View Article

Abstract

The precise, accurate, and linear Green RP-HPLC method was created to evaluate edoxaban in accordance with ICH guidelines and GAC principles. The study demonstrates a highly environmentally friendly approach that replaces or reduces the use of hazardous chemicals. Edoxaban was evaluated using a green reversed-phase high-performance liquid chromatography method, and the greenness of the method was assessed for both standard and commercial tablets. A wavelength of 291 nm was selected. Edoxaban was separated chromatographically using a Hypersil BDS Column-C18 (Thermo Scientific) (4.6 × 250 mm, 5?m) at room temperature with a 20 ?l injection volume. Methanol, water, ethanol, and glacial acetic acid were mixed in the proportions of 65:15:14.5:0.5 with 1.5 min/ml and used as the mobile phase. The method was validated in accordance with ICH guidelines, with a correlation equation of y = 893240x + 4000486 and linearity in the range of 15–45 ?g/ml R2 = 0.9998. Good recovery accuracy (97.90%–99.925%). The precision within a day (% RSD = 0.41) and that between days (% RSD = 0.84). The LOQ and LOD were 1.78 and 0.59 ?g/ml, respectively. GAC alignment was demonstrated by an ARGEE score of 0.61. Overall, the BAGI scores 70 for a good level of greenness, while the MOGAPI scores 86 for a high level of greenness. The ECO SCALE score was 66.5 points, and the AMGS score was 1392.28, indicating a high level of greenness. This approach passed the green assessment and was validated in accordance with the ICH guidelines.

Keywords

RP-HPLC, Edoxaban, Validation, GAC, Greenness Assessment, Method Development

Introduction

× Popup Image

The most commonly used method of analysis is high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC)[1]. It is a quick, accurate, and simple analysis method [1], [2]. The goal of this study was to quantify and identify chemicals and contaminants in pharmaceutical products. With a high pressure of up to 400 atmospheres, HPLC is an enhanced form of column chromatography [3]. RP-HPLC is a popular technology that is rapid and precise. The stationary phase is composed of highly nonpolar materials, such as C18, C12, or C8 columns [4], [5]. Polar liquids, such as water, acetonitrile, and methanol, are used in the mobile phase. Since most materials are polar, they elute quickly in a polar mobile phase [6].

The guidelines for validating the HPLC method were created in accordance with international regulatory bodies and were provided by the International Council of Harmonization (ICH) Q2 (R2). The standard values of each parameter are provided [7].

Edoxaban tosylate monohydrate belongs to the direct/novel oral anticoagulant (DOAC/NOAC) class [8], [9], [10], [11], [12]. Coagulation-related, selective factor Xa inhibitor. It is used in deep vein thrombosis (DVT), pulmonary embolism (PE), nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NAVF), and systemic embolism (SE) to reduce complications. The antagonist of edoxaban is vitamin K [12].

 

 

 

Fig 1 Structure of Edoxaban

 

The Edoxaban structure contains a diamine group. which are biologically charged and protonated. Therefore, Edoxaban has a high polarity. The IV class designation of edoxaban indicates limited permeability and solubility [10]. The solubility of the medication in organic solvents, which are more environmentally friendly than others, was a major challenge when devising a new method for validating Edoxaban. This was the main motivation for this Green Chemistry procedure.

Anastas and Warner proposed 12 green chemistry tenets [13], [14], [15], [16], [17]. can minimize or reduce the use of elements that eventually cause environmental harm. A large amount of solvent should be employed during the technique development [15], [16]. Because ACN and MeOH are more polar and have longer wavelengths, they are frequently used as hazardous solvents. According to the solvent selection guide, ACN is categorized as a high-risk solvent [14]. It has detrimental effects on the environment and is extremely hazardous to the analysts [17].

The literature review revealed that only a few green methods have been developed for the determination of edoxaban. We created a system based on green principles that was accurate, precise, robust, linear, and compliant with the ICH Q2 (R2) guidelines. The selection of a highly polar and environmentally friendly solvent was crucial in method development.

Metric tools were available to assess the greenness of the method and provide scores that indicate the greenness of the approach. It has 12 principles [17].

MATERIALS AND METHOD

MATERIALS

 Edoxaban was  gifted by MORPEN Laboratories Ltd.. In India, SUPEXA OD 15 tablets were purchased from a local pharmacy. HPLC Grade water was purchased from Qualigens, Thermo Fisher Scientific, Mumbai, India. Methanol was purchased from Qualigens, Thermo Fisher Scientific, Mumbai, India. Ethanol was purchased from Changshu Song Sheng, China. Glacial acetic acid was purchased from Qualigens, Thermo Fisher Scientific, Mumbai, India. Propan-2-ol was purchased from Finar Limited, Ahmedabad, India. Ammonium formate was purchased from Qualigens, Thermo Fisher Scientific, Mumbai, India. Nylon syringe filters and nylon 6,6 membrane filters were purchased from Ultipor, Pall  Life Science, India.

