Table of Contents Author Guidelines Submit a Manuscript
Journal of Spectroscopy
Volume 2013, Article ID 705363, 7 pages
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2013/705363
Research Article

Simultaneous Determination of Prasugrel and Aspirin by Second Order and Ratio First Order Derivative Ultraviolet Spectrophotometry

Post Graduate Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Sardar Patel University, Vallabh Vidyanagar, Anand, Gujarat 388 120, India

Received 14 May 2013; Accepted 1 October 2013

Academic Editor: Naoki Asakawa

Copyright © 2013 Shahabuddin N. Alvi et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Abstract

Two simple, accurate, and precise UV derivative spectrophotometric methods for the simultaneous determination of Prasugrel and Aspirin in synthetic mixture form have been developed. The first method involves measurement of second order derivative spectra of Prasugrel and Aspirin. The zero crossing wavelengths 267.62 nm and 252.40 nm were selected for estimation of Prasugrel and Aspirin, respectively. In the second method, the first order derivatives of ratio spectra were calculated and used for the determination of Prasugrel and Aspirin by measuring the peak intensity at 268 nm and 290 nm, respectively. The methods were validated as per the ICH guideline Q2 (R1). Beer’s law is followed in the range of 5–45 μg/mL for Prasugrel and 25–150 μg/mL for Aspirin by second order derivative method and 6–22 μg/mL for Prasugrel and 45–165 μg/mL for Aspirin by ratio first order derivative method. The recovery studies confirmed the accuracy of the methods. Relative standard deviations for repeatability and inter- and intraday assays were less than 2%. Hence, the described derivative spectrophotometric methods are simple, accurate, precise, and excellent alternatives to sophisticated chromatographic techniques and can be potentially used for the simultaneous determination of Prasugrel and Aspirin in combined dosage form.

1. Introduction

Aspirin (ASP), 2-(acetyloxy)benzoic acid, (Figure 1) has anti-inflammatory and antipyretic properties and acts as an inhibitor of cyclooxygenase which results in the inhibition of the biosynthesis of prostaglandins. It also inhibits platelet aggregation and is used in the prevention of arterial and venous thrombosis [1]. Aspirin is official in IP [2], BP [3], and USP [4].

705363.fig.001
Figure 1: Chemical structure of Aspirin.

Prasugrel (PRA), 5-[2-cyclopropyl-1-(2-fluorophenyl)-2-oxoethyl]-4H,5H,6H,7H-thieno [3,2-c]pyridin-2-yl acetate, a thienopyridine derivative (Figure 2), is a platelet activation and aggregation inhibitor structurally and pharmacologically related to clopidogrel and ticlopidine. It is a prodrug that requires enzymatic transformation in the liver to its active metabolite R-138727. R-138727 irreversibly binds to P2Y12 type ADP receptors on platelets thereby inhibiting ADP-mediated platelet activation and aggregation [5]. It is not official in any pharmacopoeia. Aspirin in combination with Prasugrel is used to prevent thrombotic complications of Acute Coronary Syndrome (ACS) and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) [6].

705363.fig.002
Figure 2: Chemical structure of Prasugrel.

The literature survey reveals that some analytical methods have been reported for determination of PRA [711] and ASP [1214] individually and Aspirin in combination with other drugs [1517]. HPLC and UV simultaneous methods are available for estimation of PRA and ASP in their combined dosage form [18, 19]. The objective of the current study was to develop simple, accurate, and reproducible second order derivative and ratio first order derivative analytical methods for the simultaneous estimation of Prasugrel and Aspirin in presence of excipients. The methods have advantage over other methods that they completely eliminate the spectral interference from one of the two drugs while estimating the other drug at selected wavelength. The second order derivative method eliminates interference by selection of zero crossing point (ZCP), while the ratio first order derivative method eliminates it by dividing the zero order spectra of mixture with one of the two drugs and transforming the resulting spectra into their respective first order derivatives to estimate other drug. The methods were developed and validated as per ICH guideline Q2 (R1) [20].

