The first, second, third, and fourth-order derivative spectrophotometric methods by using the peak—zero (P - O) and peak-peak (P - P) techniques of measurement have been developed for the determination of levofloxacin, norfloxacin, and moxifloxacin in their combined pharmaceutical dosage form or individually for levofloxacin, norfloxacin, and moxifloxacin. Linearity was achieved at 2–20 µg/ml. The procedure is Simple, quick, and precise. The developed method is sensitive and precise. simple, accurate, and cost-effective, and exhibited a good correlation coefficient (R2 = 0.9998) and excellent mean recovery (99.20–100.08%), indicating a high degree of precision of the methods. This approach was successfully used to determine the levofloxacin, norfloxacin, and moxifloxacin content in marketed pharmaceutical dosages. The method's linearity, and accuracy, were confirmed statistically and through recovery tests. The results showed that the method can be used for routine analysis in bulk and commercial formulations.
Research Article
Determination of Levofloxacin, Norfloxacin, and Moxifloxacin in Pharmaceutical Dosage Form or Individually Using Derivative UV Spectrophotometry
https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-2455969/v2
This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License
Version 2
posted
You are reading this latest preprint version
levofloxacin
norfloxacin
moxifloxacin
Validation
Simultaneous Estimation
Derivative
Uv Spectrophotometry
Derived UV-spectrophotometry is an intrusive method of obtaining mutually qualitative and quantitative information from spectra in debatable bands. It uses first or higher derivatives of absorbance by all directions wavelength for both qualitative and quantitative analysis. [1] For qualitative and quantitative analysis, derivative spectroscopy employs the first or higher derivatives of absorbance concerning wavelength. Derivatizing spectral data was first introduced in the 1950s, when it was demonstrated to have numerous advantages. However, due to the difficulty of generating derivative spectra with early UV-Visible spectrophotometers, the technique received little attention. With the introduction of microcomputers in the late 1970s, it became commonplace to use mathematical methods to generate derivative spectra quickly, easily, and reproducibly. This increased the use of the derivative technique significantly. In this application note, we will go over the mathematics and generation methods of derivative spectroscopy in a nutshell. We use computer-generated examples to demonstrate the features and applications. Figure (1). [24]
A negative band with a minimum at the same wavelength as the maximum on the zero-order band is the most distinguishing feature of a second-order derivative. It also displays two more positive satellite bands on either side of the main band. A positive band can be seen in a fourth-order derivative. Even-order derivatives have a strong negative or positive band with a minimum or maximum at the same wavelength as the absorbance band's maximum. [2,3,4] The observed number of bands is one more than the derivative order. How to Get Derivative Spectra Optical, electronic, or mathematical methods can be used to obtain derivative spectra. Early UV-Visible spectrophotometers used optical and electronic techniques, but these have been largely replaced by mathematical techniques. The mathematical techniques have the advantage of being easily calculated and recalculated with different parameters, and smoothing techniques can be used to improve the signal-to-noise ratio. Techniques based on optics and electronics The main optical technique is wavelength modulation, in which an electromechanical device rapidly modulates the wavelength of incident light over a narrow wavelength range. This technique can be used to generate the first and second derivatives. It is popular for dedicated spectrophotometer designs used in environmental monitoring, for example. A dual wavelength spectrophotometer can also produce first-derivative spectra. Scanning with each monochromatic separated by a small constant wavelength difference produces the derivative spectrum. [5,6,7] The synthesis of fluorinated quinolones known as fluoroquinolones has opened up the field of quinolone antibacterial chemotherapy. Fluoroquinolones have enhanced activity against a wide range of Gram-negative as well as Gram positive cocci and Enterobacteriaceae. The increased potency of fluoroquinolones due to enhanced activity, a broader antibacterial spectrum or improved pharmacokinetic properties has greatly expanded their potential usefulness in clinical practice. The fluoroquinolones are widely distributed in the body tissue and achieve excellent urinary concentration hence; they are useful for the treatment of urinary, respiratory, gastrointestinal, skin, soft tissue, bone and sexually transmitted infections due to intracellular pathogens. [8,9] Quinolones are antibiotics that are structurally similar to nalidixic acid. Bactericidal action is principally achieved by blocking bacterial DNA gyrase. Early quinolones had a narrow spectrum of activity, low potency, a high rate of spontaneous bacterial resistance, low serum drug concentrations, and short half-lives, limiting their application to urinary tract infections. The novel fluorinated quinolones differ from their predecessors in that they have a broad antibacterial range that includes Gram-negative and Gram-positive aerobic, facultative anaerobic, and Gram-negative and Gram-positive mycobacterium, Chlamydia, Legionella, and Mycoplasma spp. Furthermore, many bacteria strains are multi resistant to beta-lactam antibiotics and aminoglycosides. They also have a lot of potency, a low rate of resistance, a lot of oral bioavailability, a lot of tissue penetration, a lot of protein binding, and a lot of elimination half-lives. Apart from some gastrointestinal disturbances and rashes, including photosensitive eruptions and a proclivity to trigger central nervous system stimulation, they are generally well tolerated. Antacids, theophylline, fenbufen, and warfarin all have clinically significant interactions. Cartilage damage, eye toxicity, teratogenicity, and spermatogenesis impairment are all possible side effects. Infections of the urinary tract, respiratory tract, skin and soft tissues, bone and joints, infections in immunocompromised patients, sexually transmitted illnesses, infectious diarrhea, gynecological infections, and surgical prophylaxis are all areas where fluoroquinolones are used. The ease with which oral therapy is an added advantage of the new fluoroquinolones. [10] Broad-spectrum bactericidal action, great oral bioavailability, good tissue penetration, and favorable safety and tolerability characteristics characterize the newer fluoroquinolones. The extended antibacterial spectrum of the most recently introduced fluoroquinolones, as well as their therapeutic indications, are accounted for in a new four-generation categorization of quinolone medicines. Nalidixic acid, for example, is a first-generation medication that achieves low serum levels. Second-generation quinolones (e.g., ciprofloxacin) have more gram-negative and systemic activity than first-generation quinolones. Third-generation antibiotics (such as levofloxacin) show increased activity against gram-positive bacteria as well as atypical infections. Fourth-generation quinolone medications (now just trovafloxacin) increase anaerobe activity significantly. The pharmacokinetic features of quinolones can be used to classify them within classes. The new classification will aid family physicians in prescribing these medications correctly. [1] The antibiotics levofloxacin and norfloxacin are used to treat a variety of illnesses caused by different bacterial species. Using spectroscopic methods for fluorescence and ultraviolet-visible absorption, the photo physical characteristics of the medicines were examined in this study. The outcomes showed that solvent polarity and drug concentration had an impact on the fluorescence quantum yields, lifespan, and non-radiative decay of the medicines. Using the fluorescence quenching technique, the binding mechanisms of levofloxacin- and norfloxacin-caffeine were identified. Caffeine-induced drug quenching is caused by ground state complexes. Electrostatics, hydrogen, and the Van der Waals force all contribute significantly to spontaneous binding. [11]
