jrnls.org logo
Submit

BROWSE ALL JOURNALS

SEE ALL 19 JOURNALS
International Journal of Pharmaceutical InvestigationNOW IN
Article

Development and Validation of a Gradient RP-HPLC Method for Concurrent Analysis of Mirabegron and Silodosin in Bulk and Pharmaceutical Tablets

Satti Sandeep Reddy1, Rajendran Vijayalakshmi1★, Shaik Sadhik Ansari1, Pilli Sandya2★ Corresponding author

  1. 1Department of Pharmaceutical Analysis, GIET School of Pharmacy, Chaitanya Knowledge City, Rajahmundry, Andhra Pradesh, INDIA.
  2. 2Department of Pharmaceutical Analysis, Sri Vishnu College of Pharmacy, Vishnupur, Bhimavaram, Andhra Pradesh, INDIA.

CORRESPONDENCE

Rajendran Vijayalakshmi

Department of Pharmaceutical Analysis, GIET School of Pharmacy, NH-16 Chaitanya Knowledge City, Rajahmundry-533296, Andhra Pradesh, INDIA.

vijayalakshmir@giet.ac.in

Received: 12-11-2024; Revised: 05-01-2025; Accepted: 03-04-2025.

Volume 15, Issue 3 · pp. 895–902 · PUBLISHED Jul-Sep 2025 · DOI: 10.5530/ijpi.20250183

View on IJPI original site ↗

ABSTRACT

Objectives To quickly and easily identify and quantify Mirabegron and Silodosin in both pure and pharmaceutical dosage forms, a gradient Reverse-Phase High Performance Liquid Chromatography (RP-HPLC) technique was described. Materials and Methods The separation was accomplished using a gradient mode pumping mobile phase consisting of acetonitrile and a 0.03 M buffer (Potassium dihydrogen orthophosphate in water with pH corrected to 3.2 with orthophosphoric acid) at a flow rate of 1 mL/min on a C-18 matrix Inertsil ODS-3V column with dimensions 250x4.6 mm and a 5-micron particle size. Results At 6.052 and 7.986 minutes, respectively, the UV detector set at 245 nm was able to capture the peaks of MGB and SLD. The approach demonstrated linearity for MGB from 5 to 60 µg/mL and for SLD from 0.8 to 9.6 µg/mL, with matching r² values of 1 and 0.9999, respectively. A %RSD below 2 indicates that the procedure is both accurate and precise. Conclusion It was concluded that the approach that was developed could be utilized for routine analysis of the pharmaceuticals in question in quality control laboratories, and that it was successfully applied to simultaneously estimate MGB and SLD in pure and its commercial medicinal dosage forms.

KEYWORDS

0% READ

FULL TEXT

INTRODUCTION

Mirabegron (MBG) is an innovative, first-in-class, powerful β3-AR agonist that operates orally once daily and is composed of 2-(2-Amino-1,3-thiazol-4-yl)-N-[4-[2-[((2R) -2-hydroxy-2-phenylethyl)amino]ethyl]phenyl]acetamide (Figure 1A) (Aditya et al., 2015). When a person has Overactive Bladder (OAB), they may have a number of unpleasant symptoms, including an overwhelming need to urinate at inappropriate times (such as during the night), leakage of urine following a strong urge, and a generalized lack of control over their bladder (Nandy and Ranganathan, 2024). A selective β3-adrenoceptor agonist, MBG is a relatively new component of OAB treatment (O'Kane et al., 2022). Because of the effect it has on the concentration of cyclic adenosine monophosphate in the bladder tissue, it can relax the bladder (Basu, 2020). As far as women experiencing symptoms of OAB are concerned, it is the first commercially available beta 3 adrenoreceptor agonist to have been approved for this purpose (Warren et al., 2016).

Figure 1: (A) Chemical structure of MGB and (B) Chemical structure of SLD.

