Advanced Analytical Method Validation for Bioequivalence Studies of Fexofenadine in Human Plasma Using LC-MS/MS
Keywords:
Fexofenadine, Bioequivalence, LC-MS/MS, Analytical Method Validation, PharmacokineticsAbstract
This study presents a comprehensive bioequivalence analysis of fexofenadine in human plasma samples, employing an advanced LC-MS/MS technique. The method was meticulously validated in compliance with the ICH M10 guidelines, focusing on specificity, linearity, precision, accuracy, and robustness. Calibration curves were constructed over a concentration range of 0.625–300 ppb, exhibiting high linearity (R² > 0.99). Specificity assessments demonstrated negligible interference, ensuring the method’s reliability in detecting analyte and internal standard signals. Clinical application involved the analysis of plasma samples from volunteers administered test and reference formulations, with pharmacokinetic parameters such as Cmax and Tmax compared. The results confirmed the bioequivalence of the two formulations, as indicated by comparable pharmacokinetic profiles and low intra-individual variability. This validated method and its findings provide a robust framework for the bioequivalence assessment of fexofenadine and similar pharmaceutical compounds, supporting regulatory approval and clinical application.
Downloads
References
1. Bouchafra, H., El Orche, A., Khabbaz, C.E., Cheikh, A., Karbane, M.E., Faouzi, M.E.A., Cherrah, Y., Zarayby, L., and Hirri, A. (2024). Determination and Validation of Tiaprofenic Acid in Human Plasma: A Detailed LC-MS/MS-Based Analysis Following ICH M10 Guidelines and the Accuracy Profile Approach. Current Chemistry Letters, 13, 707–716. doi: 10.5267/j.ccl.2024.4.003.
2. Bonde, S.L., Bhadane, R.P., Gaikwad, A., Gavali, S.R., Katale, D.U., and Narendiran, A.S. (2014). Simultaneous Determination of Olanzapine and Fluoxetine in Human Plasma by LC–MS/MS: Its Pharmacokinetic Application. Journal of Pharmaceutical and Biomedical Analysis, 90, 64–71. doi: 10.1016/j.jpba.2013.10.033.
3. Negi, G., Majeed, J., Arora, S., Rana, S., Singh, M., and Tomar, J. (2021). Quantification of Fluoxetine in Human Plasma by the Development of Liquid Chromatography-Tandem Mass Spectrometry Method. Indian Journal of Pharmaceutical Education and Research, 55, s303–s311. doi: 10.5530/ijper.55.1s.63.
4. Zhou, N., Chen, B., Pan, T., and Liu, S. (2009). Determination of Fluoxetine in Human Plasma by Liquid Chromatography–Mass Spectrometry and Its Application. Analytical Letters, 42, 2071–2086. doi: 10.1080/00032710903082804.
5. Feinberg, M. (2007). Validation of Analytical Methods Based on Accuracy Profiles. Journal of Chromatography A, 1158, 174–183. doi: 10.1016/j.chroma.2007.02.021.
6. ICH Expert Working Group. (2022). ICH Guideline M10 on Bioanalytical Method Validation. European Medicines Agency. Retrieved from https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/documents/scientific-guideline/ich-guideline-m10-bioanalytical-method-validation-step-5_en.pdf.
7. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. (2022). M10 Bioanalytical Method Validation and Study Sample Analysis. FDA Guidance Documents. Retrieved from https://www.fda.gov/regulatory-information/search-fda-guidance-documents/m10-bioanalytical-method-validation-and-study-sample-analysis.
8. Li, Y., Zhang, D., and Sun, Y. (2014). Development and Validation of an LC-MS/MS Method for the Determination of Fluoxetine in Human Plasma. Journal of Chromatography B, 960, 170–175. doi: 10.1016/j.jchromb.2014.05.025.
9. Bansal, S., and DeStefano, A. (2007). Key Elements of Bioanalytical Method Validation for Small Molecules. The AAPS Journal, 9(1), E109–E114. doi: 10.1208/aapsj0901011.
10. Viswanathan, C.T., Bansal, S., Booth, B., DeStefano, A.J., Rose, M.J., Sailstad, J., Shah, V.P., Skelly, J.P., Swann, P.G., and Weiner, R. (2007). Quantitative Bioanalytical Methods Validation and Implementation: Best Practices for Chromatographic and Ligand Binding Assays. Pharmaceutical Research, 24, 1962–1973. doi: 10.1007/s11095-007-9291-7.
11. European Medicines Agency. (2011). Guideline on Bioanalytical Method Validation. EMA/CHMP/EWP/192217/2009. Retrieved from https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/documents/scientific-guideline/guideline-bioanalytical-method-validation_en.pdf.
12. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. (2018). Bioanalytical Method Validation Guidance for Industry. FDA Guidance Documents. Retrieved from https://www.fda.gov/media/70858/download.
13. Peters, F.T., Drummer, O.H., and Musshoff, F. (2007). Validation of New Methods. Forensic Science International, 165(2-3), 216–224. doi: 10.1016/j.forsciint.2006.05.021.
14. Matuszewski, B.K., Constanzer, M.L., and Chavez-Eng, C.M. (2003). Strategies for the Assessment of Matrix Effect in Quantitative Bioanalytical Methods Based on HPLC-MS/MS. Analytical Chemistry, 75(13), 3019–3030. doi: 10.1021/ac020361s.
15. Chambers, E., Wagrowski-Diehl, D.M., Lu, Z., and Mazzeo, J.R. (2007). Systematic and Comprehensive Strategy for Reducing Matrix Effects in LC/MS/MS Analyses. Journal of Chromatography B, 852(1-2), 22–34. doi: 10.1016/j.jchromb.2006.12.030.
16. Annesley, T.M. (2003). Ion Suppression in Mass Spectrometry. Clinical Chemistry, 49(7), 1041–1044. doi: 10.1373/49.7.1041.
17. Taylor, P.J. (2005). Matrix Effects: The Achilles Heel of Quantitative High-Performance Liquid Chromatography–Electrospray–Tandem Mass Spectrometry. Clinical Biochemistry, 38(4), 328–334. doi: 10.1016/j.clinbiochem.2004.11.007.
18. Trufelli, H., Palma, P., Famiglini, G., and Cappiello, A. (2011). An Overview of Matrix Effects in Liquid Chromatography–Mass Spectrometry.
