Ahmed K. Kammouna,
Mona H. Abdelrahmanb,
Ahdab N. Khayyata,
Samar S. Elbaramawic,
Tarek S. Ibrahima and
Nehad A. Abdallah*de
aDepartment of Pharmaceutical Chemistry, Faculty of Pharmacy, King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah 21589, Saudi Arabia
bDepartment of Pharmaceutical Analytical Chemistry, Faculty of Pharmacy, Ain Shams University, Cairo 11566, Egypt
cDepartment of Medicinal Chemistry, Faculty of Pharmacy, Zagazig University, Zagazig 44519, Egypt
dPharmacognosy and Pharmaceutical Chemistry Department, Faculty of Pharmacy, Taibah University, Al-Madinah Al-Munawarah, 41477, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia
eExperimental and Advanced Pharmaceutical Research Unit (EAPRU), Faculty of Pharmacy, Ain Shams University, Cairo, 11566, Egypt. E-mail: nehad.amin@gmail.com
First published on 23rd October 2023
Metal organic frameworks (MOFs), with structural tunability, high metal content and large surface area have recently attracted the attention of researchers in the field of electrochemistry. In this work, an unprecedented use of multi-walled carbon nanotubes (MWCNTs)/copper-based metal–organic framework (Cu-BTC MOF) composite as an ion-to-electron transducer in a potentiometric sensor is proposed for the determination of orphenadrine citrate. A comparative study was conducted between three proposed glassy carbon electrodes, Cu-MOF, (MWCNTs) and MWCNTs/Cu-MOF composite based sensors, where Cu-MOF, MWCNTs and their composite were utilized as the ion-to-electron transducers. The sensors were developed for accurate and precise determination of orphenadrine citrate in pharmaceutical dosage form, spiked real human plasma and artificial cerebrospinal fluid (ACSF). The sensors employed β-cyclodextrin as a recognition element with the aid of potassium tetrakis(4-chlorophenyl)borate (KTpCIPB) as a lipophilic ion exchanger. The sensors that were assessed based on the guidelines recommended by IUPAC and demonstrated a linear response within the concentration range of 10−7 M to 10−3 M, 10−6 M to 10−2 M and 10−8 M to 10−2 M for Cu-MOF, MWCNTs and MWCNTs/Cu-MOF composite based sensors, respectively. MWCNTs/Cu-MOF composite based sensor showed superior performance over other sensors regarding lower limit of detection (LOD), wider linearity range and faster response. The sensors demonstrated their potential as effective options for the analysis of orphenadrine citrate in quality control laboratories and in different healthcare activities.
The glassy-carbon electrode is a new-generation solid-contact ion-selective electrode (SC-ISE) that features a layered device architecture. This electrode comprises an electrical contact that is coated with an ion-to-electron transducer and followed by an ion-selective membrane (ISM). Its primary goal is to deliver efficient analytical performance with a stable and robust design that can be applied for long-term analysis without any deterioration in performance. Any SC-ISE comprises two primary components: the ion recognition element and the transducer layer. The function of the transducer layer is to convert the ionic current to electronic current and stabilize the potential at the interface between the membrane and the substrate. Meanwhile, the recognition element (e.g., ionophores) is used to impart selectivity against a particular ion, which is achieved through various interactions such as the target's nature (charge and size), the ability to form weak interaction-based supramolecular assemblies (host-guest), and/or hydrophobic/hydrophilic forces.2
A variety of solid-contact functional materials have been introduced into SC-ISEs as ion-to-electron transducers such as conducting polymers, carbon nanotubes, graphene and recently metal–organic frameworks (MOFs).3 MOFs represent an intriguing class of porous and crystalline materials that constructed from the assembly between metal ions and functional organic ligands.4 They were first studied and investigated in 1965 by Tomic.5 Their unique properties such as the large surface area, tailored pore size, high stability, and high porosity enable them to be good candidates in various applications including sensing,6 gas storage,7 catalysis,8 chiral separation,9 and other interesting analytical applications.10
The use of MOFs in electrochemical sensing may be restricted due to their low electronic conductivity and instability in aqueous solutions. As a result, MOFs have been scarcely employed as electrode modifiers in electroanalysis, with only a few studies investigating their application.11–13 In recent times, there has been a growing trend of incorporating highly-conductive nanostructured materials with MOFs to enhance their electrocatalytic abilities and conductivity towards target analytes.14–18 To address the limitations of MOFs, the incorporation of highly-conductive materials has been identified as an effective strategy. Carbon-based materials, such as multi-walled carbon nanotubes (MWCNTs), have garnered significant interest in the electrochemical field owing to their remarkable physical and chemical properties, such as excellent electrical conductivity, high stability, and good mechanical strength.17 The inclusion of MWCNTs in the sensor design not only reduces electrical impedance but also enhances the electrochemical reactivity of analytes when compared to a single metallic environment.
