Evaluation of Greenness assessment of Chemometrics assisted UV Spectrophotometric Method for Simultaneous Estimation of Remogliflozin Etabonate and Teneligliptin Hydrobromide Hydrate in Pharmaceuticals

These are chemometric approaches based on UV measurements like principal component regression (PCR) and partial least-squares regression (PLS) to quantify remogliflozin etabonate (REM) and teneligliptin hydrobromide hydrate (TEN) in a multicomponent tablet dosage form simultaneously. The benefit of the suggested approach is that it can analyze a large number of samples quickly and does not require the costly and time-consuming stages of ratio spectra modes or derivatization for any of the analysis. Full factorial design was used in the development of the calibration and validation sets. By measuring the absorbance in the span of 210–275nm (Δλ = 4nm) at 16 different wavelengths, the absorption data matrix was created. The models were developed by utilising computer programming such as Minitab 21.3.0 and Microsoft Excel 2019. The linear response was observed in the range of 10 – 50μg/ml and 1 – 40μg/ml for REM and TEN correspondingly. The model output was assessed on the basis of coefficient of determination (R²), root mean square error of cross-validation (RMSECV), root mean square error of calibration (RMSEC) and root mean square error of prediction (RMSEP) value. Analytical figures of merit (FOM) like, selectivity, limit of detection (LOD), sensitivity and limit of quantitation (LOQ), were determined for both PLS and PCR. The RMSEP for PLS Model was found 1.552 and 1.422 for REM and TEN correspondingly. The RMSEP for PCR Model was found 1.1516 and 1.3016 for REM and TEN correspondingly. Hence, the prediction power of PCR is relatively better. The suggested approaches greenness profile was shown by the greenness evaluation tool, which concluded that they were environmentally harmless. Using a greenness assessment tool, the newly created method’s green profile was evaluated and compared with prior published spectroscopic approaches. A statistical comparison of the assay results obtained for the suggested approach using the Student’s t-test showed no discernible differences between the approaches. The developed models were tested to the marketed dosage form for the content determination of both drugs.