Recently, UV-Visible spectroscopy and density functional theory (DFT) techniques have been used to examine the charge-transfer (CT) complex formation of iodine with aniline and derivatives of aniline in CCl4 at various temperatures (293.15-308.15 K). Using the Benesi-Hildebrand plot, the formation constant (KCT) of the CT complexation was calculated. It was discovered that changes in temperature and the structure of the donor molecules affected the KCT values of CT complexes involving iodine and aniline/aniline derivatives. In the UV spectra obtained from experimental and DFT experiments, the extra CT band has been detected. Additionally, the lengthening of I2 acceptors' bonds allowed researchers to observe the interaction between I2 and aniline and aniline derivatives. [12] The goal of this work was to provide the titrimetric approach as a convenient, affordable, simple, and environmentally friendly analytical methodology (method A). Based on the in situ bromination of CIP-HCl by bromine created by the interaction of acid on the bromate-bromide combination, a new titrimetric approach has been devised. In addition, straightforward UV-Spectroscopic (method A) from earlier literature was carried out. In UV spectroscopic analysis, Beer's law is seen in the concentration ranges of 3.5-11.5 g mL-1, whereas titrmetric analysis permits determination across the range of 5.0-70.0 mg CIP-HCl. The accuracy and precision of the devised approach (method A) and the reference method (method B) exhibited no discernible variations in the results. Three distinct dosage forms of CIP-HCl were successfully determined using the described approach and UV spectroscopy. [13] A thorough review of the literature revealed that there is no technique for simultaneous measurement of Doxycycline and Levofloxacin in combination by UV/Visible spectroscopy in any of the most widely used pharmacopeias or journals. Building a method that would serve as a reliable, accurate UV approach for the simultaneous quantification of Doxycycline and Levofloxacin was therefore deemed essential. [14] the utilisation of highly crystalline TiO2 nanoparticles in the photocatalytic degradation of the antibiotic levofloxacin (LEVO), which is a common medication. The TiO2 nanoparticles were created using a sol-gel method, and their morphological, structural, compositional, thermal, and optical characteristics were assessed using a variety of methods. the generated TiO2 nanoparticles are formed in high density, are extremely crystalline, and have good optical characteristics, according to the in-depth research. [15]. the simple hydrothermal and sol-gel synthesis of carbon dots (C-dots), titanium dioxide (TiO2) quantum dots, and carbon dots (TiO2/C-dots). Using a variety of spectroscopic and analytical approaches, the synthesised quantum dots were further characterised in order to comprehend their crystalline, structural, morphological, thermal, and optical characteristics. The results of the characterization demonstrated that the produced photocatalysts had great crystallinity, purity, and superior optical characteristics. According to the morphological findings, nanocomposites had an average size of 12 nm and the C-dots were uniformly dispersed across the TiO2 quantum dots. [16]. In order to address contemporary environmental issues, photocatalytic materials and semiconductors with suitable structural and morphological architectures, as well as energy band gaps, are required. These materials have the capacity to use the whole solar spectrum in a variety of applications. To effectively remove organic compounds from wastewater, to name just one area of application, creating a Z-scheme heterojunction is an ideal way to get beyond the constraints of a single component or conventional heterogeneous catalysts. [17]. A simple, quick, and affordable technique for making MIL-100(Fe) using a sealed autoclave and a solid state reaction. With the aid of several methods, such as PXRD, FTIR, SEM, EDX, TGA, BET surface area, and zeta potential analysis, the as-prepared MIL-100(Fe) was further described in detail. The produced sample served as an adsorbent for the extraction of the antibiotic levofloxacin (LVX) from the aqueous phase. [18]
2.1. Device's
UV –Visible double beam spectrophotometer, Model Shimadzu 1800 Origin, Kyoto, Japan. Uv. Probe 2.34, Model shimadzu Origin Kyoto Japan was used for all absorbance measurements with matched quartz cells., Laboratory oven- sonorex, Sensitive Electronic balance, Ultra sonic devise (ultrasonicator)- sonorex, Water bathe - Karl kolb, hot plate with magnetic stirrer-(LMS-1003, Daihan lab tech) Origin Germany. Micropipettes-(1-10 µl) and 100 µl Origin Swiss. Computer - dell Origin Germany China
2.2. Chemical materials
Levofloxacin, Norfloxacin, and Moxifloxacin were provided by Arti (India). Pharmaceutical grade excipients were provided as a gift sample from Eipico company (10th of Ramadan City, Egypt), Croscarmellose sodium, Citric acid, Magnesium stearate, Vinyl pyrrolidone, Starch, Methanol, Methyl paraben, Talc, and Salicylic Acid. Deionized water used in the analysis was prepared by reverse osmosis and passed through a 0.45 μm Millipore filter (Millipore Company, USA).
2.3. Market sample
Tablet forms of Levofloxacin, Norfloxacin, and Moxifloxacin were randomly selected from the market and analysed with the recently developed and approved method. Sample solutions of each brand's Levofloxacin, Norfloxacin, and Moxifloxacin contents were evaluated against the reference standard, utilizing data from the marketed products, the amounts of levofloxacin, norfloxacin, and moxifloxacin were determined.
- A drug Levoxin made to contain 250 mg Levofloxacin Producing Company: by ALAR LABORATORIES PVT LIMITED
- A drug Epinor made to contain 400 mg Norfloxacin Producing Company: EIPICO
- A drug Deltamox made to contain 400 mg moxifloxacin Producing Company: DELTA PHARMA
2.4. Solutions
Solution of Levofloxacin, Norfloxacin, and moxifloxacin (1000 µg/ml)
Solution of Levofloxacin, Norfloxacin, and moxifloxacin 1000 µg/ml prepared by dissolving (0.1g) of Levofloxacin, Norfloxacin and moxifloxacin in 100 ml methanol solution.
Solution of Levofloxacin, Norfloxacin and moxifloxacin (100 µg/ml)
It is prepared by dilution the stock solution of Levofloxacin, Norfloxacin and moxifloxacin in in 100 ml of methanol, the work solution dilution in volumetric flask 10 ml in methanol solution (2-20 µg/ml)
Additives (1000 µg/ml)
It is prepared by dissolving (0.1g) of Levofloxacin, Norfloxacin and moxifloxacin in 100 ml methanol in volumetric flask which were (Levofloxacin, Norfloxacin, moxifloxacin, Croscarmellose sodium, Citric acid, Magnesium stearate, Vinyl pyrrolidone, Starch, Methanol, Methyl paraben, Talc, Salicylic acid)
2.5. procedures:
Preparation of the calibration curve for Levofloxacin, Norfloxacin and moxifloxacin
Take 10 ml of the working solution. By dilution of the work solution (100 µg/ml) in the methanol solvent in a volumetric flask 10 ml prepared solution, it's concentration at the range (2-20 µg/ml). The cross ponding absorption, this concentration measured in Uv –visible double beam spectrophotometer (Shimadzu 1800) the absorption spectra of the Levofloxacin, Norfloxacin and moxifloxacin were scanning (220 - 350 nm). Was carried out to determine the (λ max) for Levofloxacin, Norfloxacin, and moxifloxacin the detection using diluent as blank. The wavelength at absorption maximum (λ max) was determined. Calibration curves were created for these drugs at their respective (λ max). The derivative spectra (D1, D2, D3 and D4) have been derived from their normal spectra (zero order) for the drug by the computer via shimadzu Uv (Uv probe 2.34) data system program. The suitable wavelength peak to baseline and peak area at (λ max) where determination for standard drug. Calibration curves of each derivative were constructed of them used to determine the concentration of drug. Calibration curves of suitable derivatives and at suitable wavelength were created for these standard drugs, which were used to determine the concentration of the drug.
2.6. Stability study
Samples produced for the repeatability research were kept at room temperature for 24 hours before being tested for short-term stability the next day.