A substantial decrease in incontinence events, micturition frequency, and urgency episodes was shown to be related with MBG (Coleman and Cox, 2012; Rossi and Roumeguère, 2010). In contrast, Silodosin (SLD) 1-(3-hydroxypropyl)-5-[(2R)-2-[2-[2-(2,2,2 trifluoromethoxy)phenoxy]ethylamino]propyl]-2,3-dihydroindole7-carboxamide (Figure 1B) is a selective α1 antagonist that inhibits receptors on prostate smooth muscle, resulting in relaxation of both the bladder neck and prostate smooth muscles (Bylund, 2016; Jindan et al., 2022). This, in turn, improves urine flow and reduces problems associated with Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia (BPH). For storage symptoms that are moderate to severe, SLD is not enough on its own; further treatment is necessary. Considering this, research examining the efficacy of combination therapy involving SLD and MBG found that it was much more effective than either drug alone or a placebo, had far fewer side effects, improved quality of life, and alleviated persistent storage symptoms in BPH patients. Consequently, it is crucial to design an efficient analytical method to enable the widespread deployment of the combination of MBG and Sildosin as an effective treatment.

Separately (Suryawanshi et al., 2020; RP-HPLC, 2018; Sankar et al., 2016; Godse and Sawant, 2024; Meijer et al., 2019) or in conjunction with other drugs (UHPLC, 2023; Patel et al., 2022; Patil et al., 2024; Andhale et al., 2022; RP-HPLC, 2023; Rao and Meghana, 2023) MBG has been determined using a few different analytical methods. There is a plethora of analytical approaches that have been documented for the detection of SLD, either on its own (Harischandran et al., 2012; Er and Erk, 2016; Tanuja et al., 2021; Aneesh and Rajasekaran, 2012; Hasan et al., 2024; Shaik et al., 2014; Sayana et al., 2012; Jahan and Malipatil, 2014; Rani and Venkateswarlu, 2016; Zhao et al., 2009) or in conjunction with other medications (Nataraj et al., 2020; Paljashuva and Ramarao, 2019; Gupta and Mishra, 2021; Kurmi and Asati, 2022; Dhiman et al., 2022). However, HPLC techniques were found for the detection of MBG and Sildosin in a synthetic combination (Mishra et al., 2024; Dudhrejiya et al., 2024; Trivedi et al., 2023). The development of analytical methods for the simultaneous detection and quantification has been further complicated by the development of numerous dosage form combinations in recent years. In response to the growing need for RP-HPLC methods that are sensitive, selective, accurate, precise, and robust enough to detect MGB and SLD simultaneously, the authors present a novel strategy based on acetonitrile as the organic solvent.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Reagents and chemicals

Sigma-Aldrich Chemicals, Mumbai, India, supplied pharmaceutical grade (>99%) substances (I) MGB and SLD. Water and acetonitrile (HPLC grade) were procured from Ranbaxy Fine Chemical Limited, New Delhi, India. Qualigen-Fine chemicals supplied the remaining reagents, including phosphoric acid.

Chromatographic conditions and instrumentation

An HPLC system (2996) was employed for the analysis, which included an auto sampler and a PDA detector. Empower 2 software was employed to capture the data. Chromatographic separation was conducted on a C-18 matrix Inertsil ODS-3V, 250x4.6 mm, 5 microns, which was paired with a defense column of the same material. The mobile phase consisted of 0.03 M buffer (Potassium dihydrogen orthophosphate in water with pH corrected to 3.2 with orthophosphoric acid) and acetonitrile, which was pumped in a gradient mode at a flow rate of 1.0 mL/min. The UV detector was configured to operate at 245 nm to monitor the column effluent. A 50:50 (v/v) combination of water with acetonitrile was employed as a diluent. Prior to injection into the HPLC system, the mobile phase as well as standard solutions have been passed through a 0.45 μm nylon filter. The study was conducted at ambient temperature. The gradient program was executed in the following manner (Table 1).

