Flyer

International Journal of Drug Development and Research

  • ISSN: 0975-9344
  • Journal h-index: 51
  • Journal CiteScore: 46.50
  • Journal Impact Factor: 26.99
  • Average acceptance to publication time (5-7 days)
  • Average article processing time (30-45 days) Less than 5 volumes 30 days
    8 - 9 volumes 40 days
    10 and more volumes 45 days
Awards Nomination 20+ Million Readerbase
Indexed In
  • Genamics JournalSeek
  • China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI)
  • CiteFactor
  • Scimago
  • Directory of Research Journal Indexing (DRJI)
  • OCLC- WorldCat
  • Publons
  • MIAR
  • University Grants Commission
  • Euro Pub
  • Google Scholar
  • J-Gate
  • SHERPA ROMEO
  • Secret Search Engine Labs
  • ResearchGate
  • International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE)
Share This Page

Abstract

Spectrophotometric Determination of Tenofovir Disoproxil Fumarate After Complexation With Ammonium Molybdate And Picric Acid

Johnson O. Onah and Ukpe Ajima

PURPOSE: Tenofovir disoproxil Fumarate (TDF) is a Nucleoside Reverse Transcriptase Inhibitor (NRTI) used in the management of HIV/AIDS. The drug has not been listed in the Official Pharmacopoeias and monographs. Two simple and sensitive methods for the determination of Tenofovir are described. METHODS: The first method involved the acid hydrolysis of the orthophosphate group of tenofovir disoproxil and its subsequent complexation with ammonium molybdate- Stannous Chloride to form a coloured complex with absorption maximum (ëmax) at 495nm. The second method involves complexation of the hydrolyzed tenofovir with picric acid to form a blue coloured complex that absorbed maximally (ëmax) at 465 nm. RESULTS: Both complexations obeyed Beer-Lamberts Law over the wide range of concentrations investigated. Complexation with ammonium molybdate-stannous Chloride and picric acid gave a mean recovery of 99.20% and 96.12% respectively. Their molar absorptivities were also calculated to be 1,234.09 Mol l-1cm-1 and 12,330.92 Mol l-1cm-1 respectively. The Sandell?s sensitivity were similarly determined as 1.94 and 19.40 respectively. Comparison of the two methods by Student?s t-test suggested that they are not significantly different (t ≥ 5 %). CONCLUSION: This results from this investigation show that both methods are suitable for evaluating the quality of the tenofovir disoproxil formulation and can be used for its routine quality control