2.7. Accuracy/recovery study
This study was carried out using pre-formulated granules containing pure Levofloxacin, Norfloxacin, and Moxifloxacin and common excipients. The calculation was done from the label claim and the average weight of the final product. Previously used dilution pattern was followed for the granules to obtain three concentrations—80%, 100%, and 120% of reference solution.
2.8. Specificity in the presence of excipients
The test for specificity was carried out using only excipients. Spectra were evaluated for placebo granules, a blank, and a sample. Second, the specificity was evaluated by submitting the sample solution to heat-accelerated degradation (60 oC) for 72 hours to ensure that none of the degradation products interfered with drug measurement.
2.9. Determination of Levofloxacin, Norfloxacin, and Moxifloxacin in pharmaceutical dosage
Ten tablets of Levonex (containing 0.250 g of levofloxacin), Epinor (containing 0.400 g of norfloxacin), and Deltamox (containing 0.200 g of Moxifloxacin) were weighed and milled. A 50 mL volumetric flask containing 20 mL of 0.1 mol/L HCl was filled with an accurately weighed amount of the homogenized powder corresponding to 50 mg of each tested drug. After shaking the combinations for 20 minutes, the volumes were diluted to 50 ml with 0.1 mol/L HCl and the solutions produced were filtered. 1 mL of each of the clear solutions obtained was diluted to 10 mL with 0.1 mol/L HCl. Then come the volumes of these solutions: 0.5 mL, 0.5 mL, 1.0 mL (solution of Levofloxacin, Norfloxacin, and Moxifloxacin, respectively) were placed in 10 ml volumetric flasks and diluted to the mark with 0.1 mol/L HCl. The first—, second—, third—, and fourth—order derivative spectra of these solutions were recorded. The amplitudes of the minimum and maximum were graphically measured and the concentrations of Levofloxacin, Norfloxacin, and Moxifloxacin in the researched sample, solutions examined were obtained by interpolating the corresponding calibration curves.
3.1. Method development and optimization
Levofloxacin, Norfloxacin and moxifloxacin are almost soluble in methanol. During the development phase, the use methanol with water as the diluent resulted in preferable outcome in UV analysis. The solvent composition was optimized to water (5): methanol (5) The pre-determined wavelength of maximum absorption (λ max) were scanning (220 - 350 nm). And the maximum absorption for levofloxacin at 287 nm, Norfloxacin at 291 nm, and moxifloxacin 294 nm.
3.2. Method validation
3.2.1. Linearity and range
The calibration curve obtained was tested using its linear correlation coefficient (R2), which was more than 0.99.
The calibration curves were constructed by plotting the graphically measured (mm) amplitudes of the first—, second—, third—, and fourth—order derivative spectra vs the corresponding concentrations of the examined drugs.
Figure 2 show, the first—, second—, third—, and fourth—order derivative spectra of levofloxacin standard solution in 0.1 ml HCl, recorded within the range of 220—350 nm at the concentrations of 2.0, 4.0 to 20 µg ml levofloxacin
Figure 3 shows the first—, second—, third—, and fourth—order derivative spectra of norfloxacin standard solution in 0.1 ml HCl, recorded within the range of 220—350 nm at concentrations of 2.0, 4.0 to 20 µg ml of norfloxacin.
Figure 4 shows the first—, second—, third—, and fourth—order derivative spectra of moxifloxacin standard solution in 0.1 ml HCl, recorded within the range of 220—350 nm at concentrations of 2.0, 4.0 to 20 µg ml of moxifloxacin.
3.2.2. Limit of Detection and Limit of Quantification
LOD and LOQ were calculated from the data obtained from the linearity studies. The slope of the linearity plot
was determined. For each of the five replicate determinations, standard deviation (SD) of the responses was calculated.
From these values, the parameters Limit of Detection (LOD) and Limit of Quantification (LOQ) were determined on the
basis of standard deviation and slope of the regression equation.
LOD = 3.3 × σ/S; LOQ = 10 × σ/S
Where, σ = the standard deviation of the response and S = slope of the calibration curve
LOD and LOQ values were calculated in 2-20 µg/ml respectively for Levofloxacin, Norfloxacin and moxifloxacin. These shows that proposed method is sensitive.
3.2.3. Stability
The results of the stability study were within the acceptable range (Table 1), indicating that the samples were stable for 24 hours (short-term). This test was carried out with the test at a concentration of [1 mL]. It was measured at various time intervals to determine the solution's stability.
Table 1 Short term stability determined by the proposed method (n=3).
|
Drugs |
Concentration declared (mg/mL) |
Concentration found (mean ±SD, ) |
RSD (%) |
Average Potency (%) |
|
levofloxacin |
2 |
1.96±0.05 |
0.295 |
98.19 |
|
|
4 |
3.95±0.05 |
0.146 |
98.80 |
|
|
6 |
5.97±0.05 |
0.097 |
99.41 |
|
norfloxacin |
2 |
1.94±0.05 |
0.295 |
98.20 |
|
|
4 |
3.90±0.05 |
0.265 |
99.90 |
|
|
6 |
5.93±0.05 |
0.098 |
100.05 |
|
moxifloxacin |
2 |
1.95±0.05 |
0.295 |
98.19 |
|
|
4 |
3.96±0.05 |
0.150 |
99.50 |
|
|
6 |
5.98±0.05 |
0.255 |
98.90 |
3.2.4. Accuracy/recovery
Results within the range of 99.20–100.08% ensure an accurate method (Table 2) as well as indicate non-interference with the
excipients of formulation.
Table 2 Recovery/accuracy for three different concentrations of levofloxacin, norfloxacin, and moxifloxacin by the proposed method.
|
Dosage form |
Label claim
|
Amount added (%)
|
Recovery (%)
|
|
levofloxacin |
0.500 mg |
80 |
99.80 |
|
|
|
100 |
99.45 |
|
|
|
120 |
99.60 |
|
norfloxacin |
0.500 mg |
80 |
100.05 |
|
|
|
100 |
99.70 |
|
|
|
120 |
100.1 |
|
moxifloxacin |
0.500 mg |
80 |
99.5 |
|
|
|
100 |
100.08 |
|
|
|
120 |
99.20 |
3.2.5. Specificity in the presence of excipients
The specificity of the analytical method was proved by comparing the spectra of placebo and degradation product of sample solution with that of accuracy sample.
3.2.6. Content of Levofloxacin, Norfloxacin, and Moxifloxacin in marketed brands
Levofloxacin, Norfloxacin, and Moxifloxacin content of market product determined by the proposed method (Table 3,5,7) was in good agreement with the label claims and was in the range of 98.05–99.47% with the RSD values of 0.16 – 0.92% respectively.