Basolite® C 300, Cu-BTC MOF or copper benzene-1,3,5-tricarboxylate is one of the MOFs family with rigid crystal structure, space group P1.19 The chemical and crystal structures of Cu-BTC MOF are shown in Fig. 1. It has a characteristic pyramidal skeleton with prominent edges. The surface area of Cu-BTC MOF is 343.32 m2 g−1 and it has a significant thermal stability.20
Carbon nanotubes (CNTs) is a class of sp2 hybridized carbon nano-materials which was first discovered by Iijima in 1991.21 MWCNTs are formed of multiple layers of graphene are wrapped concentrically. MWCNTs are characterized by being always metallic and the electronic transfer occurs across the carbon nanotube allowing the passage of current with minimum heating effect. The surface area of MWCNTs is approximately 10–20 m2 g−1.22 They have outstanding physicochemical characteristics, for instance excellent electrical conductivity, high thermal stability and high surface area.23 Owing to their promising properties, MWCNTs were exploited recently in many fields either alone or in nanocomposites, especially in electroanalysis.24,25
In this work, a comparative study was applied between three GCEs that were proposed for the accurate, precise and sensitive determination of orphenadrine citrate (ORPH) in different matrices including real human plasma samples, pharmaceutical dosage form and ACSF samples. The developed sensors were based on the incorporation of Cu-MOFs, MWCNTs and MWCNTs/Cu-MOFs composite as different transducers with β-cyclodextrin ionophore as a recognition element and potassium tetrakis(4-chlorophenyl)borate (KTpCIPB) as a lipophilic ion exchanger and investigated to be facile, non-invasive and rapid sensors for monitoring the concentration of orphenadrine citrate without applying time-consuming extraction methods.
To the best of our knowledge, there is no potentiometric method in literature that explored the incorporation of either Cu-BTC MOF or MWCNTs/Cu-MOFs in a potentiometric sensor for the determination of orphenadrine citrate. Moreover, it is the first time to harness Cu-BTC MOF as an ion-to-electron transducer for the analysis of a pharmaceutical drug in different matrices. The proposed sensors provide a promise for the analysis of orphenadrine citrate in real life applications.
