DL-menthol — etiket CAS 89-78-1

DL-menthol

0,99 €

Chemisch reagens Mentol (CAS 89-78-1). Volledige encyclopedische kaart — classificatie, eigenschappen en veiligheidsgegevens — hieronder.

🔒 Demomodus — dit artikel is niet te koop.

Legale stof. dhscientific.com is een demonstratie van het MOL-GOD-platform — wij verkopen niets en er worden geen bestellingen verwerkt. Verboden stoffen worden hier automatisch geblokkeerd op basis van de regelgevingscanon (vergelijk bijv. heptachloor).

Controle van uw VIB — gratis → · Contact

MolGod_SDSCARD_1
REACH 2020/878
v1 · 18.07.2026
Kategoria:
🧬 3D-molecuulvisualisator
Molecuul laden...
3D-model Menthol, CAS 89-78-1, molecuulformule C10H20O, molaire massa 156.26 g/mol

Gegevens overgenomen uit regelgevende registers en vakliteratuur, met vermelding van bron en editie. Zij vervangen niet het veiligheidsinformatieblad van de leverancier. Velden zonder vastgelegde bron zijn als zodanig gemarkeerd.

Chemisch overzicht: MentholMolGod_OVERVIEW_1
MolecuulformuleC10H20O[1]
Molecuulmassa156.26 g/mol[1]
Smeltpunt43 °C[1]
Kookpunt215 °C[1]
Dichtheid0.904 g/cm³[1]
LogP (lipofiliteit)3[1]
IUPAC-naam5-methyl-2-propan-2-ylcyclohexan-1-ol[1]
SMILESCC1CCC(C(C1)O)C(C)C[1]
InChIKeyNOOLISFMXDJSKH-UHFFFAOYSA-N[1]

Synoniemen: MENTHOL · 1490-04-6 · 2-Isopropyl-5-methylcyclohexanol · Menthyl alcohol · Mentholum

Gegevensbronnen: PubChem (NLM/NIH)
Laatst bijgewerkt: 2026-07-18

📚 Wetenschappelijke referenties (Chicago Author-Date) (1 bronnen)
  1. PubChem. National Center for Biotechnology Information (NIH/NLM), chemical compound database. ↗ dotyczy: Molecuulformule · Molecuulmassa · Smeltpunt · Kookpunt · Dichtheid · LogP (lipofiliteit) · IUPAC-naam · SMILES · InChIKey

WETENSCHAPPELIJK ONDERZOEK

[1]PubMed2025
Peppermint and menthol: a review on their biochemistry, pharmacological activities, clinical applications, and safety considerations.
Kazemi A, Iraji A, Esmaealzadeh N et al.. (2025). "Peppermint and menthol: a review on their biochemistry, pharmacological activities, clinical applications, and safety considerations.". Critical revi
Ga naar het volledige onderzoek ↗
📚 Wetenschappelijke referenties (Chicago Author-Date) 1 refs · 1 baz

MOLEKUŁA Bibliografie per CAS (live uit 13+ databases)

Bronnen: db:pubmed (1)

  1. db:pubmed Kazemi A, Iraji A, Esmaealzadeh N et al.. (2025). "Peppermint and menthol: a review on their biochemistry, pharmacological activities, clinical applications, and safety considerations.". Critical reviews in food science and nutrition. https://doi.org/10.1080/10408398.2023.2296991 →
📊 Fysisch-chemische eigenschappen

Snel overzicht

Formule: C10H20O
MW: 156.26 g/mol
CAS: 89-78-1
Uiterlijk: Witte kristallen /89-78-1/
Geur: Pepermuntgeur /dl-Menthol/
🔬 Geavanceerde eigenschappen

Chemische identificatoren

SMILES: CC1CCC(C(C1)O)C(C)C

Laatst bijgewerkt: 2026-06-30

Regelgevingsstatus van de stof
Deze stof is onderworpen aan reglementaire vereisten: beheer van gevaarlijke afvalstoffen (BDO-register). Details in de sectie "Regelgevingsstatus (REACH/ECHA/CLP)" en op de SDS. Regelgevingsinformatie — beperkt de aankoop in deze winkel niet.
🧮 StoichiometrierekenmachineMolGod_STOICH_1
🔍 Externe identificatorenMolGod_EXTID_1
9 van 16 ID-systemen56%
DatabaseIdentificatorActies
CAS Registry Number89-78-1Openen →
PubChem CID1254[1]Openen →
InChIKeyNOOLISFMXDJSKH-UHFFFAOYSA-N[1]Openen →
InChIInChI=1S/C10H20O/c1-7(2)9-5-4-8(3)6-10(9)11/h7-1…[1]
SMILESCC1CCC(C(C1)O)C(C)C[1]
EC Number201-939-0[2]Openen →
DrugBankDB14123Openen →
NSC Number (NCI)2603Openen →
WikiData QIDQ27032492Openen →

Bronnen: PubChem (NIH), Wikidata SPARQL, KEGG, ChEMBL (EBI), CompTox CTX (EPA).

📚 Wetenschappelijke referenties (Chicago Author-Date) (2 bronnen)
  1. PubChem. National Center for Biotechnology Information (NIH/NLM), chemical compound database. ↗ dotyczy: PubChem CID · InChIKey · InChI · SMILES
  2. ECHA. EC Inventory — EINECS, ELINCS, NLP and List Numbers assigned under REACH. Helsinki: European Chemicals Agency. ↗ dotyczy: EC Number
📡 Spectroscopie — CAS 89-78-1MolGod_SPECHUB_MAIN
📊 Databases met spectroscopische spectra — inline-gegevens 9 bronnen MolGod_SPECDB_2

Spectra worden op aanvraag opgehaald uit 9 bronnen. Elk spectrum wordt opgeslagen in onze database — de volgende keer openen = geen enkele aanvraag naar de externe API. Download JCAMP-DX / CSV / PNG bij elk spectrum zonder te zoeken.

