Cited by 32Analytical Methods in PharmaceuticalsAdvanced Drug Delivery SystemsAdvancements in Transdermal Drug Delivery

Validation of an HPLC-UV method for analysis of Kaempferol-loaded nanoemulsion and its application to in vitro and in vivo tests

Colombo, Mariana, Melchiades, Gabriela de Lima, Figueiró, Fabrício, Battastini, Ana Maria Oliveira, Teixeira, Helder Ferreira, Koester, Letícia Scherer·2017·Journal of Pharmaceutical and Biomedical Analysis

Abstract

A simple and reliable HPLC-UV method for Kaempferol (KPF) determination in a Kaempferol-loaded nanoemulsion (KPF-NE), samples from mucosa permeation/retention studies, and murine brain was developed and validated according to international guidelines. The analyses were performed on a reversed-phase C18 column at 35°C and under UV detection at 368nm. The mobile phase was composed of methanol:formic acid 0.1% (75:25, v/v) and was eluted at an isocratic flow rate of 1.0mL/min. The method was selective and sensitive for KPF analysis in matrix extracts, and linear in the range of 0.25-7.5μg/mL. The method was also considered precise, accurate, and robust. The recovery rates of KPF from the porcine nasal mucosa and murine brain were higher than 85%. Low matrix effect was observed to determine KPF, including biological matrices. The applicability of the method was confirmed in all different approaches, i.e., quantification of KPF in nanoemulsion, in vitro permeation/retention of KPF across porcine nasal mucosa, and in vivo quantification of KPF in brain samples after nasal administration in rats. Thus, the method is effective and reliable to determine KPF in different real samples. The proposed method, therefore, provides a useful quantification approach to routine processes, to the development of drug delivery systems, and to KPF quantification in different biological matrices. Furthermore, the method is applicable in bioavailability studies and the developed formulation (KPF-NE) is suitable for preclinical trials in different brain disorders.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jpba.2017.07.046

Cites

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?

  • Kaempferol nanoemulsions showed no toxicity towards nasal mucosa, and ex vivo permeation was higher in formulations containing chitosan than in those without.

    “The NEs showed no toxicity towards nasal mucosa, and ex vivo permeation was higher in the formulations containing chitosan in respect to those without.”

    From Nanoemulsions for “Nose-to-Brain” Drug Delivery (2019) · cites this paper as [73]

  • Kaempferol-loaded nanoemulsions showed nanometric globule size, high loading capacity and entrapment efficiency, and preserved the antioxidant potential of kaempferol.

    “Results showed nanometric globule size, high loading capacity and entrapment efficiency, and NEs were able to preserve the antioxidant potential of kaempferol.”

    From Nanoemulsions for “Nose-to-Brain” Drug Delivery (2019) · cites this paper as [73]

  • Reduced C6 glioma cell viability through induction of apoptosis was obtained from nanoemulsions containing chitosan to a greater extent than from free drug solution or nanoemulsion without chitosan.

    “A reduced C6 glioma cell viability through induction of apoptosis was obtained from NEs containing chitosan to a greater extent than either free drug solution or NE without chitosan.”

    From Nanoemulsions for “Nose-to-Brain” Drug Delivery (2019) · cites this paper as [73]

  • The drug concentration in brain tissue after nasal administration of the kaempferol nanoemulsion containing chitosan was significantly higher than with nanoemulsions without chitosan or drug solutions.

    “The drug concentration (ng/g of tissue) in brain tissue after nasal administration of the NE formulation containing chitosan was found to be significantly higher with respect to NEs without chitosan or drug solutions.”

    From Nanoemulsions for “Nose-to-Brain” Drug Delivery (2019) · cites this paper as [73]

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 27 · Cited by 32

Authors
Colombo, M., Melchiades, G. D. L., Figueiró, F., Battastini, A. M. O., Teixeira, H. F., & Koester, L. S.
Affiliations
Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul (BR)
Corresponding author
Koester, Letícia Scherer
Venue
Journal of Pharmaceutical and Biomedical Analysis
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2017-10
Volume
145
Pages
831-837
ISSN
0731-7085 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2742953301
Cited by
32
References
27
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 1
FWCI
2.49
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Pharmaceutical and Biomedical Analysis (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • CNPq
  • CAPES/Brazil
  • FAPERGS
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Chemistry › Analytical Chemistry › Analytical Methods in Pharmaceuticals
  • Life Sciences › Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics › Pharmaceutical Science › Advanced Drug Delivery Systems
  • Life Sciences › Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics › Pharmaceutical Science › Advancements in Transdermal Drug Delivery
Keywords
kaempferol, nanoemulsions, HPLC-UV method validation, nasal mucosa permeation, intranasal drug delivery, murine brain, matrix effects, bioavailability, flavonoid quantification
MeSH terms
Animals, Chromatography, High Pressure Liquid, Emulsions, Reproducibility of Results, Drug Delivery Systems, Kaempferols, Mice, Rats

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