3.2.7. Statistical analysis
Data were expressed as the standard deviation and %RSD calculated for these methods are < 1, indicating high degree of precision of the methods table (3-5-7)
|
Table 3 Statistical evaluation of the elaborated method for Levofloxacin (standard solution n=10) |
||||
|
Derivative |
λ (nm) |
Technique |
Regression Equation |
Correlation Coefficient |
|
D1 |
275 |
Absorbance (p-o) |
y = 0.0029x + 0.0095 |
0.946 |
|
D1 |
297 |
Absorbance (p-o) |
y = -0.0033x - 0.0112 |
0.934 |
|
D1 |
286-322 |
Peak(P-P) |
y = -0.0504x - 0.1996 |
0.989 |
|
D1 |
257- 286 |
Peak(P-P) |
y = 0.0335x + 0.2049 |
0.982 |
|
D1 |
257-322 |
Peak(P-P) |
y = -0.0164x + 0.0024 |
0.988 |
|
D2 |
305 |
Absorbance (p-o) |
y = 0.0003x + 0.0009 |
0.969 |
|
D2 |
287 |
Absorbance (p-o) |
y = -0.0005x - 0.0022 |
0.970 |
|
D2 |
296 |
Absorbance (p-o) |
y = 0.0004x + 0.001 |
0.988 |
|
D2 |
262 - 276 |
Peak(P-P) |
y = 0.0023x + 0.0179 |
0.986 |
|
D2 |
276 - 297 |
Peak(P-P) |
y = -0.0066x - 0.0117 |
0.976 |
|
D2 |
297 - 318 |
Peak(P-P) |
y = 0.0041x + 0.0113 |
0.987 |
|
D2 |
262 - 318 |
Peak(P-P) |
y = 0.0003x + 0.0116 |
0.980 |
|
D3 |
278 |
Absorbance (p-o) |
y = -0.00006x - 0.00021 |
0.974 |
|
D3 |
296 |
Absorbance (p-o) |
y =0.00005x + 0.0003 |
0.985 |
|
D3 |
311 |
Absorbance (p-o) |
y = -0.00003x - 0.00008 |
0.980 |
|
D3 |
267 - 287 |
Peak(P-P) |
y = -0.0007x - 0.0043 |
0.983 |
|
D3 |
287 - 306 |
Peak(P-P) |
y = 0.0006x + 0.005 |
0.979 |
|
D3 |
306 - 317 |
Peak(P-P) |
y = -0.0001x - 0.0003 |
0.997 |
|
D3 |
267- 317 |
Peak(P-P) |
y = 0.0002x - 0.0078 |
0.977 |
|
D4 |
270 |
Absorbance (p-o) |
y = -0.00001x - 0.00008 |
0.986 |
|
D4 |
287 |
Absorbance (p-o) |
y = 0.00001x + 0.00012 |
0.993 |
|
D4 |
304 |
Absorbance (p-o) |
y = -0.00001x - 0.00007 |
0.988 |
|
D4 |
316 |
Absorbance (p-o) |
y = 0.000005x - 0.000004 |
0.993 |
|
D4 |
267 - 275 |
Peak(P-P) |
y = -0.00002x - 0.00018 |
0.968 |
|
D4 |
275 - 296 |
Peak(P-P) |
y = 0.0002x + 0.0006 |
0.980 |
|
D4 |
296 - 314 |
Peak(P-P) |
y = -0.00009x - 0.00053 |
0.991 |
|
D4 |
314 - 319 |
Peak(P-P) |
y = 0.00001x + 0.00004 |
0.980 |
|
D4 |
267- 319 |
Peak(P-P) |
y = 0.00006x + 0.00029 |
0.973 |
|
Table 4 Statistical analysis of the determination Levofloxacin in Levoxin tablet" (n=10) |
|||||||
|
Derivative |
λ (nm) |
Technique |
Content of Levofloxacin (g) |
Standard deviation |
Variance |
Correlation coefficient ( RSD ) |
Confidence interval (95%) |
|
D1 |
275 |
Absorbance (p-o) |
0.253 |
8.25*10-3 |
9.36*10-5 |
0.81 |
0.243-0.264 |
|
D1 |
297 |
Absorbance (p-o) |
0.251 |
8.65*10-3 |
7.59*10-5 |
0.34 |
0.243-0.262 |
|
D1 |
286-322 |
Peak(P-P) |
0.253 |
7.59*10-3 |
7.22*10-5 |
0.15 |
0.245-0.264 |
|
D1 |
257- 286 |
Peak(P-P) |
0.252 |
8.32*10-3 |
8.24*10-5 |
0.24 |
0.244-0.261 |
|
D1 |
257-322 |
Peak(P-P) |
0.255 |
8.95*10-3 |
7.35*10-5 |
0.75 |
0.242-0.260 |
|
D2 |
305 |
Absorbance (p-o) |
0.253 |
8.22*10-3 |
8.23 *10-5 |
0.64 |
0.243-0.259 |
|
D2 |
287 |
Absorbance (p-o) |
0.252 |
8.45*10-3 |
8.25*10-5 |
0.33 |
0.244-0.262 |
|
D2 |
296 |
Absorbance (p-o) |
0.250 |
7.25*10-3 |
7.25*10-5 |
0.20 |
0.244-0.253 |
|
D2 |
262 – 276 |
Peak(P-P) |
0.255 |
8.65*10-3 |
8.25*10-5 |
0.14 |
0.246-0.265 |
|
D2 |
276 – 297 |
Peak(P-P) |
0.251 |
8.25*10-3 |
7.25*10-5 |
0.88 |
0.240-0.258 |
|
D2 |
297 – 318 |
Peak(P-P) |
0.250 |
7.25*10-3 |
8.59*10-5 |
0.14 |
0.242-0.264 |
|
D2 |
262 – 318 |
Peak(P-P) |
0.251 |
9.25*10-3 |
9.12*10-5 |
0.87 |
0.244-0.262 |
|
D3 |
278 |
Absorbance (p-o) |
0.254 |
8.32*10-3 |
9.02*10-5 |
0.74 |
0.246-0.265 |
|
D3 |
296 |
Absorbance (p-o) |
0.253 |
8.21*10-3 |
8.25*10-5 |
0.62 |
0.242-0.263 |
|
D3 |
311 |
Absorbance (p-o) |
0.253 |
7.98*10-3 |
8.75*10-5 |
0.80 |
0.243-0.262 |
|
D3 |
267 – 287 |
Absorbance (p-o) |
0.251 |
8.54*10-3 |
8.85*10-5 |
0.25 |
0.249-0.267 |
|
D3 |
287 – 306 |
Peak(P-P) |
0.252 |
8.23*10-3 |
7.65*10-5 |
0.64 |
0.245-0.264 |
|
D3 |
306 – 317 |
Peak(P-P) |
0.253 |
7.22*10-3 |
8.15*10-5 |
0.77 |
0.245-0.264 |
|
D3 |
267- 317 |
Peak(P-P) |
0.253 |
8.15*10-3 |
9.14*10-5 |
0.92 |
0.242-0.263 |
|
D4 |
270 |
Peak(P-P) |
0.254 |
8.99*10-3 |
9.45*10-5 |
0.35 |
0.242-0.262 |
|
D4 |
287 |
Peak(P-P) |
0.252 |
5.01*10-3 |
5.45*10-5 |
0.61 |
0.244-0.266 |
|
D4 |
304 |
Absorbance (p-o) |
0.253 |
8.26*10-3 |
7.52*10-5 |
3.36 |
0.243-0.262 |
|
D4 |
316 |
Absorbance (p-o) |
0.251 |
8.28*10-3 |
7.12*10-5 |
0.56 |
0.245-0.268 |
|
D4 |
267 – 275 |
Absorbance (p-o) |
0.252 |
8.64*10-3 |
8.78*10-5 |
0.23 |
0.242-0.265 |
|
D4 |
275 – 296 |
Absorbance (p-o) |
0.251 |
8.21*10-3 |
9.96*10-5 |
3.47 |
0.243-0.265 |
|
D4 |
296 – 314 |
Absorbance (p-o) |
0.255 |
9.67*10-3 |
8.25*10-5 |
0.55 |
0.245-0.261 |
|
D4 |
314 – 319 |
Peak(P-P) |
0.251 |
8.87*10-3 |
9.33*10-5 |
0.18 |
0.244-0.263 |
|
D4 |
267- 319 |
Peak(P-P) |
0.252 |
8.83*10-3 |
9.85*10-5 |
0.62 |
