AI Article Synopsis

  • Post-market surveillance is crucial for preventing the consumption of substandard and falsified medicines, and field deployable technologies enable quick screening for these issues.
  • Twelve devices, including various types of spectrometers and chromatographs, were tested on both real and simulated medicines to assess their ability to identify and quantify active pharmaceutical ingredients (APIs), showing high sensitivity for detecting medicines lacking the correct API.
  • While most devices were effective at identifying falsified medicines, their ability to quantify API content varied significantly, with some devices showing particular weaknesses in detecting lower concentrations of active ingredients.

Article Abstract

Background: Post-market surveillance is a key regulatory function to prevent substandard and falsified (SF) medicines from being consumed by patients. Field deployable technologies offer the potential for rapid objective screening for SF medicines.

Methods And Findings: We evaluated twelve devices: three near infrared spectrometers (MicroPHAZIR RX, NIR-S-G1, Neospectra 2.5), two Raman spectrometers (Progeny, TruScan RM), one mid-infrared spectrometer (4500a), one disposable colorimetric assay (Paper Analytical Devices, PAD), one disposable immunoassay (Rapid Diagnostic Test, RDT), one portable liquid chromatograph (C-Vue), one microfluidic system (PharmaChk), one mass spectrometer (QDa), and one thin layer chromatography kit (GPHF-Minilab). Each device was tested with a series of field collected medicines (FCM) along with simulated medicines (SIM) formulated in a laboratory. The FCM and SIM ranged from samples with good quality active pharmaceutical ingredient (API) concentrations, reduced concentrations of API (80% and 50% of the API), no API, and the wrong API. All the devices had high sensitivities (91.5 to 100.0%) detecting medicines with no API or the wrong API. However, the sensitivities of each device towards samples with 50% and 80% API varied greatly, from 0% to 100%. The infrared and Raman spectrometers had variable sensitivities for detecting samples with 50% and 80% API (from 5.6% to 50.0%). The devices with the ability to quantitate API (C-Vue, PharmaChk, QDa) had sensitivities ranging from 91.7% to 100% to detect all poor quality samples. The specificity was lower for the quantitative C-Vue, PharmaChk, & QDa (50.0% to 91.7%) than for all the other devices in this study (95.5% to 100%).

Conclusions: The twelve devices evaluated could detect medicines with the wrong or none of the APIs, consistent with falsified medicines, with high accuracy. However, API quantitation to detect formulations similar to those commonly found in substandards proved more difficult, requiring further technological innovation.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8483346PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pntd.0009360DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

api
11
falsified medicines
8
twelve devices
8
raman spectrometers
8
api wrong
8
wrong api
8
samples 50%
8
50% 80%
8
80% api
8
c-vue pharmachk
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!