Table 8 Comparison between the developed methods and the reported one
Item for comparison | Methods under comparison | ||
|---|---|---|---|
The developed method TLC-densitometric method | The developed method RP-HPLC method | Chemometric methods [27] | |
Linearity range | -GUF: 0.5–8.0 µg/band -BR: 0.25–4.0 µg/band -SAL: 0.25–4.0 µg/band -GUL: 0.1–1.6 μg/band | -GUF: 2–50 μg/mL -BR: 2–50 μg/mL -SAL: 2–50 μg/mL -GUL: 2–50 μg/mL | -GUF: 10.0–30.0 μg/mL -BR: 10.0–30.0 μg/mL -SAL: 10.0–30.0 μg/mL -GUL:6.0–10.0 μg/mL |
Solvents used | hexane: methylene chloride: triethylamine (5:6:0.3, by volume) | 0.05M disodium hydrogen phosphate pH 3 with aqueous phosphoric acid: methanol (containing 0.3% triethylamine) (40:60, v/v) | Methanol |
Comments | -It is the first TLC-densitometeric method for the determination of the studied drugs and impurity without interference from excipients -It has low energy and money consumption -It has low waste production -It has short analysis time | -It is the first developed stability indicating HPLC method for quantitation of the impurity - The run time is less than 10 min | - It has the lowest energy and money consumption - The sensitivity is lower than the developed methods according to the linearity ranges - It measures the drugs in the presence of the excipients without separation of the excipients, so it always needs certain modifications on the method to remove the interference from excipients |
-They have higher sensitivity for the studied drugs as well as the impurity -Insilico study for the selected impurity to study the toxicity profile and the pharmacokinetic properties -Complete separation of drug from the excipients with minimum sample pretreatment steps | |||