Table 1: Programming for mobile phase pumping in gradient manner.
TimeMobile phase AMobile phase B
0.018020
52080
102080
10.18020
138020

Standard Stock Preparation

Transfer 50 mg of MGB and 8 mg of SLD working standards into 100 mL clean, dry volumetric flasks. Add 50 mL of diluent and sonicate for 20 min to dissolve the working standards completely. Make up to the mark with the same diluent. This results in a stock solution of 500 µg/mL of MGB and 80 µg/mL of SLD. 5.0 mL of the stock solution was pipetted into a 50 mL volumetric flask, and the final volume was added with diluent. This resulted in a 50 µg/mL MBG and 8 µg/mL SLD operating standard solution.

Sample Preparation

In a mortar and pestle, 20 tablets (Silodol-M 50) were precisely weighed, pulverized, and combined. Accurately weigh a portion of powder equivalent to 650 mg and transfer it to a 100 mL volumetric flask. Add 50 mL of diluent and sonicate for 30 min to dissolve the powder completely. Make up to the mark with the same diluent. The solution was filtered through a 0.45 µm membrane filter. The 5.0 mL of the filtered solution was pipetted into a 50 mL volumetric flask and subsequently diluted to the final volume. For HPLC analysis, 20 µL of this solution was injected.

Method Validation

Specificity Assessment

To evaluate the specificity of the novel technique, it is essential to ensure that the analyte response remains unaffected by any potential interferences, such as placebos or other naturally occurring compounds. This investigation involves bringing the system to equilibrium by optimizing chromatographic conditions beforehand. After a stable baseline is achieved, responses are recorded initially with a blank solution, followed by sample and standard preparations containing 50 μg/mL of MGB and 8 μg/mL of SLD.

Precision

To test the method's precision, the chromatographic conditions were set to stabilize the system before proceeding. Both a standard and drug solution was tested for precision at 100% concentration (50 μg/mL for MGB and 8 μg/mL for SLD). Six samples of these concentrations were examined on the same day to determine intra-day variability, and six were tested across three days to investigate inter-day variability.

Accuracy

Accuracy of the method was established through recovery studies, where a sample solution with known quantities was spiked at three standard concentration levels (approximately 80%, 100%, and 120%). Each concentration level was injected in triplicate, and the mean percentage recovery for each level was calculated to confirm the method's accuracy

Linearity

To evaluate linearity, working standards were formulated at six intensity levels: 20%, 40%, 60%, 80%, 100%, and 120%, resulting in final concentrations of 5 to 60 µg/mL for MGB and 0.8 to 9.6 µg/mL for SLD. Each standard solution was subjected to filtration via a 0.45 µm renewable cellulose filter before to injection. The differing percentages of MGB and SLD in these standard working solutions have been introduced in triplicate to determine linearity and range. Peak sizes matching to each concentration were documented, and a curve for calibration was generated by graphing concentration against peak area for MGB and SLD. The data were examined employing the least-squares method to ascertain the calibration equations.

Limit of Detection (LOD) and Limit of Quantification (LOQ)

The Limits of Detection (LOD) and Quantification (LOQ) limits for MGB and SLD were established by examining many diluted specimens at levels of 20%, 10%, 5%, 2%, 1%, 0.5%, 0.2%, 0.1%, 0.05%, 0.02%, 0.01%, and 0.005% using this approach. Signal-to-noise ratios were documented to evaluate sensitivity. The Limit of Detection (LOD) was established as the concentration at which the signal-to-noise ratio of roughly 3:1, while the Limit of Quantification (LOQ) was determined at a ratio of around 10:1, accompanied by a Relative Standard Deviation (%RSD) of less than 10% (n=3).

Robustness

To assess robustness, slight modifications were implemented in method parameters; specifically (i) the utilization of alternative columns and (ii) a flow rate variation of±0.1 mL/min. Specimen and standard solutions were examined for each adjustment to assess any effects on the procedure. The percentage Relative Standard Deviation (RSD) was computed for each instance to evaluate consistency.