Orphenadrine citrate or (RS)-(dimethyl-2-(2-methylbenzhydroxy)ethyl) amine citrate; Fig. 2 is an anti-cholinergic drug that is commonly used to treat muscle spasm owing to its potent central and peripheral effects.26 Muscle spasms significantly affect the quality of life of patients suffering from liver cirrhosis. Orphenadrine citrate represents a very effective drug with prolonged therapeutic effect.27 It can be used as an analgesic with different co-administered drugs such as paracetamol, ibuprofen and diclofenac potassium.28,29 Orphenadrine citrate is considered a member of the centrally acting skeletal muscle relaxants, their use is limited by somnolence and the potential for abuse and dependency. The drug's effects on the central nervous system (CNS) may include dizziness, confusion, blurred vision, agitation, hallucinations, and headaches. In cases of excessive dosage, significant toxicity may occur, leading to CNS depression, which can manifest as stupor, respiratory depression, coma, and even death.30 Therefore, an accurate, facile and precise method of analysis is needed for the rapid analysis of orphenadrine citrate in plasma and in cerebrospinal fluid as the drug can pass the blood–brain barrier which is very critical in case of drug abuse.30
A review of the literature indicates that various techniques have been used for the quantitative analysis of orphenadrine citrate, including potentiometry,31–33 voltammetry,34 chromatography,35–39 and spectrophotometry.40,41 The potentiometric sensors reported in the literature were based on the use of either conventional liquid contact-ISE or coated wire electrodes (CWs) with the application of a plasticized membrane containing the orphenadrine–tetraphenyl borate/reineckate ion-pair complex as the electroactive material. The absence of an intermediate layer between the membrane and inner electrode in these sensors could result in potential instability owing to the formation of a water layer. Furthermore, the sensors described in the literature were only utilized for detecting orphenadrine citrate in bulk, tablets, and spiked human plasma.
For MWCNTs/Cu-MOFs composite, 25 mg of each of Cu-BTC MOF and carboxylated MWCNTs were dispersed in 50 mL of N,N-DMF and ultrasonicated for 10 h at 25 °C to get homogeneous dispersion.
Fig. 3 Schematic representation of the electrodes' assembly, GCE: glassy carbon electrode, ISM: ion selective membrane. |
Three-dimensional structure of the selected CD-ionophore was extracted from the appropriate protein complex; retrieved from the protein data bank (https://www.rcsb.org/; accessed on 8 June 2023). The α-CD was extracted from B. thetaiotaomicron SusE with alpha-cyclodextrin (pdb: 4FEM, 2.50 Å),44 the β-CD was extracted from B. thetaiotaomicron SusD with beta-cyclodextrin (pdb: 3CK8, 2.10 Å)45 and the γ-CD was extracted from E. coli branching enzyme with gamma cyclodextrin (pdb: 5E70, 2.33 Å).46 In order to prepare the CD-ionophore structures for the docking process, the Quick-Prep panel in MOE was utilized. This preparation involved energy minimization, protonation at pH = 5, fixing and tethering atoms, deleting unnecessary water molecules, and initial refinement at a gradient RMS of 0.1 kcal mol−1 Å−2. Following this, the docking process for orphenadrine with the chosen CD-ionophores was conducted using alpha triangle placement with Amber10: EHT forcefield. The resulting docked structures were then refined using forcefield and scored using the Affinity dG scoring system.
Guest | Docking energy score; kcal mol−1 | Interactions | Host |
---|---|---|---|
Orphenadrine | −4.8673 | 1 H-bond | α-CD |
−5.8370 | 1 H-bond, 2 pi–H | β-CD | |
−5.3642 | 1 H-bond, 1 pi–H | γ-CD |
Docking energy score of orphenadrine–β-CD-ionophore is −5.8370 kcal mol−1; indicating that β-CD-ionophore is the most stable one in the inclusion complex. This is followed by orphenadrine–γ-CD-ionophore (−5.3642 kcal mol−1) and finally orphenadrine–α-CD-ionophore (−4.8673 kcal mol−1).
Furthermore, the average molecular diameters for α-CD, β-CD and γ-CD are 8.51, 10.32, 13.91 Å, respectively and the average diameter of orphenadrine is 9.10 Å; indicating that β-CD is ideally suited to orphenadrine for perfect fitting (Fig. 4).
In molecular interactions, orphenadrine showed H-bond interaction with the α-CD pocket. With the β-CD, amino group of orphenadrine formed H-bond interaction, while both phenyl rings showed pi–H bond interactions, indicating good binding interactions. Finally, amino group and one phenyl ring exhibited H-bond and pi–H bond interactions, respectively with the γ-CD pocket.
