Cited by 15Analytical Methods in PharmaceuticalsBiosimilars and Bioanalytical MethodsForensic Toxicology and Drug Analysis

A novel, sensitive and selective method of UPLC/MS–MS for rapid simultaneous determination of midodrine and its active metabolite desglymidodrine in human plasma: Application to support bioequivalence study in healthy human volunteers

Patel, Daxesh P., Nair, Sneha, Suhagia, Bhanubhai N., Patel, Bhargav M.·2016·Journal of Pharmaceutical and Biomedical Analysis

Abstract

A specific, rapid, sensitive and selective ultra-performance liquid chromatography - tandem mass spectrometry has been developed for the simultaneous determination of midodrine and desglymidodrine in human plasma. The analytes and its deuterated analogs were quantitatively extracted from 100μL of human plasma by solid phase extraction technique. Separation of analytes was achieved on the Waters Acquity UPLC BEH C18 (50×2.1mm, 1.7μm) column using acetonitrile-4.0mM ammonium formate, pH 2.5(90:10, v/v) as mobile phase. The protonated analytes were quantified by selected reaction monitoring in the positive ionization mode by triple quadrupole mass spectrometer. The calibration plots were linear over the concentration range of 0.050-50.0ng/mL. The intra-batch and inter-batch precision (%CV) across quality control levels was <4.0 and the% mean relative recovery was ≥96%. Various other parameters like stability in different conditions; matrix effect and reproducibility of the method were performed in accordance with the guidelines specified by the USFDA for bioanalytical method development and validation. The developed method was successfully administered to the pharmacokinetics study of 5 mg midodrine tablet in 12 healthy subjects. Reproducibility of assay was proved by reanalysis of 48 incurred samples.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jpba.2016.09.005

Cites

16 of 16 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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Patel, D. P., Nair, S., Suhagia, B. N., & Patel, B. M.
Affiliations
  • National Cancer Institute (US)
  • Gujarat University (IN)
  • Dharmsinh Desai University (IN)
  • St Xavier’s College (IN)
Corresponding author
Patel, Bhargav M.
Venue
Journal of Pharmaceutical and Biomedical Analysis
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2016-11
Volume
131
Pages
355-363
ISSN
0731-7085 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2515460764
Cited by
15
References
16
Citations by year
2025: 2 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 1 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 1
FWCI
1.58
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Pharmaceutical and Biomedical Analysis (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Chemistry › Analytical Chemistry › Analytical Methods in Pharmaceuticals
  • Life Sciences › Immunology and Microbiology › Immunology › Biosimilars and Bioanalytical Methods
  • Life Sciences › Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics › Toxicology › Forensic Toxicology and Drug Analysis
Keywords
midodrine, UPLC-MS/MS, human plasma, bioequivalence, pharmacokinetics, solid-phase extraction, deuterated internal standards, bioanalytical method validation, healthy volunteers
MeSH terms
Chromatography, High Pressure Liquid, Humans, Midodrine, Therapeutic Equivalency, Time Factors, Cross-Over Studies, Tandem Mass Spectrometry

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