System appropriateness

Injecting standards of MGB and SLD into an HPLC system allowed us to verify that the established method's precision as well as accuracy were within the appropriate limits. Several metrics were assessed, including the Relative Standard Deviation (RSD), hypothetical plates as well, resolution, and USP tailing component.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Optimization of chromatographic conditions

The chromatographic settings have been tuned to elute the compounds of interest simultaneously, a challenging task that involves regulating the pH of the mobile phase, which governs the ionization of the drug and thus speeds up elution. Various experiments were conducted in an isocratic mode using phosphate buffer at varying pH in conjunction with methanol and acetonitrile; however, the separation of pharmaceuticals was not sufficiently effective. Good retention was observed when the fluid was circulated in a gradient manner. The pH was further adjusted to 3.2 using orthophosphoric acid to enhance the resolution between the peaks and the morphology of the peaks. This was successful. The mobile phase is initially composed of 80% phosphate buffer (A) and 20% acetonitrile (B), which results in a more polar operating environment. MBG and SLD both associate with the stationary phase; however, the elution is slowed by the higher polarity of phase A, which enables them to engage with the column and retain them for an extended period. The proportion of acetonitrile (B) increases considerably to 80% over the first 5 min, while the phosphate buffer (A) decreases to 20%. The mobile phase is generally less polar than the phosphate buffer due to the fact that acetonitrile is less polar. The interaction between the stationary phase and MBG and SLD is disrupted by this alteration, resulting in an increase in their elution rate. For the subsequent five minutes, the ratio remains constant at 20% A and 80% B. The low-polarity environment that is maintained by the high concentration of acetonitrile facilitates the elution of both compounds from the column, if they have not already done so, in accordance with their respective affinities. Compounds such as SLD and MBG, which elute at varying rates based on their molecular size or polarity, can be successfully separated during this period. The mobile phase reverts to the initial conditions of 80% phosphate buffer and 20% acetonitrile after 10 minutes. By reestablishing a polar environment, this reconstitution conditions the column for the subsequent cycle. The UV absorption spectrum of MGB and SLD were combined, and they intersected at 245 nm. This proved that it is feasible to detect many signals at once using just one wavelength.

Validation

Specificity assessment

The chromatograms of the blank, standard, and test samples, as illustrated in Figure 2, verify the analyte's distinct evaluation, thereby proving the specificity of the approach that was created.

Figure 2: Chromatograms that show how the blank, he sample, and the standard layer compared to each other.

Precision

The precision of the method is indicated by % RSD values, which are calculated, based on the peak response areas from six injections each of MGB and SLD sample and standard solutions. For intraday precision, data was collected within a single day, while interday precision data were gathered across three separate days. In both cases, % RSD values were below 2%, confirming the method's reliability, as summarized in Table 2.

Table 2: Report of precision study results of MGB and SLD.
Intraday Precision
StandardSample
MGBSLDMGBSLD
Mean RT±SD6.033±0.0167.996±0.0116.025±0.0058.011±0.005
%RSD0.2580.1420.0880.063
Mean Area±SD6254898.3±1800.31883241.8±1544.76241884.0±1763.21881521.3±1988.4
%RSD0.20.10.30.1
Interday Precision
StandardSample
MGBSLDMGBSLD
Mean RT±SD6.013±0.0187.786 ±0.0156.017±0.0470.078
%RSD0.2580.1680.0780.058
Mean Area±SD6254898.3±1800.31891541.8±1426.96252762.0±1812.21887528.4±1876.4
%RSD0.20.20.40.2

Accuracy

The percentage mean recovery of MGB and SLD at 3 different concentration levels demonstrated the method's compliance with acceptance criteria. These results confirm the method's reliability and are presented in Table 3.

