ArticleAAPS PharmSciTech2013
Validation of a new 96-well plate spectrophotometric method for the quantification of compound 48/80 associated with particles.
Article in AAPS PharmSciTech, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- A Sensitive Spectrofluorimetric Method for Curcumin Analysis.Journal of fluorescence · 2022Article
- Chitosan Plus Compound 48/80: Formulation and Preliminary Evaluation as a Hepatitis B Vaccine Adjuvant.Pharmaceutics · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A new, simple, inexpensive, and rapid 96-well plate UV spectrophotometric method was developed and validated for the quantification of compound 48/80 (C48/80) associated with particles. C48/80 was quantified at 570 nm after reaction with acetaldehyde and sodium nitroprusside in an alkaline solution (pH 9.6). The method was validated according to the recommendations of the ICH Guidelines for specificity, linearity, range, accuracy, precision, and detection and quantification limits (DL and QL). All the validation parameters were assessed in three different solvents, i.e., deionized water, blank matrix of chitosan nanoparticles, and blank matrix of chitosan/alginate nanoparticles. The method was found to be linear in the concentration range of 5 to 160 μg/ml (R(2)>0.9994). Intraday and interday precision was adequate, with relative standard deviation lower than those given by the Horwitz equation. The mean recoveries of C48/80 from spiked samples ranged between 98.1% and 105.9% for calibration curves done with the blank matrices and between 89.3% and 103.3% for calibration curves done with water, respectively. The DL were lower than 1.01 μg/ml and the QL were lower than 3.30 μg/ml. The results showed that the developed method is sensitive, linear, precise, and accurate for its intended use, with the additional advantages of being cost-effective and time-effective, allowing the use of small-volume samples, and the simultaneous analysis of a large number of samples. The proposed method was already successfully applied to evaluate the loading efficacy of C48/80 chitosan-based nanoparticles and can be easily applied during the development of other C48/80-based formulations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.