INSTRUMENTS

HPLC System Agilent-HPLC system Model: 1100, Pump – Isocratic, DE43629962, Detector – UV detector, JP43826546,  Software – EZ Chrome Elite, Column - C18 ( Thermo Scientific) (4.6 × 250 mm, 5μm), UV spectroscopy Shimadzu UV 1800 series(Shimadzu) UV-1700 Double beam with Software UV Probe 2.33, pH meter (Digisun electronics)  pH System 7007, UltraSonicator (Servewell Instrument)   RC-SYSTEM MU-1700,  Analytical balance (ESSAE) DS-852J Series (Micro Analytical Balance).

METHOD

Optimization of chromatographic condition

 

Table 1 Optimization of chromatographic condition

HPLC System

Agilent 1100 series

Column

BDS Hypersil C18, 250 mm ×4.6 mm,5,

Pump

Isocratic, DE43629962

Mobile Phase

Methanol: Ethanol: Water: Glacial Acetic Acid in the ratio 70:14.5:15:0.5

Detection Wavelength

291 nm

Flow rate

1.5 ml/min

Temprature

Ambient

Run time

7 min

 

Solubility studies

Prior to developing a procedure, solubility studies should be performed. To identify the appropriate solvent, the solubility of the drug was tested in various solvents. Edoxaban is a BCS class IV medication that changes with pH and has poor solubility [18], [19]. It is somewhat soluble in water and ethanol and barely soluble in ACN [20]. The solubility increases as the pH decreases and vice versa [18], [19], [20].

Selection of mobile phase

Edoxaban in its pure form was injected into the HPLC system and run in various solvent systems. Each mobile phase was permitted to equilibrate with the stationary phase until a stable baseline was achieved. Various mobile phases, such as methanol: water, isopropyl alcohol: ammonium formate, and isopropyl alcohol: water: glacial acetic acid (GAA) were tested. To achieve a stable peak in each mobile phase, different ratios of Glacial Acetic Acid: Ethanol were tested, sonicated in an ultrasonic bath, and filtered through a 0.45 μm filter paper. Following trials, a final solvent combination of methanol, ethanol, water, and glacial acetic acid, in the ratio of 70:14.5:15:0.5, produced a sharp peak and good resolution.

Preparation of standard stock solution

Edoxaban tosylate standard (30 mg) was precisely weighed and transferred to a 100 ml volumetric flask. The mixture was shaken thoroughly after adding approximately 90 mL of diluent. The samples were sonicated them for two minutes, and the volume was adjusted accordingly. The final concentration of the stock solution was 300 μg/ml.

Preparation of standard solution

2 ml of the stock solution should be pipetted out, transferred to a 20 ml volumetric flask, diluted to the appropriate level with diluent, well shaken, sonicated for approximately two minutes, and filtered through a 0.2 µm syringe filter before injection. The standard solution's final concentration is 30 μg/ml.

Marketed Tablet Test Preparation

Ten SUPEXA OD 15 tablets were weighed individually, and each tablet was crushed using a mortar and pestle. Tablet powder (API) equal to the standard concentration was weighed, dissolved in 100 mL of diluent, and thoroughly shaken. After two minutes of sonication, the mixture was passed through a 0.2 µm membrane syringe filter.

Validation of Edoxaban

According to ICH guideline Q2 (R2), validation is a crucial step in demonstrating the accuracy, precision, linearity, specificity, system appropriateness, LOD, LOQ, and robustness of the method [7], [21]. The standard solution for the main parameter was 30 μg/ml. Three distinct concentrations of the reference solution were prepared at 80%, 100%, and 120% for accuracy.

 

 

 

Specificity

The method's specificity was proven when it was recorded and compared that there was no interference between the test sample and the standard. The tailing factor (T), resolution factor (Rs), and retention time (R) were examined. This study demonstrated that the developed approach was tailored for Edoxaban [22].

System suitability

It examines several factors, including the theoretical plate (S), tailing factor (T), resolution (RS), capacity factor (K), repeatability, and relative retention. quick injection of the reference solution was performed. when the ICH-compliant system suitability parameter was used [23].

Linearity

A curve was used to assess the linearity and range of the five levels of samples prepared: 15, 22.5, 30, 37.50, and 45 μg/ml. The edoxaban concentration was plotted on the x-axis, and the peak area was calculated on the y-axis. R2 is known [7],[24].

Accuracy

This indicates the closeness of the mean test to the actual edoxaban concentration. In accordance with the ICH guidelines, the concentrations were measured at 80%, 100%, and 120% in triplicate to determine the mean of each concentration. The edoxaban test was performed [7].

Precision

Both intraday and interday precision were performed in accordance with ICH guidelines. Inter-day precision refers to the analysis of a sample at two separate times on two different days. Intraday precision was determined by analyzing the sample twice on the same day. The RSD was limited to 2% [25].