Table 3: Results for MGB and SLD Accuracy
MGBSLD
120%100%80%120%100%80%
Unspiked standard Area7436241.± 956.66216462.7± 1648.74955698.7± 2056.72287307.7± 1692.01885230.0± 1866.11504217.7± 1416.0
Spiked standard Area8113602.± 1062.86810144.0± 859.75685089.7± 1932.52507352.0± 1724.72096484.0± 1993.51697878.7 ± 2543.9
Average % recovery109.1109.6114.7109.6111.2112.9
%RSD1.80.20.51.40.92
SEM3.120.350.872.421.563.46

Linearity

The regression analysis of mean peak areas vs concentrations established a linear correlation within the defined concentration ranges: 5 µg/mL to 60 µg/mL for MGB and 0.8 µg/mL to 9.6 µg/mL for SLD. The determination Coefficients (R²) derived from the linear regression study were 1 for MGB and 0.9999 for SLD, signifying exceptional linearity. Figure 3 illustrates the linear correlation between MGB and SLD. The corresponding chromatograms depicting linearity are shown in Figure 4.

Figure 3: Calibration curve of HPLC method showing linearity of A. Silodosin B. Mirabegron.
Figure 4: Chromatograms illustrating linearity at A. 40%, B. 60%, C. 80%, D. 100%, and E. 120%.

Limit of Detection (LOD) and Limit of Quantification (LOQ)

This approach demonstrated significant sensitivity, producing LOD levels of 0.05% for MGB and 0.2% for SLD. The LOQ values were determined to be 0.15% for MGB and 0.60% for SLD.

Robustness

The approach exhibited considerable robustness, as variations in mobile phase flow velocity and the application of various columns had no major impact, as indicated by consistent % RSD results in Table 4.

Table 4: Results of assessments of method robustness.
MGBSLD
ParameterMean area±SD%RSDRT±SD%RSDMean area±SD%RSDRT±SD%RSD
Different column
Sample6343669.7±1966.00.17.928±0.010.0151941994±1936.50.15.972±0.010.02
STD6330477.7±2305.20.27.941±0.0090.1071926133.7±980.20.15.978±0.0070.111
Flow decrease
Sample2141419.0±1563.40.18.38±0.0050.0557069205.7±1888.20.16.382±0.0060.08
STD2178750±1255.20.18.391±0.0100.77077793.0±1479.00.016.384±0.0090.13
Flow Increase
SAMPLE1753226.7±1423.00.17.525±0.0040.0585781497.7±2703.80.015.624±0.0030.051
STD1753662±1669.40.17.524±0.0110.1515829478.7±1705.50.025.627±0.0110.188

System appropriateness

The results showed that MGB and SLD separated at a resolution of 9.08 and a retention duration of 6.052 and 7.986 min, respectively. With a tailing factor of 1.55 for MGB and 0.95 for SLD, the theoretical plate count was determined to be 32285.08 and 13,275.44, respectively.

Applications of the developed analytical method in the assay of formulations

The test of existing tablets in the market was used to assess the suggested procedure. There was a comparison of the tablet dosage forms' responses to their respective standard solutions. All the drugs were found to be within the specified limits (i.e., 95-105%), as stated in Table 5.

Table 5: HPLC assay results for tablet formulations.
Peak Area of STDPeak Area of SampleLabel claim (mg)Amount found (mg)%Assay
MGB6254898.362418845049.6599.3%
SLD1883241.81881521.387.9899.81%

CONCLUSION

The successful development of a simultaneous HPLC method allowed for the successful optimization, validation, and development of its separation and detection of MGB and SLD in their mixed dosage form in a singular mixture. Selective, precise, accurate, and robust are the characteristics of the method as demonstrated by the experiments conducted in accordance with the ICH guidelines. The proposed approach is suitable for the quality monitoring of dosage forms due to its simplicity and effectiveness in identifying the proposed drugs. The gradient elution achieves effective separation by exploiting both the polarities of MBG and SLD in relation to the mobile phase. The relationship of each substance with the stationary state is manipulated by altering the mobile phase constitution over time, resulting in a differential separation that facilitates their efficient separation.

REFERENCES

As published

Showing references and in-text citations exactly as published.

