Quality Standards for Antiretrovirals in Indian Pharmacopoeia

Abstract

The global antiretroviral market is expanding dramatically with the approval of competent authorities in individual countries. In India, the Central Drugs Standard Control Organization (CDSCO) and Indian Pharmacopoeia Commission (IPC) are making efforts to approve and set the standards for antiretroviral drugs, respectively. The IPC publishes an official book of standards known as Indian Pharmacopoeia (IP) in fulfillment of the requirements of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act of 1940. There are 41 antiretroviral active pharmaceutical ingredients (APIs) and combinations approved by the CDSCO; the sixth edition of IP contains 52 monographs of different APIs and formulations. The monographs of antiretrovirals include descriptions, identifications, impurities, assays, and specific tests. IP plays a significant role in improving the quality of antiretroviral drugs, which in turn promote public health.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

References

  1. 1.

    Waning B, Diedrichsen E, Moon S. A lifeline to treatment: the role of Indian generic manufacturers in supplying antiretroviral medicines to developing countries. J Int AIDS Soc. 2010;13:13–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. 2.

    World Health Organization. Towards Universal Access: Scaling Up Priority HIV/AIDS Interventions in the Health Sector. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2009.

    Google Scholar 

  3. 3.

    Nsimba SE. Problems associated with substandard and counterfeit drugs in developing countries: a review article on global implications of counterfeit drugs in the era of antiretroviral (ARVs) drugs in a free market economy. East Afr J Public Health. 2008;5:205–210.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. 4.

    Caudron JM, Ford N, Henkens M, Mace C, Kiddle-Monroe R, Pinel J. Substandard medicines in resource-poor settings: a problem that can no longer be ignored. Trop Med Int Health. 2008;13:1062–1072.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. 5.

    Gautam CS, Utreja A, Singal GL. Spurious and counterfeit drugs: a growing industry in the developing world. Postgrad Med J. 2009;85:251–256.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  6. 6.

    Aldhous P. Counterfeit pharmaceuticals: murder by medicine. Nature. 2005;434:132–136.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  7. 7.

    Newton PN, Green MD, Fernandez FM. Impact of poor-quality medicines in the developing world. Trends Pharmacol Sci. 2010;3:99–101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. 8.

    Videau JY. Quality of medicines in least developed countries. Med Trop (Maras). 2006;66:533–537.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. 9.

    Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, Government of India. Indian Pharmacopoeia. Ghaziabad: Indian Pharmacopoeia Commission; 2010.

    Google Scholar 

  10. 10.

    Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, Government of India. Indian Pharmacopoeia. Ghaziabad: Indian Pharmacopoeia Commission; 2007.

    Google Scholar 

  11. 11.

    Mendez A, Steppe M, Schapoval E. Stability and degradation kinetics of meropenem in powder for injection and reconstituted sample. J Pharm Biomed Anal. 2006;4:1363–1366.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. 12.

    Gorog S. Chemical and analytical characterization of related organic impurities in drugs. Anal Bioanal Chem. 2003;377:852–862.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. 13.

    Qiu F, Norwood DL. Identification of pharmaceutical impurities. J Liq Chromatogr Relat Technol. 2007;30:877–935.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  14. 14.

    Rao RN, Nagaraju V. An overview of the recent trends in development of HPLC methods for determination of impurities in drugs. J Pharm Biomed Anal. 2003;33:335–377.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. 15.

    Rousseau G. International Conference on Harmonisation impurity guidelines: the industry perspective. Drug Information Journal. 2000;34:903–907.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. 16.

    International Conference on Harmonisation. Q3A(R): Draft Revised Guidance on Impurities in New Drug Substances. Fed Regist. 2000;65(140):45085.

  17. 17.

    International Conference on Harmonisation. Q3B(R): Draft Revised Guidance on Impurities in New Drug Products. Fed Regist. 2000;65(139):44791.

    Google Scholar 

  18. 18.

    Mallipeddi R, Rohan LC. Progress in antiretroviral drug delivery using nanotechnology. Int J Nanomed. 2010;5:533–547.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  19. 19.

    Flora SJS, Mittal M, Mehta A. Heavy metal induced oxidative stress and its possible reversal by chelation therapy. Indian J Med Res. 2008;128:501–523.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. 20.

    Graeme KA, Pollack CV Jr.. Heavy metal toxicity, part I: arsenic and mercury. J Emerg Med. 1998;16:45–56.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  21. 21.

    Sanjay BB, Bharati RK, Yogini SJ, Atul AS. Impurity profile: significance in active pharmaceutical ingredient. Eurasian J Anal Chem. 2007;2:32–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kalaiselvan Vivekanandan MPharm, PhD.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Vivekanandan, K., Sharma, H. & Singh, G.N. Quality Standards for Antiretrovirals in Indian Pharmacopoeia . Ther Innov Regul Sci 46, 581–586 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1177/0092861512450568

Download citation

Keywords

  • antiretrovirals
  • Indian Pharmacopoeia Commission
  • Indian Pharmacopoeia
  • monograph
  • Central Drugs Standard Control Organization