IR IR (Infrared) — NIST WebBook
Public domain (US Federal)
▶ Klik om het spectrum te laden
🔗 Bron
— punten
📚 NIST Chemistry WebBook, SRD 69
MS (NIST) Mass Spectrum (EI) — NIST WebBook
Public domain (US Federal)
▶ Klik om het spectrum te laden
🔗 Bron
— punten
📚 NIST Standard Reference Database 1A
UV-Vis UV/Visible Absorption — NIST WebBook
Public domain (US Federal)
▶ Klik om het spectrum te laden
🔗 Bron
— punten
📚 NIST Chemistry WebBook, SRD 69
¹H NMR NMR (¹H, ¹³C) — NMRShiftDB
CC-BY-SA 4.0
▶ Klik om het spectrum te laden
🔗 Bron
— punten
📚 Steinbeck C et al. (2003) J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 43(1):10–16 DOI: 10.1021/ci025588g
MS (MoNA) MoNA — MassBank of North America
CC-BY 4.0
▶ Klik om het spectrum te laden
🔗 Bron
— punten
📚 MassBank of North America (UC Davis) DOI: 10.1002/jms.1777
IR/NMR/MS (SDBS) SDBS — Spectral Database for Organic Compounds (Japan AIST)
Free for non-commercial

Referentiebron — geen openbare API. Openen in een externe database:

🔗 IR/NMR/MS (SDBS) →
📚 SDBSWeb: https://sdbs.db.aist.go.jp (AIST, Japan)
JP Monograph Japanese Pharmacopoeia — Monographs
Reference only

Referentiebron — geen openbare API. Openen in een externe database:

🔗 JP Monograph →
📚 Japanese Pharmacopoeia 18th Edition (2021)
WHO INN WHO — International Nonproprietary Names
WHO Model Lists (free)

Referentiebron — geen openbare API. Openen in een externe database:

🔗 WHO INN →
📚 WHO INN Programme
DOAJ DOAJ — Directory of Open Access Journals
OA journal index (mixed)

Referentiebron — geen openbare API. Openen in een externe database:

🔗 DOAJ →
📚 DOAJ — doaj.org

De gegevens worden eenmalig opgehaald (JCAMP-DX-parser) en opgeslagen in de lokale database van de plug-in. Geen dubbele downloads, geen NIST-verzoeken bij volgende keren openen. Licenties worden gerespecteerd (alleen een deeplink en een eigen visualisatie worden gepubliceerd).

🔬 Interactieve spectra (live — NIST / MoNA / NMRShiftDB / SDBS) (2)

Gegevens worden live opgehaald uit meerdere bronnen (priority-chain). JCAMP-DX / CSV / PNG beschikbaar om te downloaden onder elk spectrum.

IR — Fourier-transform infrarood

IR — Fourier-transform infrarood wordt geladen…

MS — massaspectrometrie (EI 70eV)

MS — massaspectrometrie (EI 70eV) wordt geladen…

📐 Fysisch-chemische eigenschappen (database) 5 velden MolGod-score: Betrouwbaar
Eigenschap Waarde Eenheid Conditions Source
Smeltpunt 43 [1] °C 1 atm PubChem PUG-View
Kookpunt 215 [1] °C PubChem PUG-View
Wateroplosbaarheid 0.42 [1][2] g/L 25°C PubChem PUG-View
Dichtheid (ρ) 0.904 [1] g/cm³ 15°C PubChem PUG-View
logP (octanol/water) 3 [1] — PubChem PUG-View
📚 Wetenschappelijke referenties (Chicago Author-Date) (2 bronnen)
  1. PubChem. National Center for Biotechnology Information (NIH/NLM), chemical compound database. ↗ dotyczy: Smeltpunt · Kookpunt · Wateroplosbaarheid · Dichtheid (ρ) · logP (octanol/water)
  2. NLM. Hazardous Substances Data Bank (HSDB). National Library of Medicine. ↗ dotyczy: Wateroplosbaarheid

De fysisch-chemische waarden zijn afkomstig van de onafhankelijke, peer-reviewed bronnen die hierboven zijn vermeld.

🔄 Omrekenaar voor concentratie-eenheden LIVE MolGod_UNITCONV_1

Voer de concentratie Menthol in een willekeurige eenheid in — de rest wordt automatisch berekend.

MW: 156.26 g/mol · IUPAC Gold Book ↗

⚗️ Conversieformules + citaten (per formule)
ConversieFormuleNauwkeurigheidBron
% (w/v) ↔ molarityc (mol/L) = (% × 10) / MW±0.5% rel. when density ≈ 1.0 g/mLIUPAC (2019)
millimolar ↔ molarc (mol/L) = mM × 10⁻³ExactCohen ER, Cvitaš T, Frey JG, Holmström B, Kuchitsu K, Marquardt R, Mills I, Pavese F, Quack M, Stohner J, Strauss HL, Takami M, Thor AJ (2007)
molarity (mol/L)c = n/V = (m/MW)/V±0.1% (depends on MW precision)IUPAC (2019)
parts per million (mg/L) ↔ molarityc (mol/L) = ppm / (1000 × MW); equivalently ppm = mg/L for dilute aqueous±1% (density-independent for dilute solutions)IUPAC (2019)
mg/mL ↔ molarityc (mol/L) = (mg/mL × 1000) / MW / 1000 = mg/mL / MW × 1±0.2%Cohen ER, Cvitaš T, Frey JG, Holmström B, Kuchitsu K, Marquardt R, Mills I, Pavese F, Quack M, Stohner J, Strauss HL, Takami M, Thor AJ (2007)
g/L ↔ molarityc (mol/L) = (g/L) / MW±0.1% (depends on MW precision)Cohen ER, Cvitaš T, Frey JG, Holmström B, Kuchitsu K, Marquardt R, Mills I, Pavese F, Quack M, Stohner J, Strauss HL, Takami M, Thor AJ (2007)
mmol/L ↔ molarityc (mol/L) = mmol/L × 10⁻³ExactCohen ER, Cvitaš T, Frey JG, Holmström B, Kuchitsu K, Marquardt R, Mills I, Pavese F, Quack M, Stohner J, Strauss HL, Takami M, Thor AJ (2007)
Celsius ↔ KelvinT(K) = t(°C) + 273.15±0.01 K (ITS-90 scale)BIPM (Bureau International des Poids et Mesures) (2019)
Celsius ↔ FahrenheitT(°F) = T(°C) × 9/5 + 32±0.1 °FThompson A, Taylor BN (2008)
density-corrected % ↔ molarityc (mol/L) = (%w/w × ρ × 10) / MW, ρ in g/mL±0.1% when ρ known to 3 decimalsCohen ER, Cvitaš T, Frey JG, Holmström B, Kuchitsu K, Marquardt R, Mills I, Pavese F, Quack M, Stohner J, Strauss HL, Takami M, Thor AJ (2007)
📚 Bibliografie (8 gezaghebbende bronnen)
  1. Thompson A, Taylor BN (2008). Guide for the Use of the International System of Units (SI). NIST Special Publication 811 · DOI: 10.6028/NIST.SP.811-2008
    → Primary SI standard for US scientific usage
  2. Cohen ER, Cvitaš T, Frey JG, Holmström B, Kuchitsu K, Marquardt R, Mills I, Pavese F, Quack M, Stohner J, Strauss HL, Takami M, Thor AJ (2007). Quantities, Units and Symbols in Physical Chemistry — The IUPAC Green Book. RSC Publishing, 3rd ed. · DOI: 10.1039/9781847557889 · ISBN: 978-0-85404-433-7
    → Canonical IUPAC guide for chemistry quantities/units
  3. BIPM (Bureau International des Poids et Mesures) (2019). The International System of Units (SI), 9th edition. BIPM · ↗
    → International SI definitions (incl. redefined kilogram 2019)
  4. ISO/IEC (2022). Quantities and units — Part 1: General. International Organization for Standardization — ISO 80000-1:2022 · ↗
    → General rules for physical quantities and units
  5. ISO/IEC (2019). Quantities and units — Part 9: Physical chemistry and molecular physics. International Organization for Standardization — ISO 80000-9:2019 · ↗
    → Concentration / molality / amount-of-substance conventions
  6. Tiesinga E, Mohr PJ, Newell DB, Taylor BN (2021). CODATA recommended values of the fundamental physical constants: 2018. Rev. Mod. Phys. 93(2):025010 · DOI: 10.1103/RevModPhys.93.025010
    → Avogadro, gas constant, molar volume (2019 SI revision)
  7. IUPAC (2019). Compendium of Chemical Terminology — the IUPAC Gold Book (online). IUPAC · DOI: 10.1351/goldbook
    → Definitions of mass fraction, molality, normality, ppm, activity
  8. Mills IM, Cvitaš T, Homann K, Kallay N, Kuchitsu K (1988). Quantities, Units and Symbols in Physical Chemistry. Blackwell Scientific Publications, 1st ed. · ISBN: 0-632-01773-5
    → Historical predecessor of IUPAC Green Book
🧪 Wizard voor het bereiden van oplossingen WIZARD MolGod_PREP_1
① Selecteer concentratie
② Doelvolume
③ Oplosmiddel