  1. 1.Aditya, S.; Mathur, S. K.. MBG: A first-in-class beta-3 agonist for overactive bladder. Journal of Mahatma Gandhi Institute of Medical Sciences. 2015;20(2):128. https://doi.org/10.4103/0971-9903.164227DOIGOOGLE SCHOLAR
  2. 2.Andhale, G.; Shankarpure, M.; Kadam, J. et al. RP-HPLC method development and validation for the simultaneous estimation of MBG and solifenacin succinate in pharmaceutical dosage form. NeuroQuantology. 2022;20(9):2652–2659. https://doi.org/10.14704/nq.2022.20.9DOIGOOGLE SCHOLAR
  3. 3.Aneesh, T. P.; Rajasekaran, A.. Development and validation of HPLC method for the estimation of SLD in bulk and pharmaceutical dosage form. IJBPR. 2012;3.GOOGLE SCHOLAR
  4. 4.Basu, M.. Management of overactive bladder. Obstetrics, Gynaecology and Reproductive Medicine. 2020;30(1):1–5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ogrm.2019.10.001DOIGOOGLE SCHOLAR
  5. 5.Bylund, D. B.. SLD☆. Reference module in biomedical sciences. Elsevier. 2016. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-801238-3.98851-2DOIGOOGLE SCHOLAR
  6. 6.Coleman, J. J.; Cox, A. R.. Antihypertensive drugs. A Worldwide Yearly Survey of New Data in Adverse Drug Reactions and Interactions. Elsevier. 2012;34:317–338. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-444-59499-0.00020-9DOIGOOGLE SCHOLAR
  7. 7.Dhiman, S.; Kurmi, B. D.; Asati, V.. Analytical reversed-phase high-performance liquid chromatography method development for SLD and solifenacin in bulk and marketed formulation using analytical quality by design approach. Separation Science Plus. 2022. https://doi.org/10.1002/sscp.202200117DOIGOOGLE SCHOLAR
  8. 8.Dudhrejiya, A. V.; Pithadiya, S. B.; Vyas, A. J.; Patel, N. K.; Patel, A. I.; Gavit, H. B. et al. RP-HPLC method development and validation for simultaneous estimation of MBG and SLD in synthetic mixture. Research Journal of Pharmacy and Technology. 2024;17(9):4247–4252. https://doi.org/10.52711/0974-360X.2024.00656DOIGOOGLE SCHOLAR
  9. 9.Er, E.; Erk, N.. An effective and sensitive stability-indicating chromatographic approach based on HPLC for SLD assay. Journal of Analytical Science and Technology. 2016;7(1):20. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40543-016-0100-yDOIGOOGLE SCHOLAR
  10. 10.Godse, S. D.; Sawant, S. D.. Development and validation of stability-indicating HPTLC method for MBG with identification, and characterization of degradant by ESI-MS. Asian J. Green Chem. 2024;8(4):397–410. https://doi.org/10.48309/ajgc.2024.445377.148DOIGOOGLE SCHOLAR
  11. 11.Gupta, A.; Mishra, S. K.. A novel analytical method for simultaneous quantification of SLD and tadalafil by RP-HPLC. Journal of Pharmaceutical Research International. 2021;33(39B):193–202. https://doi.org/10.9734/jpri/2021/v33i39B32195DOIGOOGLE SCHOLAR
  12. 12.Harischandran, Shankar; Iyer et al. Validated stability indicating RP-HPLC method for the determination of SLD in pharmaceutical dosage form. 2012.GOOGLE SCHOLAR
  13. 13.Hasan, M. A.; Helal, N.; Azmi, S.; Jahan Sultana, N.; Sarmina Nasir, S.; Jafreen, R. et al. Development of a convenient and robust analytical technique for HPLC-based determination of SLD in capsule formulation. Research Journal of Pharmacy and Technology. 2024;17(9):4311–4317. https://doi.org/10.52711/0974-360X.2024.00666DOIGOOGLE SCHOLAR
