Abstract

Ceftiofur Sodium is a semi-synthetic beta-lactamase broad spectrum third generation of cephalosporin antibiotic. The development and validation of a two-level agar diffusion (2+2) bioassay to quantify ceftiofur in powder for injection is described in this paper. Bacterial strain Bacillus subtilis ATCC 6633 (MTCC 441) was selected and used as the most significant strain against ceftiofur sodium. The mean potency recovery value of ceftiofur sodium in marketed sample XCEFT powder for injection was estimated to be 101.79%. All potency results were statistically analyzed and found to be linear (r2 = 0.9916) in the range of 1.0-10 µgmL-1, with the intermediate precision RSD between days was 0.81%; intermediate precision RSD between analyst was 0.43% and accuracy 101.08%, RSD = 0.28%. The findings backed up the proposed microbiological technique, which allowed for accurate ceftiofur sodium quantification in pharmaceutical samples. Furthermore, bioassay is a useful, easy and cost-effective method for controlling the quality of ceftiofur sodium in raw material as well as in pharmaceutical preparations.

• 1.   Salmon S.A., Watts J.L., Case C.A. , Hoffman L.J., Wegener H.C. and Yancey R.J.: Comparison of MICs of ceftiofur and other antimicrobial agents against bacterial pathogens of swine from the United States, Canada, and Denmark, J. Clin. Microbio., 1995, 33(9): 2435–2444.
• 2.   Stanek C. and Kofler J.: Use of sodium ceftiofur in the combined therapy of complicated septic diseases in cattle, Tierarztl Prax Ausg G: Grosstiere Nutztiere., 1998, 26(6): 314–317.
• 3.   Wisselink H.J., Veldman K.T., Eede C.V.D., Salmon S.A. and Mevius D.J.: Quantitative susceptibility of Streptococcus suis strains isolated from diseased pigs in seven European countries to antimicrobial agents licenced in veterinary medicine, Vet. Microbiol., 2006, 113(1-2): 73–82.
• 4.   Erskine R.J., Wilson R.C., Tyler J.W., McClure K.A., Nelson R.S. and Spears H.J.: Ceftiofur distribution in serum and milk from clinically normal cows and cows with experimental Escherichia coli-induced mastitis, Am. J. Vet. Res., 1995, 56(4): 481–485.
• 5.   Deshande L., Pfaller M.A. and Jones R.N.: In vitro activity of ceftiofur tested against clinical isolates of Escherichia coli and Klebsiella pneumoniae including extended spectrum β-lactamase producing strains, Int. J. Antimicrob. Agents., 2000, 15(4): 271-275.
• 6.   Donaldson S.C., Straley B.A., Hegde N.V., Sawant A.A., DebRoy C. and Javarao B.M.: Molecular epidemiology of ceftiofur-resistant Escherichia coli isolates from dairy calves, Appl. Environ. Microbiol., 2006, 72(6): 3940–3948.
• 7.   Indian Pharmacopoeia, Indian Pharmacopoeia Commission, Govt. of India, Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, Ghaziabad, 2018, 3 (50-56), 1539- 1540.
• 8.   Souza M.J.E., Rolim C.M.B., Melo J., Philo P.S.S. and Bergold A.M.: Development of a microbiological assay to determine the potency of ceftiofur sodium powder, J. AOAC Int., 2007, 90(6): 1724-1728.
• 9.   Jacobson G.A., Martinod S. and Cunningham C.P.: Determination of ceftiofur in bovine plasma by HPLC-DAD, J. Pharm. Biomed. Anal., 2006, 40(5): 1249-1252.
• 10.   Keever J., Voyksner R.D. and Tyczkowska K.L.: Quantitative determination of ceftiofur in milk by liquid chromatography-electrospray mass spectrometry, J. Chromatogr. A., 1998, 794(1-2): 57- 62.
• 11.   United States Pharmacopoeia, United States Pharmacopoeial convention, Rockville, MD, USA, 2021, 3, 6488-6508.
• 12.   British Pharmacopoeia, The stationary office, London, 2021, 5, VA439- VA446.
• 13.   Cazedey E.C.L. and Salgado H.R.N.: Development and validation of a microbiological agar assay for determination of orbifloxacin pharmaceutical preparations, Pharmaceutics., 2011, 3(3): 572-581.
• 14.   Dafale N.A., Agarwal P.K., Semwal U.P. and Singh G.N.: Development and validation of microbial bioassay for the quantification of potency of the antibiotic cefuroxime axetil, Anal. Methods., 2013, 5: 690–698.
• 15.   Bauer A.W., Kirby W.M., Sherris J.C. and Turck M.: Antibiotic susceptibility testing by a standardized single disk method, Am. J. Clin. Pathol., 1966, 45(4): 493-496.
• 16.   Simon H.J. and Yin E.J.: Microbioassay of antimicrobial agents, J. Appl. Microbiol., 1970, 19(4): 573-579.
• 17.   ICH Harmonized Tripartite Guideline, Validation of Analytical Procedures: Text and Methodology Q2 (R1) Current Step 4 Version, November, 2005.
• 18.   Queiroz K.M., Silva M.L.M., Prado N.D., Lima P.M.A., Diniz R.D.L., Cesar I.C., Pianetti G.A. and Santos D.A.: Comparison of microbiological assay and HPLC-UV assay for determination of fluconazole in capsules, Braz. J. Pharm. Sci., 2009, 45(4): 693-700.
• 19.   Hewitt W.: Microbiological Assay for Pharmaceutical Analysis: A Rational Approach (1st Indian Reprint), Interpharm/CRC Press LLC, Boca Raton, FL, 2009.

Data Sharing Statement

Funding