Berekeningen volgens: IUPAC Gold Book ↗, Merck ↗

🛡️ Veiligheid — CAS 89-78-1MolGod_SAFEHUB_MAIN
Mededeling over gegevensbeperkingen. De veiligheidsinformatie op deze pagina is uitsluitend ter informatie en vervangt geen volledig veiligheidsinformatieblad (SDS). Raadpleeg vóór gebruik van het product het actuele veiligheidsinformatieblad van de fabrikant en de GHS/CLP-richtlijnen. De CLP-indeling geldt voor de zuivere bulkstof, niet voor commerciële formuleringen.

GHS/CLP-indeling — Verordening (EG) nr. 1272/2008 + UN GHS Rev. 9 (2021).

⚠️ Gevaar (Danger)
GHS05 — Bijtend
GHS05 Bijtend
GHS07 — Irriterend / schadelijk
GHS07 Irriterend / schadelijk

🚨 Gevarenaanduidingen (H)

  • H315 — Veroorzaakt huidirritatie.
  • H319 — Veroorzaakt ernstige oogirritatie.
  • H318 — Veroorzaakt ernstig oogletsel.
  • H335 — Kan irritatie van de luchtwegen veroorzaken.
  • H402 — Harmful to aquatic life
  • H412 — Schadelijk voor in het water levende organismen, met langdurige gevolgen.

🛡 Voorzorgsmaatregelen (P)

  • P264 — Na het werken met dit product … grondig wassen.
  • P280 — Beschermende handschoenen/beschermende kleding/oogbescherming/gelaatsbescherming dragen.
  • P302+P352 — BIJ CONTACT MET DE HUID: Met veel water/… wassen.
  • P305+P351+P338 — BIJ CONTACT MET DE OGEN: Voorzichtig afspoelen met water gedurende een aantal minuten.; Contactlenzen verwijderen, indien mogelijk; blijven spoelen.
  • P332+P313 — Bij huidirritatie: Een arts raadplegen.
  • P337+P313 — Bij aanhoudende oogirritatie: Een arts raadplegen.
  • P501 — Inhoud/verpakking afvoeren naar …

⚠ Indeling op basis van een consensus van bronnen (PubChem / kennisgevingen van leveranciers) — niet geverifieerd tegen de geharmoniseerde indeling in bijlage VI (CLP). De omvang van de gevaren kan ruimer zijn dan de officiële indeling; verifieer vóór gebruik aan de hand van het actuele veiligheidsinformatieblad van de leverancier.

Vertalingen: CLP-verordening (EG) 1272/2008, Bijlage III en IV. Gegevens: PubChem/NLM.

📚 Geconsolideerde wetenschappelijke referenties — Chicago Author-Date 10 bronnen

Referenties verzameld uit alle tabbladen van de Safety Hub. CAS: 89-78-1 · PubChem ↗

  1. Parlament Europejski i Rada UE. 2008. "Rozporządzenie (WE) nr 1272/2008 w sprawie klasyfikacji, oznakowania i pakowania substancji (CLP)." Dz.Urz. UE L 353. [↗] GHS, Regelgeving
  2. United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE). 2021. "Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labelling of Chemicals (GHS), Ninth Revised Edition." United Nations, Geneva. [↗] GHS
  3. Goldfrank, Lewis R., Robert S. Hoffman, Mary Ann Howland, et al.. 2019. "Goldfrank's Toxicologic Emergencies, 11th ed.." McGraw-Hill Education, New York. ISBN 978-1-25-985961-8. Pierwsza pomoc, Toksykologia
  4. National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH). 2023. "NIOSH Pocket Guide to Chemical Hazards (DHHS Publ. 2005-149)." U.S. Department of Health and Human Services / CDC, Cincinnati, OH. [↗] Pierwsza pomoc, PPE, Toksykologia
  5. European Committee for Standardization (CEN). 2016. "EN 374-1:2016 — Protective gloves against dangerous chemicals and micro-organisms." CEN, Brussels. [↗] PPE
  6. UNECE. 2023. "European Agreement Concerning the International Carriage of Dangerous Goods by Road (ADR 2025)." United Nations, Geneva. [↗] Utylizacja, Regulacje
  7. National Fire Protection Association (NFPA). 2022. "NFPA 400 — Hazardous Materials Code." NFPA, Quincy, MA. [↗] Magazynowanie
  8. Urben, P.G. (ed.). 2017. "Bretherick's Handbook of Reactive Chemical Hazards, 8th ed.." Butterworth-Heinemann / Elsevier, Oxford. [↗] Magazynowanie
  9. Ministerstwo Klimatu i Środowiska RP. 2023. "Baza danych o produktach i opakowaniach oraz o gospodarce odpadami (BDO)." Ministerstwo Klimatu i Środowiska, Warszawa. [↗] Utylizacja
  10. International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC / WHO). 2024. "IARC Monographs on the Identification of Carcinogenic Hazards to Humans — List of Classifications." WHO, Lyon. [↗] Toksykologia

