slope 67731 45794
3 Y-Intercept 47511 3241.2

A B

Fig. 4: Calibration plots of (A) Carboplatin (B) Docetaxel

Accuracy

In this method, Accuracy was conducted in triplicate by analyzing active pharma ingredient sample solution at three kinds of concentration levels of 50, 100 and 150% of each at a specified limit. Percentage recoveries were measured and found to be within the limit. The accuracy and reliability of the developed method were established. The percentage recovery values were found to be in the range of 98.56%-99.75% for Carboplatin and 101.05-101.56% for Docetaxel. The results are given in table 3.

Table 3: Results of accuracy

S. No. % Level Carboplatin Docetaxel
Mean % recovery Std dev Mean % recovery Std dev
1 50 99.11 0.596 101.38 0.272
2 100 99.75 0.628 101.56 0.277
3 150 98.56 0.139 101.05 1.155

n=3

Precision

In method precision study prepare six different standards in the concentration of Carboplatin (50 ppm) and Docetaxel (20 ppm) are injected into HPLC system. These results are given below table 4.

Intraday precision

Six replicates of a standard solution containing carboplatin (50μg/ml) and docetaxel (20μg/ml) were analysed on the same day. Peak areas were calculated, which were used to calculate mean, SD and % RSD values.

Inter-day precision

Also called Intermediate precision. In this six replicates of a standard solution containing Carboplatin (50μg/ml) and Docetaxel (20μg/ml) were analysed on a different day. Peak areas were calculated which were used to calculate mean, SD and %RSD values. The present method was found to be precise as the RSD values were less than 2% and also the percentage assay values were close to be 100%.

LOD and LOQ

The LOD concentrations for Carboplatin are 1.515 µg/ml and s/n values is 7 and Docetaxel 0.606 µg/ml and s/n value 3. The LOQ concentration for Carboplatin 5.0 µg/ml and its s/n value is 28 and Docetaxel 2.0 µg/ml and s/n value is 23. The method is validated as per the ICH guidelines [45].

Robustness

The conditions of the experiment were designed to test the robustness of established system intentionally altered, such as flow rate, mobile phase in organic percentage in all these varied conditions [46]. Robustness results for Carboplatin and Docetaxel found to be within the limit and results are tabulated in table 7.

Table 4: Intraday precision results of carboplatin and docetaxel

S. No. % Assay
Carboplatin Docetaxel
M. P. I. P. M. P. I. P.
1 101.30 101.97 100.10 100.34
2 100.01 102.18 100.21 100.14
3 99.99 101.52 100.31 99.82
4 100.26 101.20 99.93 100.23
5 101.01 102.23 100.16 100.31
6 100.69 101.89 99.82 100.45
Mean (n=6)±SD 100.54±0.496 101.83±0.364 100.09±0.165 100.22±0.196
%RSD (n=6) 0.494 0.356 0.164 0.195

Fig. 5: Chromatogram of method precision

Table 5: LOD and LOQ for carboplatin and docetaxel

Carboplatin Docetaxel
LOD LOQ LOD LOQ
Concentration s/n Concentration s/n concentration s/n Concentration s/n
1.515 µg/ml 7 5.0 µg/ml 28 0.606 µg/ml 3 2.0 µg/ml 23

Table 6: Robustness data of carboplatin and docetaxel

Parameter name Carboplatin % assay Docetaxel % assay
Mean Std dev Mean Std dev
Flow minus (0.8 ml/min 99.7 0.252 99.7 0.201
Flow plus (1.2 ml/min) 99.5 0.265 99.9 0.379
Organic minus (36:64) 100.2 0.101 100.1 0.208
Organic plus (44:56) 100.1 0.265 99.9 0.265

n=3

Table 7: Stability results of carboplatin and docetaxel

Stability Carboplatin Docetaxel
Purity % deviation Purity % deviation
Initial 99.9 0.1 99.9 0.1
6 h 99.6 0.4 99.7 0.3
12 h 99.2 0.8 99.3 0.7
18 h 98.9 1.1 99.0 1.0
24 h 98.5 1.5 98.6 1.4
Mean 99.2 0.8 99.3 0.7
Std dev 0.554 0.554 0.524 0.524

Stability

The standard solution was kept at room temperature and at 2-8 °C up to 24 h. Then these solutions were pumped into the device and calculate the % of deviation from initial to 24 h [47]. There was no significant deviation observed and confirmed that the solutions were stable up to 24 h percentage of the assay was not quite 2%. There is no effect in storage conditions for Carboplatin and Docetaxel drugs. The results are given below table 7.

