ArticlePloS one2020
Method development and validation for rapid identification of epigallocatechin gallate using ultra-high performance liquid chromatography.
Article in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Pharmacologic Alteration of Meibum Lipid Composition Alleviates Dry Eye Phenotype in Awat2-/- Mice.Investigative ophthalmology & visual science · 2026Article
- Lipid-Based Nanotechnologies for Delivery of Green Tea Catechins: Advances, Challenges, and Therapeutic Potential.Pharmaceutics · 2025Review
- Plasma Gel Matrix as a Promising Carrier of Epigallocatechin Gallate for Regenerative Medicine.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2024Article
- HPLC for simultaneous quantification of free mannose and glucose concentrations in serum: use in detection of ovarian cancer.Frontiers in chemistry · 2023Article
- Article
- Arsenic-induced uterine apoptotic damage is protected by ethyl acetate fraction of Camellia sinensis (green tea) via Bcl-2-BAX through NF-κB regulations in Wistar rats.Environmental science and pollution research international · 2021Article
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
Although Epigallocatechin gallate (EGCG) is the most available and beneficial catechin found in tea, its auto-oxidation property may lead to toxicity when consumed in large quantities. Thus, there is a need to quantify the EGCG, which enables to study the pharmacological characteristics of the compound. The study aimed to develop and validate a rapid and accurate analytical method for quantitative determination of EGCG. Standard EGCG was used to conduct trials for the optimization of the analytical method using Ultra-High Performance Liquid Chromatography (UHPLC). Tests for validation (specificity, linearity, accuracy, system suitability, method precision, robustness, and ruggedness) were performed. The preliminary trials yielded an analytical method with good peak shape and acceptable system suitability which was further validated. The method was shown to be specific, with a linear correlation coefficient of > 0.9996 and accurate with acceptable recovery rate (99.1% to 100.4%). Acceptable system suitability and method precision were confirmed with a relative standard deviation (less than 2%). Further, robustness and ruggedness experiments also demonstrated the suitability of the present analytical method. The method developed for determination of EGCG was validated as per the International Council for Harmonisation of Technical Requirements for Pharmaceuticals for Human Use (ICH) guidelines and thus can be used in routine compliance tests in the laboratory for further studying/characterizing the properties of EGCG.
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.