SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

Quantitative Colorimetric Sensing of Carbidopa in Anti-Parkinson Drugs Based on Selective Reaction with Indole-3-Carbaldehyde.

Sensors (Basel) · 2023-11-13

DOI: 10.3390/s23229142PMID: 38005530

Open accessresearch-article; Journal ArticleOriginal source ↗

Research overview

The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by

The quality of life of patients affected by Parkinson's disease is improved by medications containing levodopa and carbidopa, restoring the dopamine concentration in the brain. Accordingly, the affordable quality control of such pharmaceuticals is very important. Here is reported the simple and inexpensive colorimetric quantification of carbidopa in anti-Parkinson drugs by the selective condensation reaction between the hydrazine group from carbidopa and the formyl functional group of selected aldehydes in acidified hydroalcoholic solution. An optical assay was developed by using indole-3-carbaldehyde (I3A) giving a yellow aldazine in EtOH:H2O 1:1 (λmax~415 nm) at 70 °C for 4 h, as confirmed by LC-MS analysis. A filter-based plate reader was used for colorimetric data acquisition, providing superior results in terms of analytical performances for I3A, with a sensitivity ~50 L g-1 and LOD ~0.1 mg L-1 in comparison to a previous study based on vanillin, giving, for the same figures of merit values, about 13 L g-1 and 0.2-0.3 mg L-1, respectively. The calibration curves for the standard solution and drugs were almost superimposable, therefore excluding interference from the excipients and additives, with very good reproducibility (avRSD% 2-4%) within the linear dynamic range (10 mg L-1-50 mg L-1).

Scientific assessment

01

Research question

Assess the question within the original study’s scope.

02

Methods & sample

Check the source article for study design and sample details.

03

Key findings

An editorially approved findings summary is not yet published for this record.

04

Limitations

Generalizability, bias and clinical meaning require separate assessment.

Methods, samples and clinical conclusions are not inferred from bibliographic metadata.