Degradation studies

The Docetaxel and Carboplatin standard was subjected into various forced degradation conditions to effect partial degradation of the drug. Studies of forced degradation [48] have carried out to find out that the method is suitable for products of degradation [49, 50]. In addition, the studies provide details about the conditions during which the drug is unstable, in order that the measures are often taken during formulation to avoid potential instabilities [51].

Acid degradation

Acid degradation was done at 1N HCl and degradation was formed 16.89% for Carboplatin and 15.94% for Docetaxel.

Alkali degradation

Alkali degradation was done at 1N NaOH and degradation was formed 15.53% for Carboplatin and 15.14% for Docetaxel.

Peroxide degradation

Peroxide degradation was done at 20% hydrogen peroxide and degradation was formed 12.66% Carboplatin and 13.88% for Docetaxel.

Reduction degradation

In reduction degradation, 11.81% Carboplatin and 12.08% Docetaxel degradation was observed.

Thermal degradation

In thermal degradation the standard was degraded to 10.02% of Carboplatin and 7.95% of Docetaxel.

Hydrolysis degradation

In hydrolysis degradation the standard was degraded to 8.88% of Carboplatin and 8.66% of Docetaxel.

All degradation results are tabulated in table 9.

Table 9: Forced degradation results of carboplatin and docetaxel

Degradation condition Carboplatin % deg Docetaxel % deg
Mean Std dev Mean Std dev
Control degradation 0.18 0.038 0.22 0.026
Acid degradation 16.89 0.231 15.94 0.049
Alkali degradation 15.53 0.035 15.14 0.029
Peroxide degradation 12.66 0.021 13.88 0.033
Reduction degradation 11.81 0.03 12.08 0.018
Thermal degradation 10.02 0.02 7.95 0.011
Hydrolysis degradation 8.88 0.021 8.66 0.027

n=3

CONCLUSION

We present in this article simple, selective, validated and well-defined stability that shows isocratic RP-HPLC methodology for the quantitative determination of Carboplatin and Docetaxel. All the products of degradation formed during the stress conditions and active pharma ingredients are well separated and peaks were well resolved from each other and separate with an appropriate retention time indicating that the proposed method to be fast, simple, feasible and affordable in assay condition. Therefore the developed method during stability tests, it can be used for routine analysis of production samples and to verify the quality of drug samples during stability studies.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

The authors thankful to Shree Icon Pharmaceutical Laboratories for providing laboratory facilities to complete this research work.

FUNDING

Nil

AUTHORS CONTRIBUTIONS

All the authors have contributed equally.

CONFLICT OF INTERESTS

Declared none

REFERENCES

  1. Alfarouk KO, Stock CM, Taylor S, Walsh M, Muddathir AK, Verduzco D, Bashir AH, Mohammed OY, Elhassan GO, Harguindey S, Reshkin SJ, Ibrahim ME, Rauch C. Resistance to cancer chemotherapy: failure in drug response from ADME to P-gp. Cancer Cell Int. 2015;15:71. doi: 10.1186/s12935-015-0221-1, PMID 26180516.

  2. Felici A, Verweij J, Sparreboom A. Dosing strategies for anticancer drugs: the good, the bad and body-surface area. Eur J Cancer. 2002;38(13):1677-84. doi: 10.1016/s0959-8049(02)00151-x, PMID 12175683.

  3. Qato DM, Wilder J, Schumm LP, Gillet V, Alexander GC. Changes in prescription and over-the-counter medication and dietary supplement use among older adults in the united states, 2005 vs 2011. JAMA Intern Med. 2016;176(4):473-82. doi: 10.1001/ jamainternmed.2015.8581, PMID 26998708.

  4. Ebell MH, Culp MB, Radke TJ. A systematic review of symptoms for the diagnosis of ovarian cancer. Am J Prev Med. 2016;50(3):384-94. doi: 10.1016/j.amepre.2015.09.023, PMID 26541098.