  14. 14.Development and validation of stability indicating RP-HPLC method for simultaneous estimation of MBG and solifenacin succinate in tablet dosage form.. Int. J. Res Trends Innov. 2023;8(3):586.GOOGLE SCHOLAR
  15. 15.RP-HPLC method development and validation for the quantitative estimation of MBG in extended-release tablets. Med Chem. Sci. 2018;1:36–40.GOOGLE SCHOLAR
  16. 16.Development and validation of stability indicating UHPLC method for the quantitative estimation of MBG and solifenacin succinate in pharmaceutical dosage form.. J. Pharm. Negat. Results [Internet]. 2023;6727–3.GOOGLE SCHOLAR
  17. 17.Jahan, K. K.; Malipatil, S. M.. Development and validation of new spectrophotometric methods for the quantitative estimation of SLD in bulk drug and pharmaceutical formulations. Int. J. Pharm. Res Anal. 2014;4(1):65–69.GOOGLE SCHOLAR
  18. 18.Jindan, L.; Xiao, W.; Liping, X.. Evolving role of SLD for the treatment of urological disorders – A narrative review. Drug Design, Development and Therapy. 2022;16:2861–2884. https://doi.org/10.2147/DDDT.S373659DOIGOOGLE SCHOLAR
  19. 19.Kurmi, B.; Asati, V.. Analytical reversed-phase high-performance layer chromatography method development for SLD and solifenacin in bulk and marketed formulation using analytical quality by design approach. Separation Science Plus. 2022;6. https://doi.org/10.1002/sscp.202200117DOIGOOGLE SCHOLAR
  20. 20.Meijer, J.; van den Berg, T.; Huls, R.; Hofstede, V.; Niesing, W.; van den Beld, C. et al. Validation of LC–MS/MS methods for the determination of MBG and eight metabolites in human plasma in a paediatric population. Journal of Pharmaceutical and Biomedical Analysis. 2019;167:155–160. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpba.2019.02.007DOIGOOGLE SCHOLAR
  21. 21.Mishra, S.; Surekha, N.; Chauhan, A.. Development and validation of stability-indicating RP-HPLC method for simultaneous estimation of SLD and MBG in synthetic mixture. Annales Pharmaceutiques Francaises. 2024;82(2):243–262. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pharma.2023.12.013DOIGOOGLE SCHOLAR
  22. 22.Nandy, S.; Ranganathan, S.. Available. Urge incontinence. StatPearls [Internet]. In StatPearls Publishing. 2024.GOOGLE SCHOLAR
  23. 23.Nataraj, K. S.; Rao, A. S.; Harshitha, S.. Analytical method development and validation for the estimation of SLD and dutasteride in capsule dosage form by RP-HPLC method. Journal of Drug Metabolism and Toxicology. 2020;11:245. https://doi.org/10.35248/2157-7609.20.11.245DOIGOOGLE SCHOLAR
  24. 24.O’Kane, M.; Robinson, D.; Cardozo, L.; Wagg, A.; Abrams, P.. MBG in the management of overactive bladder syndrome. International Journal of Women’s Health. 2022;14:1337–1350. https://doi.org/10.2147/IJWH.S372597DOIGOOGLE SCHOLAR
  25. 25.Paljashuva, K.; Ramarao, N.. Simultaneous estimation of dutasteride and SLD in bulk form by RP-HPLC method. World J. Curr. Med Pharm. Res. 2019;1(5):148–163.GOOGLE SCHOLAR
  26. 26.Patel, J.; Patel, G.; Meshram, D.. Development and validation of UV and RP-HPLC methods for simultaneous estimation of MBG and solifenacin succinate in their pharmaceutical dosage form. Int. J. Pharm. Biomed Sci. 2022;2(8):223–232. https://doi.org/10.47191/ijpbms/v2-i8-01DOIGOOGLE SCHOLAR
