ArticleIranian journal of pharmaceutical research : IJPR2021
Determination of Cleaning Limits Considering Toxicological Risk Evaluation to Minimize the Risk of Cross Contamination.
Article in Iranian journal of pharmaceutical research : IJPR, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The historical approaches that have been used to establish cleaning validation acceptance limits should be updated to recent approaches to prevent cross contamination. In the present investigation, a cleaning method was validated using high performance liquid chromatography. Method modification critical parameters including spiking, swab sampling from PVC, Stainless Steel, and Polyethylene, extraction technique from swab, solubility, potency, toxicity (LD50), and improvement of limit of detection (LOD) of the method through analytical method validation were studied. In addition, roughness, mechanical and electro-polishing, consideration of dosage form as a quantitative factor, acceptable daily exposure (ADE), and permitted daily exposure (PDE) in the worst-case determination were considered in the study. The method was validated based on USP and ICH guidelines for specificity, limit of detection, limit of quantitation, precision, accuracy, linearity, and range. Linear regression analysis of data for the calibration plot in the range of 7.43, 10.89, 21.78, 43.56, 87.12 µg/mL, and relative standard deviation (R.S.D.) found to be 0.5, 0.4, 0.2, and 0.2, respectively with correlation coefficient of R
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.