0.244-0.263 |
|
Table 5 Statistical evaluation of the elaborated method for Norfloxacin(standard solution n=10) |
||||
|
Derivative |
λ (nm) |
Technique |
Regression Equation |
Correlation Coefficient |
|
D1 |
278 |
Absorbance (p-o) |
y=0.002x-0.0092 |
0.948 |
|
D1 |
300 |
Absorbance (p-o) |
y=0.0016x+0.0103 |
0.997 |
|
D1 |
316-286 |
Peak(P-P) |
y=0.0359x-0.0199 |
0.941 |
|
D1 |
257-286 |
Peak(P-P) |
y=0.027x+0.1501 |
0.990 |
|
D1 |
257-316 |
Peak(P-P) |
y=0.0134x-0.014 |
0.970 |
|
D2 |
310 |
Absorbance (p-o) |
y=0.0002x+0.0006 |
0.979 |
|
D2 |
291 |
Absorbance (p-o) |
y=0.0004x-0.0014 |
0.974 |
|
D2 |
270 |
Absorbance (p-o) |
y=0.0002x+0.0006 |
0.995 |
|
D2 |
254-279 |
Peak(P-P) |
y=0.0003x+0.014 |
0.977 |
|
D2 |
279-298 |
Peak(P-P) |
y=0.0032x-0.015 |
0.985 |
|
D2 |
298-337 |
Peak(P-P) |
y=0.0042x+0.0179 |
0.960 |
|
D2 |
254-337 |
Peak(P-P) |
y=0.0041x+0.0163 |
0.962 |
|
D3 |
262 |
Absorbance (p-o) |
y=0.005x-0.002 |
0.994 |
|
D3 |
282 |
Absorbance (p-o) |
y=0.0003x+0.0001 |
0.992 |
|
D3 |
311 |
Absorbance (p-o) |
y=0.0005x-0.0005 |
0.966 |
|
D3 |
297 |
Absorbance (p-o) |
y=0.0005x+0.0002 |
0.985 |
|
D3 |
270-291 |
Peak(P-P) |
y=-0.0005x-0.0023 |
0.962 |
|
D3 |
253-270 |
Peak(P-P) |
y=0.0016x+0.0003 |
0.984 |
|
D3 |
291-309 |
Peak(P-P) |
y=0.0008x+0.0022 |
0.989 |
|
D3 |
309-337 |
Peak(P-P) |
y=-0.0001x-0.0005 |
0.997 |
|
D3 |
253-337 |
Peak(P-P) |
y=0.0006x+0.0012 |
0.995 |
|
D4 |
267 |
Absorbance (p-o) |
y=0.027x+0.1501 |
0.997 |
|
D4 |
258 |
Absorbance (p-o) |
y=0.0134x-0.014 |
0.951 |
|
D4 |
304 |
Absorbance (p-o) |
y=0.0002x+0.0006 |
0.998 |
|
D4 |
321 |
Absorbance (p-o) |
y=0.0004x-0.0014 |
0.997 |
|
D4 |
291 |
Absorbance (p-o) |
y=0.0002x+0.0006 |
0.985 |
|
D4 |
263-282 |
Peak(P-P) |
y=0.0003x+0.014 |
0.998 |
|
D4 |
249-363 |
Peak(P-P) |
y=0.0032x-0.015 |
0.995 |
|
D4 |
297-310 |
Peak(P-P) |
y=0.0042x+0.0179 |
0.998 |
|
D4 |
282-297 |
Peak(P-P) |
y=0.0041x+0.0163 |
0.990 |
|
D4 |
310-319 |
Peak(P-P) |
y=0.005x-0.002 |
0.997 |
|
D4 |
249-319 |
Peak(P-P) |
y=0.0003x+0.0001 |
0.989 |
|
Table 6 Statistical analysis of the determination Norfloxacin in tablets "Epinor 400 mg" (n=10) |
|||||||
|
Derivative |
λ (nm) |
Technique |
Content of Norfloxacin (g) |
Standard deviation |
Variance |
Correlation coefficient (RSD) |
Confidence interval (95%) |
|
D1 |
278 |
Absorbance (p-o) |
0.402 |
9.67*10-3 |
9.05*10-5 |
0.81 |
0.343-0.464 |
|
D1 |
300 |
Absorbance (p-o) |
0.405 |
6.20*10-3 |
9.66*10-5 |
0.41 |
0.395-0.421 |
|
D1 |
316-286 |
Peak(P-P) |
0.401 |
8.25*10-3 |
9.23*10-5 |
0.65 |
0.380-0.435 |
|
D1 |
257-286 |
Peak(P-P) |
0.401 |
7.62*10-3 |
9.56*10-5 |
0.58 |
0.365-0.475 |
|
D1 |
257-316 |
Peak(P-P) |
0.403 |
8.52*10-3 |
7.25*10-5 |
0.20 |
0.412-4.265 |
|
D2 |
310 |
Absorbance (p-o) |
0.402 |
9.24*10-3 |
8.21*10-5 |
0.26 |
0.389-4.005 |
|
D2 |
291 |
Absorbance (p-o) |
0.402 |
9.87*10-3 |
7.75*10-5 |
0.52 |
0.392-0.421 |
|
D2 |
270 |
Absorbance (p-o) |
0.407 |
8.26*10-3 |
7.95*10-5 |
0.80 |
0.392-0.410 |
|
D2 |
254-279 |
Peak(P-P) |
0.403 |
9.65*10-3 |
9.15*10-5 |
0.75 |
0.385-0.402 |
|
D2 |
279-298 |
Peak(P-P) |
0.404 |
9.66*10-3 |
8.89*10-5 |
0.20 |
0.396-0.419 |
|
D2 |
298-337 |
Peak(P-P) |
0.402 |
7.25*10-3 |
7.12*10-5 |
0.69 |
0.400-0.415 |
|
D2 |
254-337 |
Peak(P-P) |
0.403 |
8.32*10-3 |
7.95*10-5 |
0.70 |
0.394-0.411 |
|
D3 |
262 |
Absorbance (p-o) |
0.404 |
9.21*10-3 |
9.14*10-5 |
0.31 |
0.410-0.425 |
|
D3 |
282 |
Absorbance (p-o) |
0.402 |
8.22*10-3 |
9.05*10-5 |
0.80 |
0.408-0.417 |
|
D3 |
311 |
Absorbance (p-o) |
0.406 |
7.45*10-3 |
9.14*10-5 |
0.95 |
0.384-0.414 |
|
D3 |
297 |
Absorbance (p-o) |
0.404 |
9.12*10-3 |
7.45*10-5 |
0.62 |
0.397-0.408 |
|
D3 |
270-291 |
Peak(P-P) |
0.403 |
8.98*10-3 |
9.32*10-5 |
0.31 |
0.380-0.405 |
|
D3 |
253-270 |
Peak(P-P) |
0.404 |
8.14*10-3 |
9.65*10-5 |
0.95 |
0.393-0.415 |
|
D3 |
291-309 |
Peak(P-P) |
0.405 |
8.25*10-3 |
8.32*10-5 |
0.45 |
0.382-0.407 |
|
D3 |
309-337 |
Peak(P-P) |
0.402 |
9.25*10-3 |
9.68*10-5 |
0.90 |
0.382-0.400 |
|
D3 |
253-337 |
Peak(P-P) |
0.403 |
9.25*10-3 |
9.68*10-5 |
0.20 |
0.373-0.404 |
|
D4 |
267 |
Absorbance (p-o) |
0.404 |
5.87*10-3 |
5.21*10-5 |
0.65 |
0.384-0.421 |
|
D4 |
258 |
Absorbance (p-o) |
0.404 |
5.24*10-3 |
5.54*10-5 |
0.65 |
0.392-0.424 |
|
D4 |
304 |
Absorbance (p-o) |
0.403 |
4.02*10-3 |
4.70*10-5 |
0.60 |
0.374-0.416 |
|
D4 |
321 |
Absorbance (p-o) |
0.404 |
3.25*10-3 |
3.25*10-5 |
0.62 |
0.437-0.264 |
|
D4 |
292 |
Absorbance (p-o) |
0.403 |
5.97*10-3 |
5.35*10-5 |
0.52 |
0.403-0.410 |
|
D4 |
263-282 |
Peak(P-P) |
0.405 |
3.20*10-3 |
3.14*10-5 |
0.65 |
0.402-0.422 |
|
D4 |
249-363 |
Peak(P-P) |
0.403 |
3.63*10-3 |
3.25*10-5 |
0.61 |
0.403-0.464 |
|
D4 |
297-310 |
Peak(P-P) |
0.404 |
5.98*10-3 |
5.95*10-5 |
0.62 |
0.398-0.426 |
|
D4 |
282-297 |
Peak(P-P) |
0.404 |
5.57*10-3 |
5.21*10-5 |
0.65 |