  5. Williams C, Simera I, Bryant A. Tamoxifen for relapse of ovarian cancer. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010;2020(3):CD001034. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD001034.pub2, PMID 20238312.

  6. Oguri S, Sakakibara T, Mase H, Shimizu T, Ishikawa K, Kimura K, Smyth RD. Clinical pharmacokinetics of carboplatin. J Clin Pharmacol. 1988;28(3):208-15. doi: 10.1002/j.1552-4604.1988.tb03134.x, PMID 3283185.

  7. Calvert AH, Harland SJ, Newell DR, Siddik ZH, Jones AC, McElwain TJ, Raju S, Wiltshaw E, Smith IE, Baker JM, Peckham MJ, Harrap KR. Early clinical studies with cis-diammine-1,1-cyclobutane dicarboxylate platinum II. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol. 1982;9(3):140-7. doi: 10.1007/BF00257742, PMID 6761010.

  8. Ramesh D, Vijayakumar BG, Kannan T. Advances in nucleoside and nucleotide analogues in tackling human immunodeficiency virus and hepatitis virus infections. ChemMedChem. 2021;16(9):1403-19. doi: 10.1002/cmdc.202000849. PMID 33427377.

  9. Zaharevitz DW, Anderson LW, Malinowski NM, Hyman R, Strong JM, Cysyk RL. Contribution of de-novo and salvage synthesis to the uracil nucleotide pool in mouse tissues and tumors in vivo. Eur J Biochem. 1992;210(1):293-6. doi: 10.1111/j.1432-1033.1992.tb17420.x, PMID 1446677.

  10. Belloc S, Benkhalifa M, Cohen Bacrie M, Dalleac A, Chahine H, Amar E, Zini A. Which isolated sperm abnormality is most related to sperm DNA damage in men presenting for infertility evaluation. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2014;31(5):527-32. doi: 10.1007/s10815-014-0194-3, PMID 24566945.

  11. Speyer BE, Pizzey AR, Ranieri M, Joshi R, Delhanty JD, Serhal P. Fall in implantation rates following ICSI with sperm with high DNA fragmentation. Hum Reprod. 2010;25(7):1609-18. doi: 10.1093/humrep/deq116, PMID 20495207.

  12. Adkins JN, Varnum SM, Auberry KJ, Moore RJ, Angell NH, Smith RD, Springer DL, Pounds JG. Toward a human blood serum proteome: analysis by multidimensional separation coupled with mass spectrometry. Mol Cell Proteomics. 2002;1(12):947-55. doi: 10.1074/mcp.m200066-mcp200, PMID 12543931.

  13. Kumar E, Kumar A, Parasuraman S, Rajan V, Emerson S. Hepatoprotective activity of clearliv a polyherbal formulation in Wistar rats. Arch Med Health Sci. 2013;1(2):120-5. doi: 10.4103/2321-4848.123023.

  14. Wallace JL. Acetaminophen hepatotoxicity: NO to the rescue. Br J Pharmacol. 2004;143(1):1-2. doi: 10.1038/sj.bjp.0705781, PMID 15345657.

  15. Donadieu J, Beaupain B, Fenneteau O, Bellanne Chantelot C. Congenital neutropenia in the era of genomics: classification, diagnosis, and natural history. Br J Haematol. 2017;179(4):557-74. doi: 10.1111/bjh.14887, PMID 28875503.

  16. Horwitz MS, Corey SJ, Grimes HL, Tidwell T. ELANE mutations in cyclic and severe congenital neutropenia: genetics and pathophysiology. Hematol Oncol Clin North Am. 2013;27(1):19-41. doi: 10.1016/j.hoc.2012.10.004, PMID 23351986.

  17. Jarde T, Perrier S, Vasson MP, Caldefie Chezet F. Molecular mechanisms of leptin and adiponectin in breast cancer. Eur J Cancer. 2011;47(1):33-43. doi: 10.1016/j.ejca.2010.09.005, PMID 20889333.

  18. Jassim GA, Whitford DL, Hickey A, Carter B. Psychological interventions for women with non-metastatic breast cancer. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015;(5):CD008729. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD008729.pub2, PMID 26017383.

  19. Auperin A. Epidemiology of head and neck cancers: an update. Curr Opin Oncol. 2020;32(3):178-86. doi: 10.1097/CCO.0000000000000629, PMID 32209823.