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Instruments and Chemicals

A double beam UV-visible spectrophotometer (Shimadzu, UV1800) having two matched quartz cells with 1 cm pathlength, UVProbe v2.35 software, Ultrasonic Cleaner (Electroquip), and electronic analytical balance (Denver SI 234) were used. Calibrated volumetric flasks, pipettes of borosilicate glasses, and Whatman grade no. 3 filter paper were used throughout the experiment. Methanol AR grade was procured from Sisco Research Laboratories Pvt. Ltd. Lactose, Corn Starch, and Magnesium Stearate were procured from SD Fine Chem Ltd.

2.2. Preparation of Standard Stock Solution

Accurately weighed quantities of PRA (25 mg) and ASP (62.5 mg) were transferred separately to 25 mL volumetric flasks, dissolved, and diluted upto the mark with methanol to get 1000 μg/mL PRA and 2500 μg/mL ASP. The working standard solutions of the respective drugs were prepared by serial dilution in methanol.

2.3. Sample Preparation

Synthetic mixture of PRA and ASP was prepared by using common excipients like Corn Starch, Lactose, and Magnesium Stearate by calculating formula for 20 tablets having label claim for PRA and ASP 10 mg and 75 mg, respectively. From this mixture, powder equivalent to 10 mg Prasugrel and 75 mg Aspirin was dissolved in 100 mL methanol, then sonicated for 15 min, and filtered through Whatman filter paper. From this solution, 1 mL aliquot was taken in 10 mL volumetric flask and diluted upto the mark with methanol to make final concentration of PRA and ASP 10 μg/mL and 75 μg/mL, respectively, which was used for assay.

3. Method Development

3.1. Method D2: Second Order UV Spectrophotometric Method (Determination of Zero Crossing Point (ZCP))

In the second order derivative method, aliquots of PRA and ASP standard stock solutions were accurately transferred into 10 mL volumetric flasks, separately, and diluted upto the mark with methanol. Each of the working standard solutions was scanned between 400 and 200 nm at a medium scanning speed. It showed wavelength maxima at 254 nm for PRA and 276 nm for ASP. All the zero order spectra were then transformed to their respective second order derivative spectra (D2) using the UVProbe v2.35 software with nm and ZCPs of PRA and ASP were found to be at 252.40 nm and 267.62 nm respectively. Responses of each of the above solutions were measured for PRA and ASP at 267.62 nm, and 252.40 nm, respectively. The calibration curves were constructed and the concentration of individual drug present in the mixture was determined against the calibration curve.

3.2. Method RD1: First Order Derivative of the Ratio Spectra

Previously scanned absorption spectrum of PRA solutions prepared at different concentrations (6–22 μg/mL) in its binary mixture with ASP was divided by the spectrum of the standard solution of ASP (75 μg/mL in methanol) to get the ratio spectra of PRA. The first derivatives of the ratio spectra were than calculated. The amount of PRA was determined by measuring the first derivative signal at 268 nm (minima). A similar procedure was followed for different concentrations of ASP (45–165 μg/mL) with PRA and was used for division spectrum of the standard solution of PRA (10 μg/mL in methanol). Similarly, content of ASP was determined by measuring the first derivative signal at 290 nm (minima).

3.3. Assay of Synthetic Mixture
3.3.1. Method D2

In the second order derivative method, the absorption spectrum was recorded against methanol as a blank for the solution prepared in methanol from the synthetic mixture of PRA and ASP. The resulting zero order spectra were transformed to their second order derivative spectra. The intensity of the second derivative spectra of the mixture were measured at 267.62 nm and 252.40 nm for estimation of PRA and ASP, respectively. The procedure was repeated 2 more times. The concentrations of PRA and ASP were calculated from their corresponding regression equations and % amount was determined.

3.3.2. Method RD1

In the ratio first order derivative method, the previously scanned zero order absorption spectra for the mixture were divided by the spectrum of ASP (75 μg/mL) and by spectrum of PRA (10 μg/mL) separately for the determination of PRA and ASP, respectively. The concentrations of PRA and ASP were calculated from their corresponding regression equations measuring the intensity of signals at 268 nm and 290 nm, respectively, and % amount was determined.

4. Validation of the Methods

Newly developed methods were validated for specificity, linearity, accuracy, precision, limits of quantitation, and limits of detection according to the ICH guideline Q2 (R1).