LOD and LOQ

The LOD is the lowest analyte concentration that can be detected but not quantified under certain conditions [22].The lowest analyte concentration that can be measured under specific conditions is known as the LOQ [7].

Robustness 

This slightly alters the chromatographic state. This change in chromatographic conditions was followed by the injection of a standard solution [7]. The mobile phase flow rate was varied by ± 2%. ± 2% variation in wavelength. The outcome should differ from the initial run by less than 2%.

RESULT AND DISCUSSUION

Selection of wavelength

The UV spectrum of 5 μg/ml edoxaban in methanol was scanned at wavelengths between 200 and 400 nm. The greatest absorption was found at 291 nm (fig. 2) for Edoxaban, and this wavelength was chosen for further operation.

 

 

 

 

Fig 2 Wavelength of Edoxaban at 291 nm.

 

Method development

To achieve efficient separation with a short run time and sharp peak in accordance with ICH guidelines, the number of solvent composition was examineds. to develop an environmentally friendly analytical technique. This method was developed in Trial 4.

Trial 1: In trial 1, the mobile phase was IPA and buffer (0.01 ammonium formate) in an 80:20 ratio. The column was Hypersil, C18 (250 mm × 4.5 mm × 5 μm), with a flow rate of 1.5 ml/min and a run time of 12 min. TP and TF did not meet the acceptance criteria. Fig 3

 

 

 

Fig 3 Trial 1

 

Trial 2: IPA, water, and glacial acetic acid were obtained in an 80:19:1 ratio. An Epic C12 column (250 × 4.5 × 5 μm) was used. The injection volume was 20 μl, the flow rate was 1 ml/min, and TP and TF did not meet the acceptance criteria. Fig. 4

 

 

 

 

Fig 4 Trial 2

 

Trial 3: In three tests, the mobile phase was methanol, ethanol, water, and glacial acetic acid in a ratio of 60:10:30:0.1; the column was Hypersil, C18 (250 mm × 4.5 mm × 5 μm); the flow rate was 1.5 min/ml, but it should have been 1.1 ml/min; the run time was 15 min; the peak was eluted at a longer retention time; TF was not found to be within the current conditions. Fig 5

 

 

 

Fig 5 Trial 3

 

Trial 4 : The chromatographic technique is finalized and optimized in trial 4. Methanol, water, ethanol, and glacial acetic acid in a ratio of 70:15:14.5:0.5 should be the mobile phase. Choose the Hypersil, C18 column (250 x 4.5 x 5 μm) with a flow rate of 1.5 ml/min, an injection volume of 20 μl, a run time of 7 minutes, and ambient temperature. Peak shape is good, and TP & TF (Asymmetry) are seen within acceptable standards. This approach has been devised, however it needs to be validated before being used. Fig. 6

 

 

 

Fig 6 Trial 4 final method development was selected.

 

Specificity

The chromatograms of the Edoxaban test solution, standard, and mobile phase blank were used to compare specificity [22], [25]. In the HPLC system, solutions were injected, and the chromatogram is shown in fig. The blank does not interfere with the Edoxaban peak's retention time in either the test or standard solution. Edoxaban retention times in the test and standard solutions match one another [26]. Therefore, specificity makes acceptable.

 

 

 

 

Fig7 Blank solution.

 

 

 

Fig 8 standard solution.

 

 

 

Fig 9 Test solution.

 

Linearity

Within a certain range, linearity yields results that are directly proportional to concentration. Create five levels of samples with varying concentrations, ranging from 50% to 150% [7], [26]. The approach is linear and linearity is supported because the linear regression equation and R2 were y = 893240x + 4000486 and R2 = 0.9998, respectively, and the correlation coefficient was found to be within the acceptance standards [22].

 

 

 

Fig 10 linearity curve

 

     

 

 

 

Table 1. linearity of Edoxaban.

Con. (ppm or μ

g/ml)

 

Area

15.00

13838594

22.50

20313520

30.00

27354643

37.50

33979710

45.00

40502011

   

Correlation coefficient

NLT 0.995

 

0.99992

Intercept

400486

   

Slope

893240

 

Accuracy

analytical technique to verify the drug's authenticity. This involves comparing the standard and theoretical concentrations obtained from the Edoxaban sample. In accordance with ICH guidelines, prepare three standard solution concentrations, such as 80%, 100%, and 120%, and determine the triple mean for each concentration [7], [21]. In the range of 97.70% to 99.92%, our analytical approach demonstrates a remarkable percentage recovery [25]. The procedure is accurate and the accuracy is justified because both the mean recovery and the %RSD of the recovery were observed within the acceptance requirements.

 

Table 2 Accuracy result of Edoxaban.

Accuracy

Mean % recovery

SD

%RSD (NMT 2)

Accuracy at 80 %

99.92

0.685

0.69

Accuracy at 100 %

98.27

0.5261

0.54

Accuracy at 120 %

97.90

0.1898

0.19

 

Precision

The ICH guidelines were followed while measuring intraday precision [7]. Obtain two sets in one day. The devised approach yielded a value of 0.41% RSD.