Practically, PVC-coated graphite electrodes were fabricated utilizing the prepared PVC membrane in Section 2.4.2 with the incorporation of α-CD, β-CD and γ-CD, separately and were applied separately for the determination of ORPH in aqueous solutions. The α-CD, β-CD and γ-CD based electrodes exhibited Nernstian responses of 48.78, 55.76 and 52.06 mV per concentration decade, respectively over the concentration range of 1 × 10−2 M to 1 × 10−5 M. Intriguingly, docking results were correlated with Nernstian responses; revealing that orphenadrine–β-CD inclusion complex is the most stable one.
In addition to the molecular docking study, the conductometric measurement was executed to affirm the effective interaction between β-CD and orphenadrine. Fig. 5 illustrates a plot of the conductance (Λm) vs. β-CD/EP.HCl mole ratio. The conductance was gradually decreased with the addition of β-CD and it leveled out at a molar ratio of β-CD to orphenadrine molecule of around one. It indicates the formation of a rather stable (1:1) stoichiometry combination of orphenadrine and β-CD. This complex seems to have lower mobility than free, uncomplexed orphenadrine, which would limit its ability to transfer charges and reduce the solution's conductivity.
The construction and performance characteristics of the studied GCEs based on the drop casting of the PVC membrane containing the recognition element β-CD over the transducer film. To study the effect of the transducer layer thickness on the electrode response, 3 different electrodes were fabricated with different volumes of the drop casted transducer layer (5 μL, 7 μL and 10 μL). The optimum potentiometric response was attained with a transducer layer thickness of 5 μL, 7 μL and 7 μL for Cu-BTC-MOF, MWCNTs, and MWCNTs/Cu-MOF based sensors, respectively as being represented in Fig. 6. When using the drop casting technique to increase the thickness of the transducer layer, it is possible that the material may form “islands.” These islands can negatively impact the electrical contact between the transducer and the electrode, ultimately hindering it.11
Fig. 6 The effect of the ion-to-electron transducer layer on the potentiometric response of the GCE, (a) Cu-MOF, (b) MWCNTs and (c) MWCNTs/Cu-MOF composite. |
The proposed sensors' performance characteristics were assessed in line with the IUPAC recommendation48 and the results were compiled in Table 2.
Parameter | Cu-MOF based GCE | MWCNTs based GCE | MWCNTs/Cu-MOF based GCE |
---|---|---|---|
a The mean of five measurements taken at five different concentration levels.b The mean of five determinations of three QC samples.c The mean of five determinations of three QC samples of using three independently fabricated sensors. | |||
Concentration range (M) | 1 × 10−3 to 1 × 10−7 | 1 × 10−2 to 1 × 10−6 | 1 × 10−2 to 1 × 10−8 |
Slope (mV per decade) | 58.85 ± 0.45 | 57.19 ± 0.33 | 60.05 ± 0.16 |
Intercept | 609.3 | 419.33 | 388.23 |
Correlation coefficient (r2) | 0.992 | 0.991 | 0.996 |
LOD (mol L−1) | 2 × 10−8 | 7 × 10−7 | 4 × 10−9 |
Response time (s) | 15 ± 2.8 | 13 ± 2.1 | 8 ± 1.3 |
Stability (days) | 47 | 55 | 69 |
Working pH range | 3–7 | 3–8 | 3–7 |
Average recoverya | 100.09 ± 0.921 | 100.02 ± 0.821 | 100.56 ± 0.476 |
Intraday precisionb (RSD%) | 0.585 | 0.637 | 0.605 |
Interday precisionb (RSD%) | 0.835 | 0.850 | 0.955 |
Reproducibilityc (RSD%) | 1.21 | 1.67 | 1.01 |
The MWCNTs, Cu-BTC-MOF and MWCNTs/Cu-MOF based GCEs exhibited a Nernstian mono-valent cation ideal responses of 57.19 ± 0.33, 58.85 ± 0.45 and 60.05 ± 0.16 mV per concentration decade over the concentration range of 1 × 10−2 M to 1 × 10−6 M, 1 × 10−3 M to 1 × 10−7 M and 1 × 10−2 M to 1 × 10−8 M, respectively. It revealed the superior sensitivity of the MWCNTs/Cu-MOF based sensor with LOD value of 4 × 10−9 M that was measured by the intersection of the two extrapolated linear portions of the curves. The potentiometric behavior of the proposed sensors is represented in Fig. 7. MWCNTs/Cu-MOF based sensor exhibited better linearity (r2 = 0.996) and faster response time (5 s ± 1.3) compared to MWCNTs based sensor (r2 = 0.991) with response time (7 s ± 2.1) and Cu-BTC MOF based sensor (r2 = 0.992) with response time (5 s ± 1.8). The faster response time of the Cu-BTC MOF and MWCNTs/Cu-MOF based sensors is owing to the large surface area of the Cu-BTC MOF molecule (343.32 m2 g−1) compared to that of MWCNTs (10–20 m2 g−1) which allows higher contact between GCE and the ISM that enhances ion-to-electron transduction at the interface.