4.1. Linearity and Range ( )

For the second order derivative method, the linearity response was determined by analyzing 5 independent calibration curves in the range of 5–45 μg/mL (5, 15, 25, 35, and 45 μg/mL) for PRA and 25–150 μg/mL (25, 50, 75, 100, 125, and 150 μg/mL) for ASP. In the ratio first order derivative method, the linearity response was determined in the range of 6–22 μg/mL (6, 10, 14, 18, and 22 μg/mL) for PRA and 45–165 μg/mL (45, 75, 105, 135, and 165 μg/mL) for ASP. Correlation coefficient and regression line equations for PRA and ASP were calculated for both the methods.

4.2. Accuracy ( )

It was carried out to determine the suitability and reliability of the proposed methods. Accuracy was determined by calculating the % recovery of PRA and ASP from the synthetic mixture by the standard addition method in which known amounts of standards samples of PRA and ASP at 80%, 100%, and 120% levels were added to the preanalysed samples. The procedure was repeated 2 more times and the recovered amounts of PRA and ASP were calculated at each level and % recovery was reported as % recovery = , where is the total drug concentration found after standard addition, is the drug concentration in the formulation mixture, and is the concentration of standard added.

4.3. Precision
4.3.1. Repeatability ( )

The repeatability was checked by scanning and measurement of the responses of solutions of PRA (10 μg/mL) and ASP (75 μg/mL) without changing the parameters of the proposed methods. The procedure was repeated six times and % RSD was calculated.

4.3.2. Intermediate Precision ( )

The intraday and interday precisions of the second order derivative method were determined by analyzing corresponding responses in triplicate on the same day and on 3 different days over a period of 1 week for 3 different concentrations of standard solutions of PRA (5, 10, and 15 μg/mL) and ASP (50, 75, and 100 μg/mL). Similarly, the intraday and interday precisions of ratio first order derivative method were determined by taking mixtures having concentration of PRA (10, 14, and 18 μg/mL) and that of ASP (75, 105, and 135 μg/mL).

4.4. Limit of Detection (LOD) and Limit of Quantitation (LOQ)

ICH guideline describes several approaches to determine the detection and quantitation limits. These include visual evaluation, signal-to-noise ratio, and the use of standard deviation of the response and the slope of the calibration curve. In the present study, the LOD and LOQ were based on the third approach and were calculated according to the and equations, respectively, where is the standard deviation of -intercepts of regression lines and is the slope of the calibration curve.

5. Results and Discussion

Prasugrel and Aspirin both possess good solubility and considerable UV absorption in methanol. Thus methanol was selected as solvent for the present work. From the zero order overlain UV spectra of PRA (10 μg/mL) and ASP (75 μg/mL) and their mixture, it was observed that the spectra are overlapping each other, demonstrating the complexity in measuring these drugs by direct UV absorption measurement in a binary mixture.

5.1. Second Order Derivative Method

The UV derivative method has advantage that it eliminates the spectral interference from one of the two drugs while estimating the other drug by selecting zero crossing point in the derivative spectra of each drug at selected wavelength. The zero order spectra of PRA and ASP were transformed to first and second order derivative spectra with help of UVProbe software (  nm). The first order spectra of PRA did not show any zero crossing points (ZCP), while the second order spectra of both the drugs showed ZCPs with considerable sensitivity for the estimation of respective drugs on each other’s ZCPs. Hence second order derivative method was used in the present work. The ZCPs for PRA and ASP were found to be 252.40 nm and 267.62 nm, respectively. Hence, the estimation of PRA was done at 267.62 nm (Figure 3) while that of ASP was done at 252.40 nm (Figure 4). Calibration graphs were established for PRA and ASP in the concentration range of 5 to 45 μg/mL (Figure 5) and 25 to 150 μg/mL (Figure 6), respectively, with good correlation.

705363.fig.003
Figure 3: Second order derivative UV absorption overlain spectra of PRA (5–45 μg/mL).
705363.fig.004
Figure 4: Second order derivative UV absorption overlain spectra of ASP (25–150 μg/mL).
705363.fig.005
Figure 5: Calibration curve of Prasugrel (5–45 μg/mL) by second order derivative method.
705363.fig.006
Figure 6: Calibration curve of Aspirin (25–150 μg/mL) by second order derivative method.
5.2. Ratio First Order Derivative Method