Tabbladen met eigen referenties (Emergency, PPE, Storage, Waste) bevatten aanvullende bibliografische vermeldingen binnen hun respectieve secties.

📈 Analytische statistiek (t-test · RSD · Grubbs · Q-Dixon) ICH Q2

Plak een reeks herhaalde metingen (CSV of één getal per regel). De calculator berekent het gemiddelde, de standaardafwijking en 95% CI, en detecteert uitschieters (Grubbs + Dixon Q).

Scheidingsteken: komma, spatie, tab, nieuwe regel. Minimaal 3 metingen.
📐 Statistische formules
  • x̄ = Σxᵢ / n — rekenkundig gemiddelde
  • s² = Σ(xᵢ - x̄)² / (n-1) — steekproefvariantie
  • s = √s² — standaardafwijking
  • RSD% = (s / x̄) × 100% — relatieve standaardafwijking
  • CI₉₅ = x̄ ± t(0.05, n-1) × s / √n — Student's t
  • G = |xᵢ - x̄| / s — Grubbs-test
  • Q = |xsuspect - xnearest| / |xmax - xmin| — Dixon Q-test

Bron: ICH Q2(R2) Validation of Analytical Procedures · ICH PDF ↗

🧪 Bufferrecept-calculator UNIEK
Literatuur: pKa-waarden uit Goldberg NIST 81 · CRC Handbook 100th ed. · Stoll & Blanchard 1990 (DOI)

Kies een buffer uit de lijst van 20 populaire systemen → voer de streef-pH in → ontvang een exact recept met de af te wegen massa's.

Stap 1: Kies een buffersysteem

📜 Receptgeschiedenis (laatste 10)
📊 Validatie van de HPLC-methode (ICH Q2(R1)) PARTIAL

3 of 3 critical metrics need experimental data

Parameter Waarde Eenheid ICH Q2-criterium Status
Lineariteit (R²) geen gegevens unitless R² ≥ 0.999 (≥0.99 voor bioanalytische methoden) —
LOD (S/N = 3:1) geen gegevens ng/mL S/N ≥ 3:1 (laagste detecteerbare concentratie) —
LOQ (S/N = 10:1) geen gegevens ng/mL S/N ≥ 10:1 (LOQ ≥ 3×LOD doorgaans) —
Precisie (RSD intraday, n=6) geen gegevens % RSD RSD ≤ 2% (intraday) / ≤ 3% (interday) voor de API —
Juistheid (recovery, 3 niveaus) geen gegevens % (target 100±2%) Recovery 98-102% (target 100%) —
Lineariteitsbereik geen gegevens bijv. 0.1-100 ng/mL Min. 80-120% van de nominale concentratie —
Selectiviteit/Specificiteit geen gegevens qualitative Geen interferentie — analytpiek volledig gescheiden (Rs ≥ 2.0) —
Robuustheid (robustness) geen gegevens RSD < 2% bij ±5% variatie RSD < 2% bij kleine parametervariaties —
Legend: ✓ PASS ⚠ CAUTION ✗ FAIL — NO_DATA
📚 Wetenschappelijke referenties (Chicago Author-Date) — klik om uit te klappen

Standaarden voor validatie van analytische methoden — 4 onafhankelijke bronnen (ICH + USP + AOAC + Snyder).

  1. International Conference on Harmonisation (ICH). 2005. Validation of Analytical Procedures: Text and Methodology Q2(R1). ICH Expert Working Group. [link ↗] — Gold-standard ICH guideline — accepted by EMA, FDA, MHLW, NMPA
  2. United States Pharmacopeia (USP) Convention. 2024. USP General Chapter <621> Chromatography. USP-NF 2024 ed. USP. [link ↗]
  3. AOAC International. 2016. Appendix F: Guidelines for Standard Method Performance Requirements. AOAC INTERNATIONAL. [link ↗] — AOAC SMPR — alternative to ICH Q2 for food/dietary supplements
  4. Snyder, Lloyd R., Joseph J. Kirkland, and John W. Dolan. 2010. Introduction to Modern Liquid Chromatography. 3rd ed. John Wiley & Sons. ISBN 978-0-470-16754-0. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470508183 [link ↗] — Industry standard textbook — Chapter 11 covers method validation
  5. Snyder, L. R., J. J. Kirkland, and J. L. Glajch. 1997. Practical HPLC Method Development. 2nd ed. Wiley. ISBN 978-0-471-00703-6. — Classic method-development reference (DryLab heritage).
  6. Rozet, Eric, et al.. 2013. Analysis of recent pharmaceutical regulatory documents on analytical method validation. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chroma.2007.03.111 [link ↗] — Comparison of FDA / EMA / ICH validation expectations — used for ICH Q2(R1) interpretation.
  7. Heyden, Yvan Vander, et al.. 2009. Robustness of pharmaceutical liquid chromatographic methods. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jchromb.2008.10.052 [link ↗] — Plackett-Burman design for robustness — basis of ICH Q2 §3.7.
  8. Dong, Michael W.. 2019. HPLC and UHPLC for Practicing Scientists. 2nd ed. Wiley. ISBN 978-1-119-31378-3. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119313793 [link ↗] — Modern (UHPLC) update of validation chapter — practical RSD/LOD examples.
  9. Meyer, Veronika R.. 2010. Practical High-Performance Liquid Chromatography. 5th ed. Wiley. ISBN 978-0-470-68218-0. — European pharmacopeial perspective — complements USP/AOAC.
  10. Kazakevich, Yuri V., and Rosario LoBrutto, eds.. 2007. HPLC for Pharmaceutical Scientists. Wiley-Interscience. ISBN 978-0-471-68162-4. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470087954 [link ↗] — Pharma-focused validation case studies (specificity, robustness).
  11. European Medicines Agency (EMA). 2011. Guideline on bioanalytical method validation EMEA/CHMP/EWP/192217/2009. EMA Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use. [link ↗] — EMA bioanalytical companion to ICH Q2(R1) for clinical samples.

