The Role of Mobile Phase Additives in Developing and Optimising Separations of Water-Soluble Enantiomers by High-Performance Liquid Chromatography
Chiral separations are presented which demonstrate the role of mobile phase additives for enantiomer separations by high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC).
Salts of relatively hydrophobic (log P > 2.2) aminoalcohol racemates are often resolved as free bases on chiral stationary phases (CSPs) using organic eluents modified with a base. However, efficient chromatographic separations for a number of more hydrophilic molecules of this type have been precluded by their low solubilities in organic solvents. Using a CSP we have developed acidic eluents which generate organically soluble ion pairs. The optimum acid has been identified. For a range of compounds the selectivity of acidic and basic eluents was compared and related to log P. Acidic eluents offered significant advantages for polar aminoalcohols.
In a second example a substituted 1,3-dioxan was resolved using a Cyclobond I (β) CSP. The efficiency, selectivity and capacity of this separation were measured and a comparison with results obtained using a nitrile (CN) column with ‘β’-cyclodextrin as an eluent additive was made. Data are presented to illustrate eluent/column selection. Enhanced parameters were obtained using the modified eluent.
Finally the application of several CSPs for the optical purity measurement of a methotrexate analogue is discussed. In this case it was also perceived that the solute anion would bind to serum proteins. A separation was achieved using bovine serum albumin (BSA) in a buffered eluent on a Diol column. The effects of pH, bonded phase and organic modifier are presented.
The use of eluent additives has proved to be a flexible technique for the separation and isolation of polar water-soluble enantiomers which are poorly resolved on CSPs.
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 2.R. Gaskell and B. Crooks, in “Chiral Separations”, D. Stevenson and I. D. Wilson, eds, Plenum, New York, 65–70 (1988).Google Scholar
- 3.Y. Okamoto, M. Kawashima, R Aburatani, K. Hatada, T. Nishiyama and M. Masuda, Chem. Letters, 1237–1240 (1986).Google Scholar
- 4.U. Kragh-Hensen, Pharm. Rev, 33: 17–53 (1981).Google Scholar