The ratio first order derivative method (RD1) permits the determination of each component in their mixture at the wavelengths corresponding to a maximum or minimum. The main advantage of this method is the chance of easy measurements in correspondence with peaks so it permits the use of the wavelength of the highest value of analytical signals (maximum or minimum). Moreover, the presence of a lot of maxima and minima is another advantage by the fact that these wavelengths give an opportunity for the determination of active compounds in presence of other active compounds or excipients which possibly interfere with the analysis. Determination of PRA was done by using spectrum of 75 μg/mL of ASP as a divisor (Figure 7). The corresponding ratio spectra of PRA were then transformed to first order derivative spectra and PRA was estimated at wavelength minima 268 nm (Figure 8). Similarly, determination of ASP was done by using spectrum of 10 μg/mL of PRA as a divisor (Figure 9) and converting these spectra into their respective first order derivative (Figure 10). ASP was estimated at wavelength 290 nm (minima). The calibration curves were constructed in the range of 6 to 22 μg/mL for PRA (Figure 11) and 45 to 165 μg/mL for ASP (Figure 12) with good correlation.

705363.fig.007
Figure 7: Ratio spectra of PRA (6–22 μg/mL) using 75 μg/mL solution of ASP as divisor.
705363.fig.008
Figure 8: First derivative ratio spectra of PRA (6–22 μg/mL).
705363.fig.009
Figure 9: Ratio spectra of ASP (45–165 μg/mL) using 10 μg/mL solution of PRA as divisor.
705363.fig.0010
Figure 10: First derivative ratio spectra of ASP (45–165 μg/mL).
705363.fig.0011
Figure 11: Calibration curve of Prasugrel (6–22 μg/mL) by ratio first order derivative method.
705363.fig.0012
Figure 12: Calibration curve of Aspirin (45–165 μg/mL) by ratio first order derivative method.
5.3. Validity of Methods

The proposed methods were validated as per ICH guideline. The results of validation are summarized in Table 1. The linearity within the specified range was established by high degree of correlation shown in Table 1. The LOD and LOQ for both the methods and both the drugs were calculated by using standard deviation of response. The %RSD values (Table 1) for repeatability, intraday and interday variations for both drugs in both the methods were within the acceptable range (<2%) indicating that these methods have excellent repeatability and reproducibility in the current experimental condition. To demonstrate the specificity and applicability of the proposed methods, the quantitative analysis of PRA and ASP was carried out in the presence of excipients by using laboratory prepared synthetic mixture (Table 2). Furthermore, the validity and reliability of the proposed methods were assessed by determining the mean percentage recovery at 80%, 100%, and 120% levels. The results showed that the % recovery values are within the acceptable limits with low standard deviation indicating high accuracy of the proposed analytical methods. The average % recoveries by both the methods are presented in Tables 3(a) and 3(b).

tab1
Table 1: Validation parameters for second order and ratio first order derivative spectrophotometric methods.
tab2
Table 2: Analysis of synthetic mixture.
tab3
Table 3: (a) Recovery studies for Prasugrel. (b) Recovery studies for Aspirin.

6. Conclusion

Two new, simple, accurate, and precise derivative UV spectroscopic methods were developed for the simultaneous estimation of PRA and ASP in bulk drugs and in the presence of tablet excipients. The recovery studies suggested noninterference of formulations excipients in the estimation. Moreover, the methods have advantage over other methods that they completely eliminate the spectral interference from one of the two drugs while estimating the other drug at selected wavelength; hence the proposed methods can be used for the quality control of the cited drugs and can be extended for routine analysis of the drugs in their pharmaceutical preparations.

Acknowledgment

The authors are thankful to Post Graduate Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Sardar Patel University, Vallabh Vidyanagar, Gujarat, India, for providing facilities to carry out research work.