· ⚠ Regelgevende waarschuwingen SVHC/REACH ↑

🔧 HPLC-troubleshooting — beslissingsboom 6 veelvoorkomende problemen

Diagnostiek van de 6 meest voorkomende HPLC-problemen met een beslissingsboom (5 stappen per probleem). Bron: Snyder/Kirkland/Dolan 3rd ed. Chapter 17 + LCGC LC Troubleshooting columns 1989-2024.

Verbrede pieken (broad peaks) medium

Symptoom: Alle pieken op het chromatogram zijn breder dan verwacht (FWHM > 2× normaal)

🔍 Diagnostische boom:
  1. 1. Controleer of alle pieken verbreed zijn of slechts sommige
    → JA: Alle → instrumenteel probleem (kolom of systeem)
    → NEE: Slechts sommige → chemisch probleem (interactie met de kolom voor specifieke analyten)
  2. 2. Verwissel met een testkolom — verdwijnt het probleem?
    → JA: KOLOM versleten — packing beschadigd, void in de eerste mm. Vervang hem.
    → NEE: Probleem in het LC-systeem
  3. 3. Controleer het dode volume (dead volume) — injectielus, verbindingen, detector
    → JA: Lus > 100 µL voor een 4.6 mm kolom of losse verbindingen → vervang de ferrules, kort de leidingen in
    → NEE: Diagnostiek voortzetten
  4. 4. Temperatuurtest: verhoog de kolom van 25°C naar 40°C
    → JA: Smallere pieken → massatransferkinetiek te traag (verhoog T)
    → NEE: Continue
  5. 5. Controleer het debiet t.o.v. het van Deemter-optimum voor deze kolom
    → JA: Optimum voor 4.6mm/5µm = 1.0 mL/min, voor 2.1mm/3µm = 0.4 mL/min
    → NEE: Continue
⚠️ Typische oorzaken:
  • Kolom versleten (>2000 injecties zonder voorkolom)
  • Dood volume van het systeem > 100 µL (verkeerde lus, lange leidingen, losse ferrules)
  • Temperatuur te laag (massatransferkinetiek)
  • Debiet buiten het van Deemter-optimum
  • Monsteroplosmiddel sterker dan mobiele fase A
✓ Oplossingen:
  • ✓ Vervang de kolom (bij >2000 injecties)
  • ✓ Controleer alle verbindingen — houd de leidingen zo kort mogelijk
  • ✓ Verhoog de kolomtemperatuur naar 40°C (als de stof stabiel is)
  • ✓ Verlaag het debiet naar het van Deemter-optimum
  • ✓ Los het monster op in mobiele fase A (niet in puur organisch)
Piektailing (tailing, T > 1.5) high

Symptoom: Pieken hebben een verlengde "staart" aan de late-elutiezijde (asymmetrie T = b/a > 1.5 volgens USP)

🔍 Diagnostische boom:
  1. 1. Bevat de stof basische groepen (amino, pyridine)?
    → JA: Ja → silanolinteracties! Voeg 0.1% TFA of 5-10 mM TEA toe aan mobiele fase A.
    → NEE: Continue
  2. 2. Controleer de pH van de mobiele fase t.o.v. de pKa van de stof
    → JA: pH = pKa ± 1 → gedeeltelijke ionisatie, peak split. Verplaats de pH ≥ 2 eenheden weg van de pKa.
    → NEE: Continue
  3. 3. Controleer de leeftijd van de kolom (>1500 injecties?)
    → JA: Ja → blootgelegde silanolen (column bleed). Vervang door een kolom met hogere endcapping (XTerra, Symmetry).
    → NEE: Continue
  4. 4. Bevat het monster metalen (Fe, Cu uit glazen flesjes)?
    → JA: Ja → gebruik kleurloze type II-flesjes of PFA. Voeg 0.1mM EDTA toe aan het monster.
    → NEE: Continue
⚠️ Typische oorzaken:
  • Silanolinteracties (basische analyt + vrije silanolen van silicagel)
  • pH op de grens van de pKa van de analyt (peak split)
  • Oude kolom (column bleed, hoge silanolactiviteit)
  • Metalen in het monster (chelatie → tailing)
  • Kolomoverbelasting (>50 µg op een 4.6mm kolom)
✓ Oplossingen:
  • ✓ Voeg 0.1% TFA (UV) of 0.1% mierenzuur (LC-MS) toe aan mobiele fase A
  • ✓ Kies een kolom met hoogzuivere endcapping: Waters XBridge BEH, Phenomenex Kinetex
  • ✓ Werk bij een pH ≥ 2 eenheden weg van de pKa
  • ✓ 0.1mM EDTA aan het monster (Fe/Cu-chelatie)
  • ✓ Verlaag het injectievolume naar ≤ 20 µL voor een 4.6mm kolom
Basislijndrift (baseline drift) medium

Symptoom: De basislijn stijgt of daalt systematisch gedurende >5 minuten

🔍 Diagnostische boom:
  1. 1. Gebruik je een gradiënt (B% neemt toe)?
    → JA: Ja → verschillende absorptie van fasen A vs B bij dλ. Oplosmiddelwisseling in de UV-cutoff. Controleer de UV-absorptie van het % organisch.
    → NEE: Verder (isocratisch)
  2. 2. Controleer de kolomtemperatuur — is deze stabiel tot ±0.5°C?
    → JA: Ja (stabiel) → verder
    → NEE: Instabiel → schakel de kolomthermostaat in (>25°C gecontroleerd)
  3. 3. Test: schakel de autosampler uit, laat alleen pomp+kolom+detector draaien
    → JA: De drift verdwijnt → contaminatie van de autosampler (reinig de naald, het septum)
    → NEE: Continue
  4. 4. Controleer de leeftijd van de lamp (D2 voor UV)
    → JA: Ja (>1500 uur) → vervang de lamp
    → NEE: Continue
⚠️ Typische oorzaken:
  • Gradiëntelutie met verschillende UV-cutoff van de fasen
  • Instabiele kolomtemperatuur
  • Autosampler-contaminatie van de naald/septum
  • UV-lamp oud (>1500h)
  • Detector-flowcel vervuild
  • Kolom niet geëquilibreerd (<10 kolomvolumes)
✓ Oplossingen:
  • ✓ Kolom voor-equilibreren gedurende 10-15 kolomvolumes bij 100% A
  • ✓ Kolomthermostaat aan, T 30-40°C stabiel
  • ✓ Reinig de detector-flowcel met een 50:50 ACN:H2O-oplossing
  • ✓ Vervang de D2-lamp indien >1500h
  • ✓ Gebruik baseline subtraction (Chromeleon, native Empower-functie)
Geen piek / verloren piek (no peak) critical

