Cited by 78Analytical Methods in PharmaceuticalsChromatography in Natural ProductsTraditional Chinese Medicine Analysis

Development of HPLC analytical protocols for quantification of artemisinin in biomass and extracts

Lapkin, Alexei A., Walker, Adam, Sullivan, Neil, Khambay, Bhupinder, Mlambo, Benhilda, Chemat, Smain·2009·Journal of Pharmaceutical and Biomedical Analysis

Abstract

Quantification of artemisinin purity and amount in plant material and extracts to date has been characterized by a considerable inconsistency in values. This is likely to be due to the adoption of varied analytical procedures and use of inappropriate to the specific applications analytical techniques. In this paper we are attempting to further develop artemisinin analysis to the point where a universally acceptable reference method is available to the research and end-users communities. Thus, we have developed and validated an HPLC-RI method and optimized an HPLC-ELSD method. We used the gradient HPLC-UV method recommended by the current artemisinin monograph as a comparison for the method improvements presented herein, and show the limitations for its application scope. The data reported should help to allow more reliable laboratory analysis of artemisinin in both pure samples and in Artemisia annua extracts.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jpba.2009.01.025

Cites

18 of 18 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Many investigators use the HPLC Q260 method of analysis, but it can result in false positives regarding artemisinin mainly because it cannot distinguish between artemisinin and deoxyartemisinin.

    “Many investigators use the HPLC Q260 method of analysis, but it can result in false positives regarding artemisinin mainly because it cannot distinguish between artemisinin and deoxyartemisinin (Lapkin et al. 2009; Christen and Veuthey 2001; Smith et al. 2010).”
  • There is considerable inconsistency in the amount of quantified artemisinin present in extracts depending on the use of different analytical methods.

    “There is considerable inconsistency in the amount of quantified artemisinin present in the extracts depending on the use of different analytical methods (Lapkin et al. 2009) and thus researchers need to use more definitive assays that validate artemisinin content.”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Lapkin, A. A., Walker, A., Sullivan, N., Khambay, B., Mlambo, B., & Chemat, S.
Affiliations
  • University of Bath (GB)
  • Rothamsted Research (GB)
Corresponding author
Lapkin, Alexei A.
Venue
Journal of Pharmaceutical and Biomedical Analysis
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2009-05
Volume
49
Issue
4
Pages
908-915
ISSN
0731-7085 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2088418994
Cited by
78
References
18
Citations by year
2025: 4 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 7
FWCI
5.18
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Pharmaceutical and Biomedical Analysis (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • GlaxoSmithKline
  • Fundación Mundo Sano
  • Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EP/F016182/1)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Chemistry › Analytical Chemistry › Analytical Methods in Pharmaceuticals
  • Physical Sciences › Chemistry › Analytical Chemistry › Chromatography in Natural Products
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Complementary and alternative medicine › Traditional Chinese Medicine Analysis
Keywords
artemisinin, HPLC method development, HPLC-ELSD, HPLC-UV, method validation, Artemisia annua, reference method, plant extracts, analytical method comparison
MeSH terms
Antimalarials, Chromatography, High Pressure Liquid, Plant Extracts, Spectrophotometry, Ultraviolet, Mass Spectrometry, Reproducibility of Results, Biomass, Artemisinins

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review