0.379-0.408 |
|
D4 |
310-319 |
Peak(P-P) |
0.403 |
4.67*10-3 |
4.54*10-5 |
0.65 |
0.389-0.407 |
|
D4 |
249-319 |
Peak(P-P) |
0.405 |
5.29*10-3 |
5.56*10-5 |
0.64 |
0.399-0.474 |
|
Table 7 Statistical evaluation of the elaborated method for Moxifloxacin (standard solution n=10) |
||||
|
Derivative |
λ (nm) |
Technique |
Regression Equation |
Correlation Coefficient |
|
D1 |
281 |
Absorbance (p-o) |
y = 0.0013x + 0.0241 |
0.972 |
|
D1 |
304 |
Absorbance (p-o) |
y = -0.0013x - 0.0244 |
0.972 |
|
D1 |
292 -326 |
Peak(P-P) |
y = -0.0222x - 0.4592 |
0.979 |
|
D1 |
262- 292 |
Peak(P-P) |
y = 0.0206x + 0.3726 |
0.960 |
|
D1 |
262 -326 |
Peak(P-P) |
y = -0.0048x - 0.0615 |
0.994 |
|
D2 |
311 |
Absorbance (p-o) |
y = 0.0001x + 0.0024 |
0.964 |
|
D2 |
294 |
Absorbance (p-o) |
y = -0.0002x - 0.004 |
0.960 |
|
D2 |
271 |
Absorbance (p-o) |
y = 0.00009x + 0.00173 |
0.978 |
|
D2 |
262 - 278 |
Peak(P-P) |
y = 0.0005x + 0.0091 |
0.948 |
|
D2 |
278 - 304 |
Peak(P-P) |
y = -0.0035x - 0.0654 |
0.948 |
|
D2 |
304 - 331 |
Peak(P-P) |
y = 0.0012x + 0.0261 |
0.942 |
|
D2 |
262 - 331 |
Peak(P-P) |
y = -0.0017x - 0.0322 |
0.967 |
|
D3 |
287 |
Absorbance (p-o) |
y = -0.00002x - 0.00041 |
0.942 |
|
D3 |
302 |
Absorbance (p-o) |
y = 0.00004x + 0.00073 |
0.946 |
|
D3 |
315 |
Absorbance (p-o) |
y = -0.00001x - 0.00026 |
0.963 |
|
D3 |
263 -295 |
Peak(P-P) |
y = -0.0005x - 0.0093 |
0.964 |
|
D3 |
295 - 309 |
Peak(P-P) |
y=0.0008x+0.0022 |
0.948 |
|
D3 |
309 -332 |
Peak(P-P) |
y = -0.0002x - 0.0031 |
0.970 |
|
D3 |
263 -332 |
Peak(P-P) |
y = -0.0003x - 0.0065 |
0.953 |
|
D4 |
271 |
Absorbance (p-o) |
y = -0.000001x - 0.000027 |
0.998 |
|
D4 |
277 |
Absorbance (p-o) |
y = -0.000002x - 0.000050 |
0.998 |
|
D4 |
294 |
Absorbance (p-o) |
y = 0.000008x + 0.000174 |
0.956 |
|
D4 |
307 |
Absorbance (p-o) |
y = -0.00001x - 0.00016 |
0.940 |
|
D4 |
320 |
Absorbance (p-o) |
y = 0.000001x + 0.000028 |
0.956 |
|
D4 |
266 - 273 |
Peak(P-P) |
y = 0.000001x + 0.000009 |
0.990 |
|
D4 |
273 - 282 |
Peak(P-P) |
y = -0.000009x - 0.000111 |
0.989 |
|
D4 |
282 - 302 |
Peak(P-P) |
y = 0.00008x + 0.00160 |
0.957 |
|
D4 |
302 - 313 |
Peak(P-P) |
y = -0.00005x - 0.00097 |
0.956 |
|
D4 |
313 - 332 |
Peak(P-P) |
y = 0.00004x + 0.00028 |
0.968 |
|
Table 8 Statistical analysis of the determination Moxifloxacin in tablets "Delmoxa 400" (n=10) |
|||||||
|
Derivative |
λ (nm) |
Technique |
Content of Moxifloxacin (g) |
Standard deviation |
Variance |
Correlation coefficient (RSD) |
Confidence interval (95%) |
|
D1 |
281 |
Absorbance (p-o) |
0.400 |
8.67*10-3 |
7.45*10-5 |
0.31 |
0.4025 -0.426 |
|
D1 |
304 |
Absorbance (p-o) |
0.401 |
9.68*10-3 |
9.91*10-5 |
0.25 |
0.395-0.405 |
|
D1 |
292 -326 |
Peak(P-P) |
0.400 |
8.85*10-3 |
8.65*10-5 |
0.53 |
0.393-0.428 |
|
D1 |
262- 292 |
Peak(P-P) |
0.400 |
7.78*10-3 |
9.36*10-5 |
0.52 |
0.387-0.405 |
|
D1 |
262 -326 |
Peak(P-P) |
0.400 |
9.56*10-3 |
9.52*10-5 |
0.90 |
0.394-0.411 |
|
D2 |
311 |
Absorbance (p-o) |
0.401 |
7.65*10-3 |
9.85*10-5 |
0.85 |
0.405 – 0.419 |
|
D2 |
294 |
Absorbance (p-o) |
0.400 |
5.32*10-3 |
5.65*10-5 |
0.91 |
0.401 – 0.429 |
|
D2 |
271 |
Absorbance (p-o) |
0.400 |
9.65*10-3 |
9.55*10-5 |
0.66 |
0.389 – 0.415 |
|
D2 |
262 - 278 |
Peak(P-P) |
0.400 |
7.65*10-3 |
8.65*10-5 |
0.80 |
0.390-0.425 |
|
D2 |
278 - 304 |
Peak(P-P) |
0.401 |
9.89*10-3 |
9.80*10-5 |
0.52 |
0.407-0.418 |
|
D2 |
304 - 331 |
Peak(P-P) |
0.401 |
7.95*10-3 |
8.65*10-5 |
0.60 |
0.401 -0.426 |
|
D2 |
262 - 331 |
Peak(P-P) |
0.400 |
9.45*10-3 |
8.25*10-5 |
0.41 |
0.403-0.424 |
|
D3 |
287 |
Absorbance (p-o) |
0.401 |
7.69*10-3 |
9.65*10-5 |
0.32 |
0.388 -0.425 |
|
D3 |
302 |
Absorbance (p-o) |
0.401 |
5.32*10-3 |
4.65*10-5 |
0.45 |
0.381-0.410 |
|
D3 |
315 |
Absorbance (p-o) |
0.400 |
9.55*10-3 |
9.65*10-5 |
0.71 |
0.394 -0.405 |
|
D3 |
263 -295 |
Peak(P-P) |
0.401 |
7.98*10-3 |
9.59*10-5 |
0.46 |
0.406 – 0.420 |
|
D3 |
295 - 309 |
Peak(P-P) |
0.401 |
8.80*10-3 |
9.51*10-5 |
0.25 |
0.405 – 0.420 |
|
D3 |
309 -332 |
Peak(P-P) |
0.401 |
9.78*10-3 |
8.45*10-5 |
0.17 |
0.400-0.415 |
|
D3 |
263 -332 |
Peak(P-P) |
0.400 |
8.65*10-3 |
9.65*10-5 |
0.81 |
0.408-0.415 |
|
D4 |
271 |
Absorbance (p-o) |
0.401 |
9.54*10-3 |
7.98*10-5 |
0.15 |
0.390-0.420 |
|
D4 |
277 |
Absorbance (p-o) |
0.401 |
8.90*10-3 |
9.25*10-5 |
0.64 |
0.395-0.427 |
|
D4 |
294 |
Absorbance (p-o) |
0.401 |
7.45*10-3 |
7.77*10-5 |
0.92 |
0.389-0.423 |
|
D4 |
307 |
Absorbance (p-o) |
0.401 |
8.65*10-3 |
8.77*10-5 |
0.25 |
0.397-0.402 |
|
D4 |
320 |
Absorbance (p-o) |
0.401 |
8.77*10-3 |
7.69*10-5 |
0.15 |
0.398 – 0.412 |
|
D4 |
266 - 273 |
Peak(P-P) |
0.400 |
9.45*10-3 |
9.45*10-5 |
0.22 |
0.371 -0.420 |
|
D4 |
273 - 282 |
Peak(P-P) |
0.400 |
8.22*10-3 |
9.56*10-5 |
0.36 |
0.399 – 0.417 |
|
D4 |
282 - 302 |
Peak(P-P) |
0.400 |
9.46*10-3 |
9.33*10-5 |
0.55 |