  20. Vigneswaran N, Williams MD. Epidemiologic trends in head and neck cancer and aids in diagnosis. Oral Maxillofac Surg Clin North Am. 2014;26(2):123-41. doi: 10.1016/j.coms.2014.01.001, PMID 24794262.

  21. Heise K, Bertran E, Andia ME, Ferreccio C. Incidence and survival of stomach cancer in a high-risk population of Chile. World J Gastroenterol. 2009;15(15):1854-62. doi: 10.3748/wjg.15.1854, PMID 19370783.

  22. Bello JO. Predictors of survival outcomes in native sub Saharan black men newly diagnosed with metastatic prostate cancer. BMC Urol. 2017;17(1):39. doi: 10.1186/s12894-017-0228-0, PMID 28558685.

  23. Catalona WJ. Prostate cancer screening. Med Clin North Am. 2018;102(2):199-214. doi: 10.1016/j.mcna.2017.11.001, PMID 29406053.

  24. Simon GR, Turrisi A, American College of Chest Physicians. Management of small cell lung cancer: ACCP evidence-based clinical practice guidelines (2nd edition). Chest. 2nd ed. 2007;132(3);Suppl:324S-39S. doi: 10.1378/chest.07-1385, PMID 17873178.

  25. Sherwood J, Dearden S, Ratcliffe M, Walker J. Mutation status concordance between primary lesions and metastatic sites of advanced non-small-cell lung cancer and the impact of mutation testing methodologies: a literature review. J Exp Clin Cancer Res. 2015;34:92. doi: 10.1186/s13046-015-0207-9, PMID 26338018.

  26. Wills CP, Young M, White DW. Pitfalls in the evaluation of shortness of breath. Emerg Med Clin North Am. 2010;28(1):163-81. doi: 10.1016/j.emc.2009.09.011, PMID 19945605.

  27. Snyder JG, Ambegaonkar JP, Winchester JB, McBride JM, Andre MJ, Nelson AG. Efficacy of cold-water immersion in treating delayed onset muscle soreness in male distance runners. Med Sci Sports Exer. 2011;43(5):766. doi: 10.1249/01.MSS.0000402128.66983.f7.

  28. Blonski W, Siropaides T, Reddy KR. Coagulopathy in liver disease. Curr Treat Options Gastroenterol. 2007;10(6):464-73. doi: 10.1007/s11938-007-0046-7, PMID 18221607.

  29. Tripodi A, Mannucci PM. The coagulopathy of chronic liver disease. N Engl J Med. 2011;365(2):147-56. doi: 10.1056/NEJMra1011170, PMID 21751907.

  30. Kapoor V, Hirst WG, Hentschel C, Preibisch S, Reber S. MTrack: automated detection, tracking, and analysis of dynamic microtubules. Sci Rep. 2019;9(1):3794. doi: 10.1038/s41598-018-37767-1, PMID 30846705.

  31. Ganguly A, Yang H, Sharma R, Patel KD, Cabral F. The role of microtubules and their dynamics in cell migration. J Biol Chem. 2012;287(52):43359-69. doi: 10.1074/jbc.M112.423905, PMID 23135278.

  32. Subrahmanyam Talari, Anuradha AV, Komala Sai Prathyusha Ks A. A validated RP-HPLC method for cisplatin and topotecan in API and vaccine form and its stress studies. Int J Res Pharm Sci. 2021;12:808-14.

  33. Syed Rafi, Kantipudi Rambabu. Stability indicating validated HPLC method for the determination of aceclofenac and misoprostol in bulk and pharmaceutical formulation. IJRPS 2020;11(4):7848-53. doi: 10.26452/ijrps.v11i4.4669.

  34. Bhavani P, Prasada Rao K, Mohan S. Novel validated reversed-phase high-performance liquid chromatography method for determination of glucosamine, diacerein, and methyl sulfonyl methane in micro sample rat plasma and its application to pharmacokinetic and dissolution studies. Asian J Pharm Clin Res. 2020;13:50-63. doi: 10.22159/ajpcr.2020.v13i12.36547.

  35. Shivani CP, Maheshwari DG. Development and validation of UV spectrometric and HPLC method for estimation of escitalopram oxalate and flupentixol dihydrochloride in combined dosage form. AJPTI 2016;4:59-70.