 

Table 3. Intra day Precision of Edoxaban.

Name

Preparations

% Assay

Set-1

prep-1

99.61

 

prep-2

99.93

Set-2

prep-1

98.99

 

prep-2

99.27

Mean

 

99.45

SD

 

0.4082

% RSD (NMT 2 )

 

0.41

 

Two times on two separate days, interday precision was measured. RSD was determined to be 0.84%.

 

Table 4 Inter day precision of Edoxaban.

Name

Preparations

% Assay

Day-1

prep-1

99.61

 

prep-2

99.93

Day-2

prep-1

98.63

 

prep-2

98.15

Mean

 

99.08

SD

 

0.8308

% RSD (NMT 2 )

 

0.84

 

Since the procedure is accurate in terms of repeated analysis in a single day, intraday and interday precision are justified [22], [25]. The overall percentage RSD for results of sets 1 and 2 done in a single day and two consecutive days was observed within acceptance requirements.

LOD and LOQ

0.56 μg/ml is the lowest limit of concentration (LOD) that can be detected but not quantified. 1.78 μg/ml is the lowest quantifiable limit of concentration (LOQ). They precisely and properly quantify [7], [26].

 

Table 5 LOD and LOQ of Edoxaban

Con. (ppm or μ

g/ml)

 

Area

15.00

13838594

22.50

20313520

30.00

27354643

37.50

33979710

45.00

40502011

   

STEYX

159272.15

SLOPE

893240

LOD (μ

g/ml)

 

0.59

LOQ (μ

g/ml)

 

1.78

 

Robustness

Robustness was the analytical parameter since there was no significant change in the system suitability parameter when the method's internal parameters were deliberated. Modify the mobile phase flow rate by ± 2%. Wavelength variation of ± 2% [22].

 

table 6 Robustness of Edoxaban

Robustness change in

Edoxaban Wt of Std (mg)

Dilutedd to (ml)

ml taken

Dilutedd to (ml)

Area

RT (min)

TP (NLT 2000)

TF (NMT 2)

Flow 1.10 ml/min

30.1

100

2

20

29299011

3.499

5477

1.74

Flow 1.30 ml/min

30.0

100

2

20

25291201

2.964

5139

1.63

Wavelength 289 nm

29.9

100

2

20

27676695

3.207

5279

1.64

Wavelength 293 nm

30.2

100

2

20

26424709

3.212

5283

1.65

 

Assay of Marketed Tablet

Assay the marketed Edoxaban tablet solution twicely. Sample shows the good % Assay of the drug.

 

Table 7 Assay of Marketed Tablet

Name

 

Area

 

RT(min)

 

Edoxaban obs. in mg

Lable claim in mg

% Assay

 

Test solutions-1

27638586

 

3.217

 

15.58

 

15

 

103.86

 

Test solutions-2

27427935

 

3.212

 

15.51

 

15

 

103.37

 

 

Greenness Assessment

  1. ARGEE  :     The Analytical Greenness (ARGEE) tool is used to evaluate how environmentally sustainable a proposed approach is  [27] . This uses the 12 GAC concept to evaluate the approach  [28],  [29] . An overall score of 0.61 was attained in this investigation. It reproduces this method's high to moderate amount of greenness. The method performs well in direct analysis, avoids derivatization, uses less energy, ensures operator safety, and has real-time capacity, according to the results. which are indicated by the green segment. Some perform mediocrely in terms of automation, miniaturization, and multianalyte capacity. The  color  yellow is used to signify this part. Certain components, such as waste production, hazardous reagent, and sample size, are displayed at the limit level and are indicated by red or orange segments. Overall, the exhibition approach was accurate and quite environmentally friendly; nevertheless, there is still room for development.

 

 

 

Fig 11 ARGEE Greenness Assessment.

  1. BAGI: The method's overall score of 70 on the Blue Applicability Grade Index indicates a good degree of greenness. Positive performance is indicated by blue tones, which are combined with green chemistry. Strong performance is shown by the dark blue section, whereas moderate performance is shown by the light segment [17]. Strong areas like efficiency, safety, and reduced environmental effect are represented by pictograms. Limit-level waste management. According to the overall BAGI rating, the analytical approach is environmentally friendly, sustainable, and green. Only a few need to be improved [30].

 

 

 

Fig 12 BAGI Greenness Assessment.

  1. MOGAP I  :   The procedure received a score of 86 on the Modified Green Analytical Procedure Index (MOGAPI). demonstrating the tremendous degree of greenery. The highly eco-friendly method was demonstrated  [31] . The approach performed well in sample collection (1), preservation (2), minimal usage (9), solvent safety (10–11), and waste management, according to subsection. Certain areas in the yellow portion show methods that operate at a modest level, such as automation (6–8) and energy efficiency. The method's limitations in terms of trash generation and occupational danger (14). Overall MoGAPI evaluation reveals that the approach was in line with the principles of green analytical chemistry  [31] . 