Fig. 7 Profile of the potential (mV) versus −log concentrations of orphenadrine citrate (M) for the proposed sensors. |
The lifetime and stability of the studied sensors was monitored through continuous measuring their linearity range, the calibration slope, response time and LOD to ensure their precision within ±2% of their original values. The MWCNTs/Cu-MOF based sensor showed the maximum stability and longer lifetime for 69 days.
Reversibility of the proposed sensors was investigated by measuring the potential values of ORPH samples from high to low concentrations and from low to high concentrations as shown in Fig. 8. It was found the response of the three proposed sensors is reversible and the time taken for equilibrium from high to low concentration is longer than from low to high concentration. By comparing the dynamic response of the three sensors, it was found that superior response of MWCNTs/Cu-MOF based GCE relative to the others. The time need to attain equilibrium from high to low concentration was about 22 s ± 1.5 and that from low to high concentration was about 8 s ± 1.3.
Fig. 8 The dynamic response time from low to high and high to low concentrations in (a) Cu-MOF based GCE, (b) MWCNTs based GCE and (c) MWCNTs/Cu-MOF based GCE. |
Table 3 lists the selectivity coefficients of the tested samples, which demonstrate the high selectivity of the sensors towards orphenadrine citrate.
Interfering ions | (logKpotorphenadrine,interferent) | ||
---|---|---|---|
Cu-MOF based GCE | MWCNTs based GCE | MWCNTs/Cu-MOF based GCE | |
Starch | −4.32 | −4.08 | −4.13 |
Glucose | −5.08 | −4.64 | −3.87 |
Magnesium stearate | −2.34 | −2.53 | −3.25 |
KCl | −3.55 | −3.16 | −3.02 |
NaCl | −2.45 | −2.78 | −3.97 |
Paracetamol | −2.89 | −3.15 | −4.02 |
Ibuprofen | −3.54 | −2.87 | −3.76 |
Diclofenac potassium | −3.23 | −3.36 | −3.82 |
Table 4 compares the response characteristics of the proposed GCEs with those of the previously reported selective potentiometric sensors for orphenadrine citrate. The results demonstrated that the suggested sensors exhibited better response characteristics and stability than the other reported ones. The MWCNTs/Cu-MOF based GCE showed should wider linearity range, shorter response time, longer stability and higher sensitivity than the other reported sensors.