  27. 27.Patil, D. J.; Godge, R. K.; Jahagirdar, S. N.; Mandhare, S. B.. Validated stability indicating RP-HPLC method for the quantification of process related impurities of solifenacin and MBG in pharmaceutical formulations. International Journal of Drug Delivery Technology. 2024;14(1):56.GOOGLE SCHOLAR
  28. 28.Rani, G. D.; Venkateswarlu, P.. Spectrophotometric determination of SLD in pharmaceutical formulations by charge transfer complex method. Journal of Chemical and Pharmaceutical Research. 2016;8(4):421–424.GOOGLE SCHOLAR
  29. 29.Rao, A. L.; Meghana, M.. Development and validation of stability indicating RP-HPLC method for simultaneous estimation of MBG and solifenacin succinate. International Journal of Research in Pharmacy and Chemistry. 2023;13(1):93–100. https://doi.org/10.33289/IJRPC.17.1.2023.13(26DOIGOOGLE SCHOLAR
  30. 30.Rossi, M.; Roumeguère, T.. SLD in the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia. Drug Design, Development and Therapy. 2010;4:291–297. https://doi.org/10.2147/DDDT.S10428DOIGOOGLE SCHOLAR
  31. 31.Sankar, R.; Vidya, V. S.; Pinnamraju, D.; Babu, P.. Validated UV spectrophotometric method for quantitative determination of MBG in bulk and pharmaceutical dosage form. 2016;8:96–103.GOOGLE SCHOLAR
  32. 32.Sayana, Shankar; Iyer et al. Development and validation of HPTLC method for quantification of SLD in bulk and pharmaceutical dosage form. Journal of Pharmaceutical Innovation. 2012;1:60–65.GOOGLE SCHOLAR
  33. 33.Shaik, J. V.; Saladi, S.; Sait, S. S.. Development of stability-indicating UHPLC method for the quantitative determination of SLD and its related substances. Journal of Chromatographic Science. 2014;52(7):646–653. https://doi.org/10.1093/chromsci/bmt094DOIGOOGLE SCHOLAR
  34. 34.Suryawanshi, R.; Shaikh, S.; Patil, S.. RP-HPLC method development and validation for the estimation of MBG in bulk and dosage form. Journal of Drug Delivery and Therapeutics. 2020;10(1):31–38. https://doi.org/10.22270/jddtDOIGOOGLE SCHOLAR
  35. 35.Tanuja, A.; Ganapaty, S.; Murthy, V. S.. Stability indicating RP-HPLC method development and validation for the determination of solifenacin succinate in bulk and pharmaceutical formulation. Research Journal of Pharmacy and Technology. 2021;14(7):3509–4. https://doi.org/10.52711/0974-360X.2021.006DOIGOOGLE SCHOLAR
  36. 36.Trivedi, P.; Dalwadi, M.; Upadhyay, U.. Development and validation of RP-HPLC method for the estimation of MBG and SLD in synthetic mixture. Int. J. Pharm. Res Appl. 2023;8(3):1245–1257. https://doi.org/10.35629/7781-080312451257DOIGOOGLE SCHOLAR
  37. 37.Warren, K.; Burden, H.; Abrams, P.. MBG in overactive bladder patients: Efficacy review and update on drug safety. Therapeutic Advances in Drug Safety. 2016;7(5):204–216. https://doi.org/10.1177/2042098616659412DOIGOOGLE SCHOLAR
  38. 38.Zhao, X.; Liu, Y.; Xu, J. et al. Determination of SLD in human plasma by liquid chromatography–tandem mass spectrometry. Journal of Chromatography. Part B. 2009;877(29):3724–3728. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jchromb.2009.08.025DOIGOOGLE SCHOLAR

Cite this article

SELECT FORMAT

Reddy, S. S., Vijayalakshmi, R., Ansari, S. S., & Sandya, P. (2025). Development and Validation of a Gradient RP-HPLC Method for Concurrent Analysis of Mirabegron and Silodosin in Bulk and Pharmaceutical Tablets. International Journal of Pharmaceutical Investigation, 15(3), 895–902. https://doi.org/10.5530/ijpi.20250183