 

 

 

Fig 13 MoGAPI Greenness Assessment

  1. AMGS : AMGS received an overall score of 1392.28, demonstrating the method's high degree of greenness. The approach was appropriate for green analytical validation. Good performance in instrument efficiency (480.85 score, 34.54% contribution) and solvent energy (151.01 score, 10.85%)  were  found in the evaluation, indicating an effective mobile phase. Certain aspects indicate that automation and microscale preparation need to be optimized or improved. The overall AMGS analysis confirms that the HPLC method was in good alignment with the GAC principle  [32], [33], [34] .
  2. ECO SCALE : A score of 66.5 was obtained in the Eco Scale assessment, indicating that the HPLC process is quite environmentally friendly [35]. The evaluation showed little use of hazardous materials and good energy efficiency. Untreated waste management and the usage of organic solvents are subject to moderate rate penalties. The approach focused on future advancements in solvent recycling and microscaling . The procedure was in line with the green analytical principles, according to the overall eco scale [36].

DISCUSSION

The Edoxaban was quantified using the green RP-HPLC technique, which has a significant environmental impact. The developed approach met all ICH-provided parameters and was reliable, accurate, and precise. The technique development result demonstrates good peak and retention time performance with respect to flow rate and ambient temperature. The mobile phase ratio was (65:15:14.5:0.5) v/v; the flow rate was 1.5 ml/min; the tailing factor, retention period, and plate count were all within acceptable bounds. The developed approach demonstrated linearity R2 = O.9998 and accuracy recovery ranging from 97.90 to 99.72%. The green assessment demonstrates good alignment with GAC principles, and the green RP-HPLC method proved to be acceptable and good.

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrates the creation, verification, and evaluation of a straightforward, precise, accurate, robust, and environmentally friendly method for determining Edoxaban. In the concentration range of 15 to 45 μg/ml, the technique was linear. The method was sensitive, appropriate, and specific for determining the dosage of Edoxaban. The marketed product was successfully assayed using this method. The developed method attained greenness and was in good alignment with green analytical principles.

Acknowledgement

We are grateful to Vidyabharthi College of Pharmacy's Department of Quality Assurance for providing the facility. Thank you also to MORPEN LABORATERIS INDIA for providing the Edoxaban API. We appreciate Amol Gawande's technical support for the HPLC validation.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