Symptoom: De verwachte analytpiek verschijnt niet op het chromatogram

🔍 Diagnostische boom:
  1. 1. Heeft de injectie daadwerkelijk plaatsgevonden?
    → JA: Controleer het autosampler-log, de pompdruk (moet dalen tijdens de injectie)
    → NEE: Autosampler-probleem → controleer de loop, de naald, het monster in de vial
  2. 2. Zit het monster in de vial (correct volume, niet verdampt)?
    → JA: Continue
    → NEE: Geen monster — opnieuw pipetteren
  3. 3. Monsterstabiliteit — >24h geleden bereid?
    → JA: Ja → degradatie. Bereid een vers monster opnieuw.
    → NEE: Continue
  4. 4. Controleer de detectiegolflengte t.o.v. de λmax van de stof
    → JA: Detectie bij λ komt NIET overeen met λmax → geen signaal. Scan DAD 200-400nm.
    → NEE: Continue
  5. 5. Test: injecteer een zuivere standaard (van bekende concentratie, vers)
    → JA: De standaard geeft een piek → probleem met het monster (matrix, derivatisering)
    → NEE: Ook geen piek met de standaard → systeemprobleem (kolom, fase, gradiënt)
⚠️ Typische oorzaken:
  • Monster niet uit de vial genomen (autosampler-bug)
  • Monster gedegradeerd (>24h pH/temp/licht)
  • Detectie bij de verkeerde golflengte
  • Verkeerde mobiele fase (bijv. vergeten TFA)
  • Kolom omgekeerd / verkeerde stationaire fase
  • De stof elueert op het front (V0) → niet vastgehouden, niet zichtbaar
✓ Oplossingen:
  • ✓ Bereid een vers monster opnieuw volgens het exacte protocol
  • ✓ UV-Vis DAD-scan 200-400nm + zoeken naar λmax
  • ✓ Controleer de samenstelling van de mobiele fase — is TFA toegevoegd?
  • ✓ Test de omgekeerde kolomrichting (voorzichtig!)
  • ✓ Voor retentie <1 min — verlaag de % B, MeOH in plaats van ACN
  • ✓ Controleer de verwachte retentietijd in de methodedatabase van de plug-in
Druk te hoog (pressure too high) critical

Symptoom: Pompdruk > 80% van het kolommaximum of systeem-shutdown met high-pressure error

🔍 Diagnostische boom:
  1. 1. Controleer of de kolom correct is aangesloten (richting van de pijl)
    → JA: OK
    → NEE: Kolom omgekeerd → draai om (nooit "achterstevoren" gebruiken)
  2. 2. Test: verwijder de kolom uit het systeem, laat alleen pomp+detector draaien
    → JA: Druk daalt naar <50 bar → probleem in de kolom (verstopt)
    → NEE: Druk blijft hoog → in-line filter verstopt, frit vervuild
  3. 3. Controleer het pre-kolomfilter (in-line frit)
    → JA: Vervuild en bruin → vervangen
    → NEE: Continue
  4. 4. Spoel de kolom terug met 50:50 ACN:H2O zonder de kolom — verdwijnt het?
    → JA: Deeltjes vast in de eerste mm — een flush van 30 min kan het herstellen
    → NEE: Vervang de kolom
⚠️ Typische oorzaken:
  • In-line filter (frit) verstopt met deeltjes
  • Buffer salting-out (precipitatie bij hoog %B)
  • Monster bevat zwevende deeltjes (filtreer 0.22 µm vóór injectie)
  • Kolom verstopt (column bed compaction)
  • Gradiënt met bufferfase + veel organisch → zoutprecipitatie
✓ Oplossingen:
  • ✓ Filtreer het monster ALTIJD door 0.22 µm PVDF vóór injectie
  • ✓ Vervang het in-line filter elke 100 injecties (of wanneer de druk >20% stijgt)
  • ✓ Gebruik GEEN >20mM fosfaatbuffer + >70% ACN (het zout slaat neer)
  • ✓ Spoel de kolom 30 min met 50:50 ACN:H2O in de omgekeerde richting (wanneer de fabrikant dit toestaat)
  • ✓ Pre-kolom 4×3mm ter bescherming van de hoofdkolom
Spookpieken (ghost peaks) high

Symptoom: Onverklaarde pieken op het chromatogram die afwezig zijn in de kalibratie