Electrode composition | Linearity range (M) | LOD (M) | Slope (mV per decade) | Response time (s) | Lifetime | pH range | Ref. |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CPE with orphenadrine–sodium tetraphenylborate complex | 1 × 10−2 to 1 × 10−6 | 1.016 × 10−6 | 57.20 ± 0.7 | 9 s | 4–5 weeks | 3.5–8 | 31 |
PCV based electrode with orphenadrine–sodium tetraphenylborate complex | 1 × 10−2 to 1 × 10−6 | 0.984 × 10−6 | 56.81 ± 1.6 | 13 s | 2–3 weeks | 3.5–7.5 | |
Screen printed electrode with orphenadrine–sodium tetraphenylborate complex | 1 × 10−2 to 1 × 10−6 | 0.991 × 10−6 | 57.09 ± 0.2 | 7 s | 18–25 weeks | 3–8 | |
Coated graphite electrode with orphenadrine–tetrakis(4-chlorophenyl)borate complex | 1 × 10−2 to 1 × 10−5 | 6.8 × 10−6 | 54.8 | 5 s | 42 days | 4–7 | 32 |
Coated platinum wire electrode with orphenadrine–tetrakis(4-chlorophenyl)borate complex | 1 × 10−2 to 1 × 10−4 | 5.8 × 10−5 | 51.6 | 7 s | 18 days | 4–7 | |
PVC based electrode with orphenadrine–ammonium reineckate complex | 1 × 10−2 to 9 × 10−6 | 1 × 10−5 | 58.5 | 35 s | 8 weeks | 4–9 | 33 |
Cu-MOF based GCE | MWCNTs based GCE | MWCNTs/Cu-MOF based GCE | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Recovery (%) | Recovery (%) | Recovery (%) | ||
a The official method of USP 2023 of the pharmaceutical tablets was RP-HPLC with UV detection at 257 nm. The mobile phase was formed of acetonitrile:phosphate buffer (pH 3.6) (50:50) with a flow rate of 2 mL min−1. The average recovery of six concentrations of orphenadrine was 99.57 ± 0.85.b The applied reported method of the human plasma matrix was RP-HPLC with UV detection at 215 nm. The mobile phase was formed of Acetonitrile:water (50:50), pH = 2.6 using propylparaben sodium as internal standard. The average recovery of six concentrations was 100.07 ± 1.14.c The figures in parenthesis are the theoretical values of t and F at p = 0.05. | ||||
Norflex tabletsa | 1 × 10−3 M | 99.63 | 98.76 | 100.25 |
1 × 10−4 M | 100.74 | 99.34 | 99.87 | |
1 × 10−5 M | 99.56 | 99.78 | 101.03 | |
1 × 10−6 M | 98.77 | 100.04 | 100.04 | |
1 × 10−7 M | 98.98 | — | 99.46 | |
1 × 10−8 M | — | — | 99.05 | |
Average recovery ± SD | 99.54 ± 0.767 | 99.48 ± 0.560 | 99.95 ± 0.681 | |
Variance | 0.588 | 0.314 | 0.464 | |
N | 5 | 4 | 6 | |
Student's t-testc | 0.06 (2.26) | 0.20 (2.31) | 0.85 (2.23) | |
F-Testc | 1.23 (6.26) | 2.3 (9.01) | 1.56 (5.05) | |
Spiked human plasmab | 1 × 10−2 M | — | 98.31 | 99.33 |
1 × 10−3 M | 97.92 | 98.84 | 99.78 | |
1 × 10−4 M | 99.43 | 97.48 | 100.17 | |
1 × 10−5 M | 99.51 | 100.65 | 101.84 | |
1 × 10−6 M | 100.37 | 98.98 | 99.88 | |
1 × 10−7 M | 98.66 | — | 98.82 | |
Average recovery ± SD | 99.18 ± 0.928 | 98.85 ± 1.165 | 99.97 ± 1.031 | |
Variance | 0.861 | 1.357 | 1.063 | |
N | 5 | 5 | 6 | |
Student's t-testc | 1.43 (2.26) | 1.75 (2.26) | 0.16 (2.23) | |
F-Testc | 1.51 (6.26) | 0.96 (6.26) | 1.22 (5.05) | |
ACSF | 1 × 10−3 M | 98.22 | 97.67 | 99.87 |
1 × 10−4 M | 97.65 | 98.04 | 99.56 | |
1 × 10−5 M | 99.32 | 98.59 | 101.21 | |
1 × 10−6 M | 99.77 | 99.43 | 99.52 | |
Average recovery | 98.74 ± 0.98 | 98.43 ± 0.76 | 100.04 ± 0.79 |
This journal is © The Royal Society of Chemistry 2023 |