4.5 Article

Simultaneous determination of dextromethorphan, dextrorphan and doxylamine in human plasma by HPLC coupled to electrospray ionization tandem mass spectrometry: Application to a pharmacokinetic study

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.jchromb.2012.05.001

Keywords

Quantification; Volunteer; LC-MS/MS

Ask authors/readers for more resources

In the present study, a fast, sensitive and robust method to quantify dextromethorphan, dextrorphan and doxylamine in human plasma using deuterated internal standards (IS) is described. The analytes and the IS were extracted from plasma by a liquid-liquid extraction (LLE) using diethyl-ether/hexane (80/20, v/v). Extracted samples were analyzed by high performance liquid chromatography coupled to electrospray ionization tandem mass spectrometry (HPLC-ESI-MS/MS). Chromatographic separation was performed by pumping the mobile phase (acetonitrile/water/formic acid (90/9/1, v/v/v) during 4.0 min at a flow-rate of 1.5 mL min(-1) into a Phenomenex Gemini (R) C18, 5 mu m analytical column (150 x 4.6 mm id.). The calibration curve was linear over the range from 0.2 to 200 ng mL(-1) for dextromethorphan and doxylamine and 0.05 to 10 ng mL(-1) for dextrorphan. The intra-batch precision and accuracy (%CV) of the method ranged from 2.5 to 9.5%, and 88.9 to 105.1%, respectively. Method inter-batch precision (%CV) and accuracy ranged from 6.7 to 10.3%, and 92.2 to 107.1%, respectively. The run-time was for 4 min. The analytical procedure herein described was used to assess the pharmacokinetics of dextromethorphan, dextrorphan and doxylamine in healthy volunteers after a single oral dose of a formulation containing 30 mg of dextromethorphan hydrobromide and 12.5 mg of doxylamine succinate. The method has high sensitivity, specificity and allows high throughput analysis required for a pharmacokinetic study. (C) 2012 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available