🔍 Diagnostische boom:
  1. 1. Test: blanco injectie (zuiver monsteroplosmiddel)
    → JA: Er verschijnt een spookpiek → contaminatie van het systeem of de eluenten
    → NEE: Verschijnt alleen bij het monster → matrix
  2. 2. Groeit de spookpiek met de gradiënt (elueert bij hoog %B)?
    → JA: Ja → overladen kolom of sterk vastgehouden uit een vorige run
    → NEE: Onafhankelijk van de gradiënt → autosampler carryover
  3. 3. Increase carryover wash (between injections)
    → JA: Helpt → carryover was de oorzaak. Sterker wasprotocol.
    → NEE: Continue
  4. 4. Injectie van zuiver water — is er een piek?
    → JA: Ja → contaminatie van de waterbron (organische stoffen uit het DI-systeem)
    → NEE: Continue
⚠️ Typische oorzaken:
  • Carryover in de autosampler-naald/loop
  • Contaminatie van het eluens (zelfs HPLC-grade)
  • Sterk vastgehouden componenten uit vorige runs
  • Plastic in de vials (ftalaten, PEG uit de doppen)
  • DI-water onvoldoende gezuiverd
✓ Oplossingen:
  • ✓ Versterk het wasprotocol: 100% B → 100% A → 50:50 (3 cycli)
  • ✓ Sterke was: 100% DMSO of 100% MeOH vóór de kalibratie
  • ✓ Filtreer de eluenten door 0.22 µm PTFE bij twijfel
  • ✓ Gebruik amberkleurig glas + doppen met Teflon-coating voor monsters
  • ✓ Periodieke gradiëntramp naar 100% B gedurende 10 min (clean-out)
📚 Wetenschappelijke referenties (Chicago Author-Date) — klik om uit te klappen
  1. Snyder, Lloyd R., Joseph J. Kirkland, and John W. Dolan. 2010. Introduction to Modern Liquid Chromatography. 3rd ed. John Wiley & Sons. Chapter 17 (Troubleshooting) pp. 559-616. ISBN 978-0-470-16754-0. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470508183 [link ↗]
  2. Dolan, John W.. 2014. LC Troubleshooting (monthly column 1989-2024). LCGC North America. [link ↗] — John Dolan 35-letnia seria miesięcznych artykułów problemowych
  3. Kromidas, Stavros. 2017. HPLC Made to Measure: A Practical Handbook for Optimization. 2nd ed. Wiley-VCH. ISBN 978-3-527-31377-1. — Praktyczny przewodnik problem-solving dla labs analitycznych
  4. Dolan, John W.. 2013. When to Modify Method Conditions. 192-199. [link ↗] — Decision flow for changing flow rate / temperature / %B vs swapping columns.
  5. Dong, Michael W.. 2019. HPLC and UHPLC for Practicing Scientists. 2nd ed. Wiley. ISBN 978-1-119-31378-3. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119313793 [link ↗] — Chapter 9 covers troubleshooting modern UHPLC systems (sub-2 µm particles).
  6. Meyer, Veronika R.. 2010. Practical High-Performance Liquid Chromatography. 5th ed. Wiley. ISBN 978-0-470-68218-0. — Solid step-by-step problem isolation chapter (eluents, columns, instruments).
  7. Snyder, L. R., J. J. Kirkland, and J. L. Glajch. 1997. Practical HPLC Method Development. 2nd ed. Wiley. ISBN 978-0-471-00703-6. — Method-development companion volume with troubleshooting cross-refs.
  8. Carr, Peter W.. 2009. The new physical chemistry of HPLC. 1764-1772. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chroma.2008.11.094 [link ↗] — Theoretical basis for diagnosing efficiency losses (mass-transfer, eddy diffusion).
  9. Heyden, Yvan Vander, et al.. 2009. Robustness of pharmaceutical liquid chromatographic methods. 2120-2129. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jchromb.2008.10.052 [link ↗] — How to diagnose method failures vs. system failures (Plackett-Burman).
  10. Engelhardt, Heinz. 2014. 100 Years of Chromatography. 2nd ed. Wiley-VCH. ISBN 978-3-527-33473-5. — Historical context for ghost-peak phenomenology (silica chemistry).
🧪 Oplosbaarheid en compatibiliteit met oplosmiddelen MolGod_SOLUB_1
Molecuul
Menthol
Formule
C10H20O
logP (XLogP3)
3.00
Massa (g/mol)
156.26
Polariteit
Hydrofoob (apolair)

⚠️ GC-schatting (Hoftyzer–Van Krevelen). Geen HSP-literatuurgegevens voor deze CAS — nauwkeurigheid ±2 MPa½. Experimenteel verifiëren.

Ra < R₀ = dobra mieszalność · Ra < 1,5×R₀ = graniczna · powyżej = słaba (R₀ — promień sfery Hansena tej molekuły) Dla tej molekuły R₀ = 8.

Oplosmiddel Compat. Ra Visueel GC-MS HPLC Toepassingen Referenties
Water (H₂O)0.42 g/L (pomiar)—
✗ NieA (aqueous) (RP)
buffercelkweekanalytischextractie (hydrofiel)
Ethanol (EtOH)——brak podstawy✗ NieA/B modifier (RP/NP)
extractiespectroscopie (UV-Vis)syntheseHPLC-modifier
Methanol (MeOH)——brak podstawy✗ NieA/B (RP) (RP)
HPLC (eluent)LC-MSKarl FischerUV-transparent do 205 nm
Acetone——brak podstawy✗ NieB modifier (NP)
GC headspacekristallisatieontvettingsynthese
Acetonitrile (ACN)——brak podstawy✗ NieB (RP) (RP)
HPLC-eluens (gouden standaard)LC-MS (wolny cut-off UV 190 nm)peptideanalyse
DMSO——brak podstawy✗ NieN/A (N/A)
NMR (d6-DMSO)celbiologie (cryopreservatie)medicijnafgiftesynthese
THF——brak podstawy✗ NieB (NP) (NP)
GPC/SEC (polymeeranalyse)Grignard-syntheseorganometaalverbindingen
DCM (CH₂Cl₂)——brak podstawy✓ TakB (NP) (NP)
extractieNP-HPLCGC-MSkristallisatie (antisolvent)
Chloroform (CHCl₃)——brak podstawy✓ TakN/A (toxic) (N/A)
NMR (CDCl3)lipide-extractie (Folch-methode)NP-TLC
Hexane——brak podstawy✓ TakA (NP) (NP)
NP-HPLColie-extractie (lipiden)GC-MSTLC (NP)
Toluene——brak podstawy✓ TakB (NP) (NP)
NMR (d8-toluene)syntheseDean-Stark azeotrope droging
📚 Wetenschappelijke referenties voor oplosmiddelen (Chicago Author-Date) — klik om uit te vouwen

11 oplosmiddelen · 54 volledige citaties (NIST/CRC/IARC/Hansen/Reichardt/Smallwood/Wypych/Armarego/Snyder/GESTIS) — hieronder.

