4.6 Article

Bioanalysis of free and liposomal Amphotericin B in rat plasma using solid phase extraction and protein precipitation followed by LC-MS/MS

Journal

JOURNAL OF PHARMACEUTICAL AND BIOMEDICAL ANALYSIS
Volume 158, Issue -, Pages 288-293

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.jpba.2018.06.014

Keywords

Amphotericin B; Liposome; LC-MS/MS; Solid phase extraction; Protein precipitation

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [81430087, 81673396, 81603182]
  2. National Science and Technology Major Specialized Projects [2017ZX09101001]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Amphotericin B (AMB) is a polyene macrolide antibiotic used for treating invasive fungal infections. Liposomal AMB (L-AMB) is a lipid dosage form which reduces the side effects and toxicity of the drug. The quantitation of free AMB (F-AMB) and L-AMB in vivo is important to monitor quality control of the liposomal formulation and to ensure its safety during clinical use. In this study, an original strategy was developed to separately determine F-AMB and L-AMB in rat plasma using LC-MS/MS. F-AMB was analyzed after separation by solid phase extraction, total AMB (T-AMB) was determined after protein precipitation and L-AMB was determined by difference. The method was fully validated. Calibration curves were linear in the ranges 0. 7-120 mu g/mL for T-AMB and 0.2-20 mu g/mL for F-AMB. Accuracy and precision results were within acceptable variability limits, recoveries were consistent and reproducible, matrix effects were insignificant and analytes were stable under all the storage conditions tested. The method was successfully applied to a pharmacokinetic study in rats administered a single intravenous 6 mg/kg dose of L-AMB. The method will allow further clinical studies of L-AMB and provide useful technical support for the assay of other liposomal drug formulations. (C) 2018 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

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available