REFERENCES

  1. Zotou , A. (2012). An overview of recent advances in HPLC instrumentation.  Central European Journal of Chemistry , 10(3), 554-569.
  2. Ahuja, S., & Dong, M. (Eds.). (2005).  Handbook of pharmaceutical analysis by HPLC  (Vol. 6). Elsevier.
  3. Moldoveanu, S. C., & David, V. (2016).  Selection of the HPLC method in chemical analysis . Elsevier.
  4. Wolfender , J. L. (2009). HPLC in natural product analysis: the detection issue.  Planta medica 75 (07), 719-734.
  5. Ali, A. H. (2022). High-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC): A review.  Ann. Adv. Chem 6 (1), 010-020.
  6. Belanger, J. M., Paré, J. J., & Sigouin, M. (1997). High performance liquid chromatography (HPLC): principles and applications. In  Techniques and instrumentation in analytical chemistry  (Vol. 18, pp. 37-59). Elsevier.
  7. International Council for Harmonisation of Technical Requirements for Pharmaceuticals for Human Use (ICH). (2023, November 30).  ICH guideline Q2(R2): Validation of analytical procedures . Geneva: ICH Secretariat. Retrieved April 4, 2026.
  8. Lip, G. Y., & Agnelli, G. (2014).  Edoxaban : a focused review of its clinical pharmacology.  European heart journal 35 (28), 1844-1855.
  9. Bounameaux , H., & Camm, A. J. (2014).  Edoxaban : an update on the new oral direct factor Xa inhibitor.  Drugs 74 (11), 1209-1231.
  10. Kirchhof, P., Toennis, T., Goette, A., Camm, A. J., Diener, H. C., Becher, N., ... & Zapf, A. (2023). Anticoagulation with  edoxaban  in patients with atrial high-rate episodes.  New England Journal of Medicine 389 (13), 1167-1179.
  11. Giugliano, R. P., Ruff, C. T.,  Braunwald , E., Murphy, S. A.,  Wiviott , S. D., Halperin, J.  L.,&  Antman, E. M. (2013).  Edoxaban  versus warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation.  New England Journal of Medicine 369 (22), 2093-2104.
  12. Van Mieghem, N. M.,  Unverdorben , M., Hengstenberg, C., Moellmann, H., Mehran, R., Lopez-Otero, D., ... &  Dangas , G. D. (2021).  Edoxaban  versus vitamin K antagonist for atrial fibrillation after TAVR.  New England Journal of Medicine 385 (23), 2150-2160.
  13. Zimmerman, J. B., Anastas, P. T.,  Erythropel , H. C., & Leitner, W. (2020). Designing for a green chemistry future.  Science 367 (6476), 397-400.
  14. Horváth, I. T., & Anastas, P. T. (2007). Innovations and green chemistry.  Chemical reviews 107 (6), 2169-2173.
  15. Andraos, J., & Matlack, A. S. (2022).  Introduction to green chemistry . CRC press.
  16. Asiya, S. I., Pal, K., Kralj, S., El-Sayyad, G. S., De Souza, F. G., & Narayanan, T. (2020). Sustainable preparation of gold nanoparticles via green chemistry approach for biogenic applications.  Materials Today Chemistry 17 , 100327.  
  17. Pusadkar , S. R., Waghulkar, V. M., Jadhao, M., &  Jawarkar , S. A COMPLETE OVERVIEW ON GREEN ANALYTICAL METHOD OF VALIDATION.  Journal of Pharmaceutical Research 15 (3), 71-84.
  18. Parasrampuria , D. A.,  Kanamaru , T., Connor, A., Wilding, I., Ogata, K.,  Shimoto , Y., &  Kunitada , S. (2015). Evaluation of regional gastrointestinal absorption of  edoxaban  using the  enterion  capsule.  The Journal of Clinical Pharmacology 55 (11), 1286-1292.
  19. Corsini, A., Ferri, N., Proietti, M., &  Boriani , G. (2020).  Edoxaban  and the issue of drug-drug interactions: from pharmacology to clinical practice.  Drugs .
  20. Ghatmale , R., & Pathan, V. T. (2023). Formulation and evaluation of sublingual tablet of  edoxaban  by solid dispersion method.  INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CURRENT RESEARCH AND INNOVATIONS IN PHARMA SCIENCES 1 (2), 115-128.
  21. Walfish, S. (2006). Analytical methods: a statistical perspective on the ICH Q2A and Q2B guidelines for validation of analytical methods.  BioPharm  International 19 (12), 1-6.
  22. Shabir, G. A. (2003). Validation of high-performance liquid chromatography methods for pharmaceutical analysis: Understanding the differences and similarities between validation requirements of the US Food and Drug Administration, the US Pharmacopeia and the International Conference on Harmonization.  Journal of chromatography A 987 (1-2), 57-66.
  23. Mukherjee, A. (2012). A detailed study of validation parameters and system suitability test in HPLC.
  24. Araujo, P. (2009). Key aspects of analytical method validation and linearity evaluation.  Journal of chromatography B 877 (23), 2224-2234.
  25. Ermer, J. (2025). ICH Q2 (R2): validation of analytical procedures.  Method validation in pharmaceutical analysis: a guide to best practice , 351-372.
  26. Guideline, I. H. T. (2022). Validation of analytical procedures Q2 (R2).  ICH: Geneva, Switzerland 1 .
  27. Pena-Pereira, F., Wojnowski, W., &  Tobiszewski , M. (2020). AGREE—Analytical  GREEnness  metric approach and software.  Analytical chemistry 92 (14), 10076-10082.
  28. Wojnowski, W.,  Tobiszewski , M., Pena-Pereira, F., &  Psillakis , E. (2022).  AGREEprep –analytical greenness metric for sample preparation.  TrAC  Trends in Analytical Chemistry 149 , 116553.
  29. Kannaiah, K. P., Sugumaran, A.,  Chanduluru , H. K., & Rathinam, S. (2021). Environmental impact of greenness assessment tools in liquid chromatography–A review.  Microchemical Journal 170 , 106685.
  30. Manousi , N., Wojnowski, W.,  P?otka-Wasylka , J., &  Samanidou , V. (2023). Blue applicability grade index (BAGI) and software: a new tool for the evaluation of method practicality.  Green chemistry 25 (19), 7598-7604.
  31. Mansour, F. R.,  P?otka-Wasylka , J., & Locatelli, M. (2024). Modified GAPI (MoGAPI) tool and software for the assessment of method greenness: case studies and applications.  Analytica 5 (3), 451-457.
  32. Hicks, M. B., Farrell, W., Aurigemma, C., Lehmann, L., Weisel, L., Nadeau, K., ... & Ferguson, P. (2019). Making the move towards modernized greener separations: introduction of the analytical method greenness score (AMGS) calculator.  Green Chemistry 21 (7), 1816-1826.
  33. Yin, L., Yu, L., Guo, Y., Wang, C., Ge, Y., Zheng, X., ... & Shi, M. (2024). Green analytical chemistry metrics for evaluating the green ness of analytical procedures.  Journal of Pharmaceutical Analysis 14 (11), 101013.
  34. Kowtharapu , L. P., Katari, N. K.,  Muchakayala , S. K., &  Marisetti , V. M. (2023). Green metric tools for analytical methods assessment critical review, case studies and crucify.  TrAC  Trends in Analytical Chemistry 166 , 117196.
  35. Tobiszewski, M.,  Mar? , M., Ga?uszka, A., &  Namie?nik , J. (2015). Green chemistry metrics with special reference to green analytical chemistry.  Molecules 20 (6), 10928-10946.
  36. Imam, M. S., & Abdelrahman, M. M. (2023). How environmentally friendly is the analytical process? A paradigm overview of ten greenness assessment metric approaches for analytical methods.  Trends in Environmental Analytical Chemistry 38 , e00202.