  36. Naresh Kumar DS, Patel D. Stability indicating chromatographic method development and validation for the simultaneous estimation of escitalopram oxalate and flupentixol in its pharmaceutical dosage form by HPLC. WJPR. 2017;6:549-66.

  37. Supriya T, Naresh D, Vijaya Kumar G, Haneer MA. Stability indicating RP-HPLC method development and validation for simultaneous estimation of escitalopram and flupentixol pure and marketed formulation. Asian J Pharm Res. 2018;8:4-10.

  38. Malathi S, Devakumar D. Development and validation of rp-hplc method for the estimation of escitalopram oxalate and flupentixol dihydrochloride in combined dosage form and plasma. Int J Pharm Pharm Sci. 2021;13:61-6.

  39. Mukta D, Naykode MD, Durgacharan A, Bhagwat DA, Swapnil D, Jadhav SD, Harinath N, More HN. Analytical and bioanalytical method for quantification of pure azilsartan, not its salts by RP-HPLC. Research J Pharm and Technol. 2017;10(3):708-14. doi: 10.5958/0974-360X.2017.00133.0.

  40. Mayanka Singh M, Manoj Charde M, Rajesh Shukla R, Rita MC. Determination of calcipotriene in calcipotriene cream 0.05% w/w by RP-HPLC method development and validation. Research J Pharm and Technol. 2011;4:1219-23.

  41. Eluru A, Surendra Babu K. A study of method development, validation and forced degradation for simultaneous quantification of povidone iodine and ornidazole in bulk and pharmaceutical dosage form by using RP-HPLC. IJPSR. 2021;12:1217-22.

  42. Senthil Rajan D, Muruganathan G, Shivkumar K, Ganesh T. Development and validation of HPLC method for simultaneous quantification of vasicine, glycyrrhizin and piperine in poly herbal cough syrup. Int J Curr Pharm Res. 2020;12:15-9.

  43. Malak Y, Al-Bathish AA, Ggazy MK, El-Jamal. Rp-hplc and chemometric methods for the determination of two anti-diabetic mixtures; metformin hydrochloride-canagliflozin and metformin hydrochloride-gliclazide in their pharmaceutical formulation. Int J Pharm Pharm Sci. 2020;12:83-94.

  44. Gadhvi MP, Bhandari A, Suhagia BN, Desai UH. Development and validation of RP-HPLC method for simultaneous estimation of atazanavir and ritonavir in their combined tablet dosage form. Research J Pharm and Technol 2013;6:200-3.

  45. Swati K, Abhishek P, Sushank S, Bothiraja C, Atmaram P. High-performance liquid chromatography for the simultaneous estimation of cefoperazone and sulbactam in rat plasma and its importance in therapeutic drug monitoring. Int J Pharm Pharm Sci. 2020;12:92-7.

  46. Gomathy S, Narenderan ST, Meyyanathan SN, Gowramma B. Development and validation of hplc method for the simultaneous estimation of apigenin and luteolin in commercial formulation. J Crit Rev. 2020;7:4785-90.

  47. Vijayakumari M, Reddy Ch B. Stability indicating validated hplc method for the determination of zanubrutinib in bulk and pharmaceutical dosage form. Asian J Pharm Clin Res. 2020;13:159-62.

  48. Raziq A. Syed Umer Jan. Relative comparison of stability and degradation of methylcobalamine tablets of different brands at different storage settings. Int J Appl Pharm. 2021;13:171-5.

  49. Rajakumari R, Sreenivasa Rao S. Stress degradation studies and development of a validated RP-HPLC method for determination of tiagabine in presence of its degradation products. Int J Pharm Pharm Sci. 2016;8:230-6.

  50. Charu Pandya P, Sadhana Rajput J. Development and validation of stability indicating method RP-HPLC method of aacotiamide. Int J Pharm Pharm Sci. 2018;10:1-8.

  51. Athavia BA, Dedania ZR, Dedania RR, Swamy SMV, Prajapati CB. Stability indicating hplc method for determination of vilazodone hydrochloride. Int J Curr Pharm Sci 2017;9(4). doi: 10.22159/ijcpr.2017v9i4.20975.