4.4 Article

Development and validation of a liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry method for topotecan determination in beagle dog plasma and its application in a bioequivalence study

期刊

BIOMEDICAL CHROMATOGRAPHY
卷 27, 期 11, 页码 1532-1539

出版社

WILEY-BLACKWELL
DOI: 10.1002/bmc.2956

关键词

topotecan; liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry; Ostro(TM) sorbent plate; bioequivalence

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [81120108025]
  2. Department of Education of Guangdong [GDJX1121]
  3. International Science and Technology Cooperation Base [2010JD035]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Topotecan (TPT) is an important anti-cancer drug that inhibits topoisomerase I. A sensitive and robust liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) method that potentially determines TPT in beagle dog plasma is needed for a bioequivalence study of TPT formulations. We developed and validated LC-MS/MS to evaluate TPT in beagle dog plasma in terms of specificity, linearity, precision, accuracy, stability, extraction recovery and matrix effect. Plasma samples were treated with an Ostro(TM) sorbent plate (a robust and effective tool) to eliminate phospholipids and proteins before analysis. TPT and camptothecin (internal standard) were separated on an Acquity UPLC BEH C-18 column (1.7 mu m, 2.1x50mm) with 0.1% formic acid and methanol as the mobile phase at a flow rate of 0.25mL/min. TPT was analyzed using positive ion electrospray ionization in multiple-reaction monitoring mode. The obtained lower limit of quantitation was 1ng/mL (signal-to-noise ratio>10). The standard calibration curve for TPT was linear (correlation coefficient>0.99) at the concentration range of 1-400ng/mL. The intra-day and inter-day precision, accuracy, stability, extraction recovery and matrix effect of TPT were within the acceptable limits. The validated method was successfully applied in a bioequivalence study of TPT in healthy beagle dogs. Copyright (c) 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据