Reference

  1. Zotou , A. (2012). An overview of recent advances in HPLC instrumentation.  Central European Journal of Chemistry , 10(3), 554-569.
  2. Ahuja, S., & Dong, M. (Eds.). (2005).  Handbook of pharmaceutical analysis by HPLC  (Vol. 6). Elsevier.
  3. Moldoveanu, S. C., & David, V. (2016).  Selection of the HPLC method in chemical analysis . Elsevier.
  4. Wolfender , J. L. (2009). HPLC in natural product analysis: the detection issue.  Planta medica 75 (07), 719-734.
  5. Ali, A. H. (2022). High-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC): A review.  Ann. Adv. Chem 6 (1), 010-020.
  6. Belanger, J. M., Paré, J. J., & Sigouin, M. (1997). High performance liquid chromatography (HPLC): principles and applications. In  Techniques and instrumentation in analytical chemistry  (Vol. 18, pp. 37-59). Elsevier.
  7. International Council for Harmonisation of Technical Requirements for Pharmaceuticals for Human Use (ICH). (2023, November 30).  ICH guideline Q2(R2): Validation of analytical procedures . Geneva: ICH Secretariat. Retrieved April 4, 2026.
  8. Lip, G. Y., & Agnelli, G. (2014).  Edoxaban : a focused review of its clinical pharmacology.  European heart journal 35 (28), 1844-1855.
  9. Bounameaux , H., & Camm, A. J. (2014).  Edoxaban : an update on the new oral direct factor Xa inhibitor.  Drugs 74 (11), 1209-1231.
  10. Kirchhof, P., Toennis, T., Goette, A., Camm, A. J., Diener, H. C., Becher, N., ... & Zapf, A. (2023). Anticoagulation with  edoxaban  in patients with atrial high-rate episodes.  New England Journal of Medicine 389 (13), 1167-1179.
  11. Giugliano, R. P., Ruff, C. T.,  Braunwald , E., Murphy, S. A.,  Wiviott , S. D., Halperin, J.  L.,&  Antman, E. M. (2013).  Edoxaban  versus warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation.  New England Journal of Medicine 369 (22), 2093-2104.
  12. Van Mieghem, N. M.,  Unverdorben , M., Hengstenberg, C., Moellmann, H., Mehran, R., Lopez-Otero, D., ... &  Dangas , G. D. (2021).  Edoxaban  versus vitamin K antagonist for atrial fibrillation after TAVR.  New England Journal of Medicine 385 (23), 2150-2160.
  13. Zimmerman, J. B., Anastas, P. T.,  Erythropel , H. C., & Leitner, W. (2020). Designing for a green chemistry future.  Science 367 (6476), 397-400.
  14. Horváth, I. T., & Anastas, P. T. (2007). Innovations and green chemistry.  Chemical reviews 107 (6), 2169-2173.
  15. Andraos, J., & Matlack, A. S. (2022).  Introduction to green chemistry . CRC press.
  16. Asiya, S. I., Pal, K., Kralj, S., El-Sayyad, G. S., De Souza, F. G., & Narayanan, T. (2020). Sustainable preparation of gold nanoparticles via green chemistry approach for biogenic applications.  Materials Today Chemistry 17 , 100327.  
  17. Pusadkar , S. R., Waghulkar, V. M., Jadhao, M., &  Jawarkar , S. A COMPLETE OVERVIEW ON GREEN ANALYTICAL METHOD OF VALIDATION.  Journal of Pharmaceutical Research 15 (3), 71-84.
  18. Parasrampuria , D. A.,  Kanamaru , T., Connor, A., Wilding, I., Ogata, K.,  Shimoto , Y., &  Kunitada , S. (2015). Evaluation of regional gastrointestinal absorption of  edoxaban  using the  enterion  capsule.  The Journal of Clinical Pharmacology 55 (11), 1286-1292.
  19. Corsini, A., Ferri, N., Proietti, M., &  Boriani , G. (2020).  Edoxaban  and the issue of drug-drug interactions: from pharmacology to clinical practice.  Drugs .
  20. Ghatmale , R., & Pathan, V. T. (2023). Formulation and evaluation of sublingual tablet of  edoxaban  by solid dispersion method.  INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CURRENT RESEARCH AND INNOVATIONS IN PHARMA SCIENCES 1 (2), 115-128.
  21. Walfish, S. (2006). Analytical methods: a statistical perspective on the ICH Q2A and Q2B guidelines for validation of analytical methods.  BioPharm  International 19 (12), 1-6.
  22. Shabir, G. A. (2003). Validation of high-performance liquid chromatography methods for pharmaceutical analysis: Understanding the differences and similarities between validation requirements of the US Food and Drug Administration, the US Pharmacopeia and the International Conference on Harmonization.  Journal of chromatography A 987 (1-2), 57-66.
  23. Mukherjee, A. (2012). A detailed study of validation parameters and system suitability test in HPLC.
  24. Araujo, P. (2009). Key aspects of analytical method validation and linearity evaluation.  Journal of chromatography B 877 (23), 2224-2234.
  25. Ermer, J. (2025). ICH Q2 (R2): validation of analytical procedures.  Method validation in pharmaceutical analysis: a guide to best practice , 351-372.
  26. Guideline, I. H. T. (2022). Validation of analytical procedures Q2 (R2).  ICH: Geneva, Switzerland 1 .
  27. Pena-Pereira, F., Wojnowski, W., &  Tobiszewski , M. (2020). AGREE—Analytical  GREEnness  metric approach and software.  Analytical chemistry 92 (14), 10076-10082.
  28. Wojnowski, W.,  Tobiszewski , M., Pena-Pereira, F., &  Psillakis , E. (2022).  AGREEprep –analytical greenness metric for sample preparation.  TrAC  Trends in Analytical Chemistry 149 , 116553.
  29. Kannaiah, K. P., Sugumaran, A.,  Chanduluru , H. K., & Rathinam, S. (2021). Environmental impact of greenness assessment tools in liquid chromatography–A review.  Microchemical Journal 170 , 106685.
  30. Manousi , N., Wojnowski, W.,  P?otka-Wasylka , J., &  Samanidou , V. (2023). Blue applicability grade index (BAGI) and software: a new tool for the evaluation of method practicality.  Green chemistry 25 (19), 7598-7604.
  31. Mansour, F. R.,  P?otka-Wasylka , J., & Locatelli, M. (2024). Modified GAPI (MoGAPI) tool and software for the assessment of method greenness: case studies and applications.  Analytica 5 (3), 451-457.
  32. Hicks, M. B., Farrell, W., Aurigemma, C., Lehmann, L., Weisel, L., Nadeau, K., ... & Ferguson, P. (2019). Making the move towards modernized greener separations: introduction of the analytical method greenness score (AMGS) calculator.  Green Chemistry 21 (7), 1816-1826.
  33. Yin, L., Yu, L., Guo, Y., Wang, C., Ge, Y., Zheng, X., ... & Shi, M. (2024). Green analytical chemistry metrics for evaluating the green ness of analytical procedures.  Journal of Pharmaceutical Analysis 14 (11), 101013.
  34. Kowtharapu , L. P., Katari, N. K.,  Muchakayala , S. K., &  Marisetti , V. M. (2023). Green metric tools for analytical methods assessment critical review, case studies and crucify.  TrAC  Trends in Analytical Chemistry 166 , 117196.
  35. Tobiszewski, M.,  Mar? , M., Ga?uszka, A., &  Namie?nik , J. (2015). Green chemistry metrics with special reference to green analytical chemistry.  Molecules 20 (6), 10928-10946.
  36. Imam, M. S., & Abdelrahman, M. M. (2023). How environmentally friendly is the analytical process? A paradigm overview of ten greenness assessment metric approaches for analytical methods.  Trends in Environmental Analytical Chemistry 38 , e00202.