References

  1. Aspirin, “DrugBank 3.0, Open data drug and drug target database,” 2013, http://www.drugbank.ca/drugs/DB00945.
  2. “The Indian Pharmacopoeia,” The Indian Pharmacopoeia Commission, vol. 2, pp. 842–843, 2010.
  3. “British Pharmacopoeia,” British Pharmacopoeia Commission Office, vol. 2, pp. 182–183, 2378-2379, 2010.
  4. “United States Pharmacopeia, National Formulary USP34 NF29,” United States Pharmacopoeial Convention Inc, vol. 2, pp. 1931–1935, 2011.
  5. Prasugrel, “DrugBank 3.0, Open data drug and drug target database,” 2013, http://www.drugbank.ca/drugs/DB06209.
  6. S. D. Wiviott, E. Braunwald, C. H. McCabe et al., “Prasugrel versus clopidogrel in patients with acute coronary syndromes,” The New England Journal of Medicine, vol. 357, no. 20, pp. 2001–2015, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  7. B. Harshini, S. V. R. Alekhya, G. Manasa, and K. Vanitha Prakash, “Extractive Spectrophotometric estimation of Prasugrel in Pharmaceutical Formulation,” Research Journal of Pharmaceutical, Biological and Chemical Sciences, vol. 2, no. 3, pp. 426–430, 2011. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  8. B. B. Kumar, A. A. Kumar, M. Laxmiram, G. Swamy, R. Das, and G. Sankar, “Spectrometric determination of prasugrel in bulk and in its pharmaceutical formulation by UV method,” Pharmanest, vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 55–57, 2011. View at Google Scholar
  9. B. M. Ishaq, K. V. Prakash, and G. K. Mohan, “Development and validation of HPLC method for determination of prasugrel n bulk and its pharmaceutical formulation,” Journal of Chemical and Pharmaceutical Research, vol. 3, no. 4, pp. 404–409, 2011. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  10. A. E. Prabahar, N. RamaRao, K. R. S. SambasivaRao, and P. VijayarajKumar, “Method development and validation for the HPLC potency assay of prasugrel tablets,” Journal of Pharmacy Research, vol. 4, no. 4, pp. 980–982, 2011. View at Google Scholar
  11. M. C. Damle, T. C. Borole, R. Mehendre, and K. G. Bothara, “Development and validation of stability indicating HPTLC method for determination of Prasugrel,” Journal of Chemical and Pharmaceutical Research, vol. 2, no. 4, pp. 907–913, 2012. View at Google Scholar
  12. A. Verstraeten, E. Roets, and J. Hoogmartens, “Quantitative determination by high-performance liquid chromatography of acetylsalicylic acid and related substances in tablets,” Journal of Chromatography, vol. 388, no. 1, pp. 201–216, 1987. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  13. S. S. Kumar, L. D. Jamadar, K. Bhat, P. B. Musmade, S. G. Vasantharaju, and N. Udupa, “Analytical method development and validation for aspirin,” International Journal of ChemTech Research, vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 389–399, 2010. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  14. M. Ahmed, M. H. U. Biswas, M. M. Rahman, M. S. A. Bhuiyan, M. A. H. M. Kamal, and G. Sadik, “Development of a spectrometric method for the determination of aspirin in blood samples,” Journal of Medical Sciences, vol. 1, no. 2, pp. 61–62, 2001. View at Google Scholar
  15. P. Mishra and A. Dolly, “Simultaneous determination of clopidogrel and aspirin in pharmaceutical dosage forms,” Indian Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences, vol. 68, no. 3, pp. 365–368, 2006. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  16. K. Anandakumar, T. Ayyappan, V. Raghu Raman, T. Vetrichelvan, A. S. K. Sankar, and D. Nagavalli, “RP-HPLC analysis of aspirin and clopidogrel bisulphate in combination,” Indian Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences, vol. 69, no. 4, pp. 597–599, 2007. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  17. S. C. Gujarathi, A. R. Shah, S. C. Jagdale, P. A. Datar, V. P. Choudhari, and B. S. Kuchekar, “Spectrophotometric simultaneous determination of aspirin and Ticlopidine in combined tablet dosage form by first order derivative spectroscopy, area under curve (AUC) and ratio derivative spectrophotometric methods,” International Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences Review and Research, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 115–119, 2010. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  18. D. K. Jain, N. Jain, and J. Verma, “RP-HPLC method for simultaneous estimation of aspirin and prasugrel in binary combination,” International Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences and Drug Research, vol. 4, no. 3, pp. 218–221, 2012. View at Google Scholar
  19. S. M. Patel, C. N. Patel, and V. B. Patel, “Development and validation of spectrophotometric methods for simultaneous estimation of prasugrel and aspirin in tablet dosage form,” American Journal of PharmTech Research, vol. 2, no. 3, pp. 818–827, 2012. View at Google Scholar
  20. Q2 (R1), “Validation of analytical procedures: text and methodology,” in International Conference on Harmonization, pp. 1–13, 2005.