These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Spectrophotometric study of the reaction mechanism between DDQ Pi- and iodine sigma-acceptors and chloroquine and pyrimethamine drugs and their determination in pure and in dosage forms.
    Author: Zayed MA, Khalil SM, El-Qudaby HM.
    Journal: Spectrochim Acta A Mol Biomol Spectrosc; 2005 Nov; 62(1-3):461-5. PubMed ID: 16257747.
    Abstract:
    Two simple and accurate spectrophotometric methods are presented for the determination of anti-malarial drugs, chloroquine phosphate (CQP) and pyrimethamine (PYM), in pure and in different pharmaceutical preparations. The charge transphere (CT) reactions between CQP and PYM as electron donors and 2,3-dichloro-5,6-dicyano-p-benzoquinone (DDQ) pi-acceptor and iodine sigma-acceptor reagents to give highly coloured complex species have been spectrophotometrically studied. The optimum experimental conditions have been studied carefully. Beer' law is obeyed over the concentration range of 1.0-15 microg ml(-1) for CQP and 1.0-40 microg ml(-1) for PYM using I(2) and at 5.0-53 microg ml(-1) for CQP and 1.0-46 microg ml(-1) for PYM using DDQ reagents, respectively. For more accurate results, Ringbom optimum concentration range is calculated and found to be 10-53 and 8-46 microg ml(-1) for CQP and PYM using DDQ, respectively and 5-15 and 8-40 microg ml(-1) for CQP and PYM using iodine, respectively. The Sandell sensitivity is found to be 0.038 and 0.046 g cm(-2) for DDQ method and 0.0078 and 0.056 g cm(-2) for I(2) method for CQP and PYM, respectively which indicates the high sensitivity of both methods. Standard deviation (S.D.=0.012-0.014 and 0.013-0.015) and relative standard deviation (R.S.D.=0.09-1.4 and 1.3-1.5%) (n=5) for DDQ and I(2) methods respectively, refer to the high accuracy and precision of the proposed methods. These results are also confirmed by between day precision of percent recovery of 99-100.6%, and 98-101% for CQP and PYM by DDQ method and 99-102% and 99.2-101.4% for CQP and PYM by I(2) method respectively. These data are comparable to those obtained by British and American pharmacopoeias assay for the determination of CQP and PYM in raw materials and in pharmaceutical preparations.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]