0.387 – 0.408 |
|
D4 |
302 - 313 |
Peak(P-P) |
0.402 |
9.52*10-3 |
9.41*10-5 |
0.47 |
0.400 – 0.415 |
|
D4 |
313 - 332 |
Peak(P-P) |
0.400 |
8.74*10-3 |
8.65*10-5 |
0.16 |
0.398 -0.401 |
In summary, the proposed analytical procedure based on the first—, second—, third—, and fourth—order UV derivative spectroscopy permits a simple, rapid, sensitive, and direct determination of the analyzed drugs
The Lambda 15 spectrophotometer enables us to store the spectra derivatives in its computer memory and to read the value of a given derivative at any point marked on the recorded spectrum.
In order to determine the value of spectra derivatives two graphical techniques, "peak—zero", and "peak—peak", have been used.
In the "peak—to—peak" technique the determination was carried out by measuring the amplitude (from the maximum to the minimum of the curve). In the baseline—to—peak technique the measurement was carried out from maximum to the zero line or from minimum to the zero line.
The linear equations obtained through regression analysis of the data on levofloxacin, norfloxacin and moxifloxacin are shown in Tables 3, 5 and 7, respectively. Tables 5, 8 and 6 illustrate the data on the determination of the investigated fluoroquinolones in tablets with statistical evaluation of the results.
The best result for determining levofloxacin in levonex tablets was obtained by the peak—zero" techniques for the fourth derivative spectra at all examined wavelengths 287.0 nm (SD - 5.01*10-3 
RSD - 0.61%).
The best results for determining norfloxacin in Epinor tablets were obtained by the "peak—zero" and the "peak—peak" techniques for the fourth derivative spectra at all examined wavelengths (RSD about 0.65 %).
The best results for determining moxifloxacin in Delmox tablets were obtained by the "peak—zero' 
technique for the second derivative spectrum at wavelength 294 nm (SD - 5.32*10-3 , RSD - 0.91%) and the third derivative spectrum at wavelength 302 nm (SD - 5.32*10-3, RSD - 0.45%).
The developed method is found to be sensitive. accurate. Simple, precise, quick economical, and exhibited good correlation coefficient (R2 = 0.999) and excellent mean recovery (99.20–100.08%), indicating a high degree of precision of the methods Derivative spectrophotometry looks to be a highly useful tool in physical-chemical research since it enables the non-invasive extraction of information from the fundamental spectrum. The results of the recovery studies showed a high degree of accuracy of these methods. In conclusion, the developed methods are accurate. Precise and selective can be employed successfully for the estimation and can be used for routine quality control analysis of Levofloxacin, Norfloxacin, and Moxifloxacin in pure form and pharmaceutical sample.
Data availability
I certify that the information I have written on the application form and the documents I have submitted to be true and accurate and I understand and agree that any false or misleading information will justify a denial of admission into the university, revocation of the scholarship, and/or dismissal from the university.
Conflicts of interest
The author declares that he has no conflict of interest.
No research involving human participants and/or animals was included in the study.
Funding
This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.
Acknowledgment
The author presents great thanks to the Eipico company for supporting this study.
1-King, D. E., Malone, R., & Lilley, S. H. New classification and update on the quinolone antibiotics. American family physician,2000; 61(9): 2741-2748.
2-Redasani, V. K., Patel, P. R., Marathe, D. Y., Chaudhari, S. R., Shirkhedkar, A. A., & Surana, S. J. A Review on derivative UV-spectrophotometry analysis of drugs in pharmaceutical formulations and biological samples review. Journal of the Chilean Chemical society,2018; 63(3):4126-4134.
3-Ojeda, C. B., & Rojas, F. S. Recent developments in derivative ultraviolet/visible absorption spectrophotometry. Analytica Chimica Acta, 2004;518(1-2): 1-24.
4-Karpinska, J. . Basic principles and analytical application of derivative spectrophotometry. Macro to nano spectroscopy, book edited by Jamal Uddin, 2012; 253-256.
5-Taghizade, M., Ebrahimi, M., Fooladi, E., & Yoosefian, M. Simultaneous spectrophotometric determination of the residual of ciprofloxacin, famotidine, and tramadol using magnetic solid phase extraction coupled with multivariate calibration methods. Microchemical Journal, 2021; 160, 105627.
6-Gülfen, M., Canbaz, Y., & Özdemir, A. (2020). Ratio-First Order Derivative-Zero Crossing UV-Visible Spectrophotometric Method for Analysis of Amoxicillin, Levofloxacin and Lansoprazole Mixture. Pakistan Journal of Analytical & Environmental Chemistry,2020; 21(1): 34-43.