Photo
Shreyash Pusadkar
Corresponding author

Department of Quality Assurances, Vidyabharthi College Of Pharmacy, SGBAU Amravati University Amravati 444601, Maharashtra, India

Photo
Vijay Waghulkar
Co-author

Department of Quality Assurances, Vidyabharthi College Of Pharmacy, SGBAU Amravati University Amravati 444601, Maharashtra, India

Photo
Monika Jadhao
Co-author

Department of Quality Assurances, Vidyabharthi College Of Pharmacy, SGBAU Amravati University Amravati 444601, Maharashtra, India

Photo
Sailesh Jawarkar
Co-author

Department of Quality Assurances, Vidyabharthi College Of Pharmacy, SGBAU Amravati University Amravati 444601, Maharashtra, India

Shreyash Pusadkar, Vijay Waghulkar, Monika Jadhao, Sailesh Jawarkar, Development and Validation of a Green RP-HPLC Method for Pharmaceutical Drug Analysis and Greenness Assessment of Edoxaban, Int. J. of Pharm. Sci., 2026, Vol 4, Issue 5, 6240-6253, https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.20354131

More related articles
Evaluation of Hepatoprotective Activity of Silybum...
Yashkirti Vishwakarma , Abhishek Shrivastava...
Formulation And Evaluation of a Polyherbal Anti-Acne Face Pack...
Vijay Gadiwan , Ekta Waghmare, Shubham Shirsat , Om Ghuge, Sunil Raut ...
Formulation and Evaluation of Sunscreen For UV Protection ...
Ritik Patel , Shivanand M. Patil, Manisha Rana...