Melinata G. Indrayanto 2006, Unpublished work

Why did USP 3940 still use ‘R” ?? USP Medicines Compendium 2013 Some mathematical equations for evaluation of linearity Funk’s et al., 1992 i i Y xo XO bx a y y y S S S X S V + = − = = ⋅ = ∑ ˆ , ˆ where 100 i i Y xo XO bx a y y y S S S X S V + = − = = ⋅ = ∑ ˆ , ˆ where 100 i Y XO bx a y N S b S + = − = = ˆ , 2 where i Y XO bx a y N S b S + = − = = ˆ , 2 where 0.05 p and 2 - N f for factor student t t , 1 1 1 . . Y with . 1 1 . . 2 2 2 2 P 2 2 = = = − = + + + = − + + = ∑ ∑ i i XX XX table Y XX P table XO P X N X Q Q X N t S a Q b Y Y N t S X The importance of the Xp’s Value for testing the linearity Xp values must be X1 Lowest Highest = Working range The Calibration Curve was not homogeneous Testing of Homogeneity Homoscedasticity of the Calibration Curve r close to one is NOT a reliable indicator of linearity Proving Linearity according to Araujo 2009 i = concentrations level; j = replicat – The calibration spots should be independent of each other, therefore spots should be applied from different, independently weighed solutions – not by diluting from one and the same stock solution. Journal of Planar Chromatography 23 2010 3, 173–179 DOI: 10.1556JPC.23.2010.3.1 173 0933-4173 20.00 © Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest stock solution. – As a consequence, calibration spots should be applied using uniform volume of solutions, but different concentrations, to avoid the different band-broadening effects of the different amounts of solution per spot or band Working range WR of a calibration curve can be defined as: “the ratio of upper concentration X u and lower concentration X l ” In QC of Pharmaceutical Industry, WR = 1.5 – 2 Our recommendation: ± 20 from target concentration with n = 45 If WR 10 , It is recommended to use “a weighting regression calibration curve” cited from: S. Kromidas ed. , HPLC Made to Measure, Wiley- VCH, Weinheim, 2006,pp. 105-115 Requirement of assay using Single point Calibration • Linear response function OK • Negligible constant systemic error CL is not significantly different to zero, or • Negligible constant systemic error CL is not significantly different to zero, or Intercept 2 from target compound • Homogeneity of variance

J. Ermer P. Nethercote, Validation in PharmaceuticaAnalysis, Wiley-VCH, 2015.

Confidence range of intercept: Qxx Xc N 1 . S . t a = C 2 y 2 - N P, table L + ±