7-Patel, P. B., & Patel, S. A. Development and validation of first order derivative spectrophotometric method for simultaneous estimation of moxifloxacin and prednisolone acetate in pharmaceutical preparation .2017
8-Kamal, A. H., & El-Malla, S. F. Factor Space Analysis and Dual Wavelength Spectrophotometric Methods for Simultaneous Determination of Norfloxacin and Tinidazole in Tablet. Analytical Chemistry Letters,2018; 8(3): 393-404.
9-Paton JH, Reeves DS. Fluoroquinolone antibiotics. Microbiology, pharmacokinetics and clinical use. Drugs,1988;36(2):193-228.
10-von Rosenstiel N, Adam D. Quinolone antibacterials. An update of their pharmacology and therapeutic use. Drugs,1994;47(6): 872-901.
11-Woldegiorges, K., Belay, A., & Kebede, A. (2022). Photophysical properties of levofloxacin and norfloxacin drugs and their fluorescence quenching mechanism with caffeine. Spectroscopy Letters, 55(8), 500-513.
12- Rahman, S., Rub, M. A., Mahbub, S., Joy, M. T. R., Rana, S., & Hoque, M. A. (2022). Spectroscopic and DFT studies of the charge transfer complexation of iodine with aniline and its derivatives in carbon tetrachloride medium. Journal of Molecular Liquids, 351, 118667.
13- Badulla, W. F. S., & Bamahmood, E. S. O. (2022). Development of Green Bromination Titration for Determination of Ciprofloxacin Hydrochloride in Different Pharmaceutical Dosage Forms. Indonesian Journal of Chemical Science, 11(3), 259-265.
14- Gholse, Y. N., Chaple, D. R., & Kasliwal, R. H. (2022). Development and validation of novel analytical simultaneous estimation based UV spectrophotometric method for doxycycline and levofloxacin determination. Biointerface Res. App. Sci, 12(4), 5458-5478.
15-Kansal, S. K., Kundu, P., Sood, S., Lamba, R., Umar, A., & Mehta, S. K. (2014). Photocatalytic degradation of the antibiotic levofloxacin using highly crystalline TiO 2 nanoparticles. New Journal of Chemistry, 38(7), 3220-3226.
16-Sharma, S., Umar, A., Mehta, S. K., Ibhadon, A. O., & Kansal, S. K. (2018). Solar light driven photocatalytic degradation of levofloxacin using TiO 2/carbon-dot nanocomposites. New Journal of Chemistry, 42(9), 7445-7456.
17-Sharma, S., Ibhadon, A. O., Francesconi, M. G., Mehta, S. K., Elumalai, S., Kansal, S. K., ... & Baskoutas, S. (2020). Bi2WO6/C-Dots/TiO2: a novel Z-scheme photocatalyst for the degradation of fluoroquinolone levofloxacin from aqueous medium. Nanomaterials, 10(5), 910.
18-Chaturvedi, G., Kaur, A., Umar, A., Khan, M. A., Algarni, H., & Kansal, S. K. (2020). Removal of fluoroquinolone drug, levofloxacin, from aqueous phase over iron based MOFs, MIL-100 (Fe). Journal of Solid State Chemistry, 281, 121029.
19-Ocaña, J. A., Barragán, F. J., & Callejón, M. (2000). Spectrofluorimetric determination of moxifloxacin in tablets, human urine and serum. Analyst, 2000;125(12): 2322-2325.
20-Kasabe, A. J., Shitole, V. V., Waghmare, V. V., & Mohite, V. (2009). Simultaneous estimation of metronidazole and ofloxacin in combined dosage form by reverse phase high performance liquid chromatography method. International Journal of ChemTech Research,2009; 1(4): 1244-1250.
21-Barot, H. N., Dave, J. B., & Patel, C. N. Development and validation of spectrophotometric method for simultaneous determination of prednisolone acetate and ofloxacin in eye-drop. International Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences and Research, 2012;3(6): 1817.
22-Naveed, S., Kafeel, H., & Rukh, R. Spectrophotometric method for the estimation of Ciprofloxacin in different medium. International Journal of Pharmaceutical Research & Drug Development,2014; 1(1):27-30.
23-Zaky, M., Fadel, S., & Elgendy, K. M. Spectrophotometric Method for Determination of Some Third Generation Cephalosporins Antibiotics Using Sodium Molybdate. Eurasian Journal of Analytical Chemistry,2020; 15(1): 59-73.
24-Naveed, S., & Waheed, N. Simple UV spectrophotometric assay of ciprofloxacin. Mintage Journal of Pharmaceutical and Medical Sciences, 2014;10.
25-Naveed, S., Alam, T., Hameed, A., & Sharif, N. UV spectrophotometric method for estimation of Ofloxacin in tablet dosage form and comparative study of its two brands. J Bioequiv Availab, 2016;(8):125-127.
26-Beard, K. W. Internet addiction: a review of current assessment techniques and potential assessment questions. Cyber Psychology & Behavior,2005; 8(1): 7-14.
27-Mohammmed, M. A., & Kadhum, M. A. Simultaneous Determination of Ciprofloxacin Hydrochloride and Mebeverin Hydrochloride by Derivative Spectrophotometry. Ibn AL-Haitham Journal for Pure and Applied Science, 2017;27(3), :448-461.
28-Yadav, P., & C Joshi, Y. Synthesis and Spectral Study of Novel Norfloxacin Derivatives. E-Journal of Chemistry,2008; 5(S2): 1154-1158.
29-Prashanth, K. N., Basavaiah, K., & Raghu, M. S. Simple and selective spectrophotometric determination of ofloxacin in pharmaceutical formulations using two sulphonphthalein acid dyes. International Scholarly Research Notices, 2013.
30-Nguyen, T. D., Le, H. B., Dong, T. O., & Pham, T. D. (2018) Determination of fluoroquinolones in pharmaceutical formulations by extractive spectrophotometric methods using ion-pair complex formation with bromothymol blue. Journal of analytical methods in chemistry, 2018.
31-Shah, V., & Raj, H. (2012). Development and validation of derivative spectroscopic method for simultaneous estimation of cefixime trihydrate and azithromycin dihydrate in combined dosage form. International Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences and Research, 2012;3(6):1753.
32- Owen, A.J. (2000). Uses of Derivative Spectroscopy Application Note UV-Visible Spectroscopy.
33-Khasawneh, O. F. S., & Palaniandy, P. (2019). Photocatalytic Degradation of Pharmaceuticals Using TiO Based Nanocomposite Catalyst-Review. Civil and Environmental Engineering Reports, 29(3), 1-33.
34-Sharma, T., Kumar, R., Sahoo, S. C., Sindhu, J., Singh, J., Singh, B., ... & Kataria, R. (2021). Synthesis, structural and pharmacological exploration of 2-(3, 5-dimethyl-1H-pyrazol-1-yl)-acetophenone oximes and their silver complexes. Polyhedron, 195, 114972.
35-Kim, J., Ahn, S. Y., & Um, S. H. (2021). Light-Induced Heat Conversion of Gold Nanorods as a Local Temperature Probe for Chemical Species Transformation in Aqueous Solution. Science of Advanced Materials, 13(8), 1437-1444.
Figures 2-4 are available in the supplementary files section.
- Figures24.docx
Figures 2-4