Water (H₂O)
  1. NIST — NIST Chemistry WebBook — Water (CAS 7732-18-5)
  2. CRC — CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics, 104th ed., Sec. 8 (Properties of Water)
  3. IAPWS — IAPWS Release on Static Dielectric Constant of Water
  4. Reichardt 2011 — Solvents and Solvent Effects in Organic Chemistry
  5. GESTIS — GESTIS Substance Database — Water
Ethanol (EtOH)
  1. NIST — NIST Chemistry WebBook — Ethanol (CAS 64-17-5)
  2. CRC — CRC Handbook — Ethanol physical constants
  3. Snyder & Kirkland — Modern Liquid Chromatography — Ethanol eluotropic
  4. Smallwood — Handbook of Organic Solvent Properties — Ethanol
  5. GESTIS — GESTIS Substance Database — Ethanol
Methanol (MeOH)
  1. NIST — NIST Chemistry WebBook — Methanol (CAS 67-56-1)
  2. CRC — CRC Handbook — Methanol physical constants
  3. Snyder & Kirkland — Modern Liquid Chromatography — MeOH eluotropic, eo=0.95
  4. GESTIS — GESTIS Substance Database — Methanol
Acetone
  1. NIST — NIST Chemistry WebBook — Acetone (CAS 67-64-1)
  2. CRC — CRC Handbook — Acetone physical & thermodynamic constants
  3. Hansen 2007 — Hansen Solubility Parameters — Acetone (dD=15.5, dP=10.4, dH=7.0)
  4. Smallwood — Handbook of Organic Solvent Properties — Acetone
  5. GESTIS — GESTIS Substance Database — Acetone
Acetonitrile (ACN)
  1. NIST — NIST Chemistry WebBook — Acetonitrile (CAS 75-05-8)
  2. CRC — CRC Handbook — Acetonitrile constants
  3. Snyder & Kirkland — Modern Liquid Chromatography — ACN gold-standard HPLC eluent
  4. Reichardt 2011 — Solvents and Solvent Effects — ACN dipolar aprotic
  5. GESTIS — GESTIS Substance Database — Acetonitrile
DMSO
  1. NIST — NIST Chemistry WebBook — DMSO (CAS 67-68-5)
  2. Wypych 2019 — Handbook of Solvents Vol. 1 — DMSO comprehensive properties
  3. Hansen 2007 — HSP — DMSO (dD=18.4, dP=16.4, dH=10.2)
  4. Reichardt 2011 — Solvents and Solvent Effects — DMSO E_T(30)=45.1, dipolar aprotic
  5. GESTIS — GESTIS Substance Database — DMSO
THF
  1. NIST — NIST Chemistry WebBook — THF (CAS 109-99-9)
  2. Armarego 2009 — Purification of Laboratory Chemicals — THF drying & peroxide test
  3. Hansen 2007 — Hansen Solubility Parameters — THF (dD=16.8, dP=5.7, dH=8.0)
  4. Smallwood — Handbook of Organic Solvent Properties — THF
  5. GESTIS — GESTIS Substance Database — Tetrahydrofuran
DCM (CH₂Cl₂)
  1. NIST — NIST Chemistry WebBook — Dichloromethane (CAS 75-09-2)
  2. IARC 71 — IARC Monograph 71 — DCM (Group 2A carcinogen)
  3. Hansen 2007 — Hansen Solubility Parameters — DCM (dD=18.2, dP=6.3, dH=6.1)
  4. Reichardt 2011 — Solvents and Solvent Effects — DCM polarity index
  5. GESTIS — GESTIS Substance Database — Dichloromethane
Chloroform (CHCl₃)
  1. NIST — NIST Chemistry WebBook — Chloroform (CAS 67-66-3)
  2. IARC 73 — IARC Monograph 73 — Chloroform (Group 2B carcinogen)
  3. Hansen 2007 — Hansen Solubility Parameters — CHCl3 (dD=17.8, dP=3.1, dH=5.7)
  4. Reichardt 2011 — Solvents and Solvent Effects — CHCl3 H-bond donor strength
  5. GESTIS — GESTIS Substance Database — Chloroform
n-Hexane
  1. NIST — NIST Chemistry WebBook — n-Hexane (CAS 110-54-3)
  2. ATSDR n-Hexane — ATSDR Toxicological Profile for n-Hexane — neuropatia obwodowa (n-Heksan NIE jest kancerogenem IARC)
  3. Hansen 2007 — Hansen Solubility Parameters — n-Hexane (dD=14.9, dP=0, dH=0)
  4. Snyder & Kirkland — Modern Liquid Chromatography — n-Hexane NP standard, eo=0.00
  5. GESTIS — GESTIS Substance Database — n-Hexane
Toluene
  1. NIST — NIST Chemistry WebBook — Toluene (CAS 108-88-3)
  2. IARC 71 — IARC Monograph 71 — Toluene
  3. Hansen 2007 — Hansen Solubility Parameters — Toluene (dD=18.0, dP=1.4, dH=2.0)
  4. Smallwood — Handbook of Organic Solvent Properties — Toluene
  5. GESTIS — GESTIS Substance Database — Toluene
Oplosbaarheidstheorie (toegepast bij de voorspelling van compatibiliteit):
  1. Yalkowsky, Samuel H., and Shri C. Valvani. 1980. "Solubility and Partitioning I: Solubility of Nonelectrolytes in Water." Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences 69 (8): 912–922. https://doi.org/10.1002/jps.2600690814 — General Solubility Equation (GSE): logS = 0.5 − logP − 0.01(MP−25).
  2. Hansen, Charles M. 2007. Hansen Solubility Parameters: A User's Handbook. 2nd ed. CRC Press. https://doi.org/10.1201/9781420006834 — HSP-triplet (dD, dP, dH) + Ra-formule.
  3. Stefanis, E., and C. Panayiotou. 2008. "Prediction of Hansen Solubility Parameters with a New Group-Contribution Method." Int J Thermophys 29: 568–585. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10765-008-0415-z
  4. Reichardt, Christian, and Thomas Welton. 2011. Solvents and Solvent Effects in Organic Chemistry. 4th ed. Wiley-VCH. https://doi.org/10.1002/9783527632220 — E_T(30) polarity scale, solwatochromia.
  5. Snyder, Lloyd R., Joseph J. Kirkland, and John W. Dolan. 2010. Introduction to Modern Liquid Chromatography. 3rd ed. Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470508183 — Eluotropic series, polarity index.
  6. Van Krevelen, D. W., and K. Te Nijenhuis. 2009. Properties of Polymers. 4th ed. Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-054819-7.X0001-5 — Hoftyzer–Van Krevelen group contribution dla dD/dP/dH z SMILES.
  7. Marcus, Yizhak. 1998. The Properties of Solvents. Wiley Series in Solution Chemistry, Vol. 4. ISBN 9780471983699 — Volledige tabellarische set van 250+ oplosmiddelen (ε, μ, doniciteit, acceptorgetallen).
  8. PubChem Compound Database — CAS 89-78-1 lookup ↗ — logP (XLogP3), water solubility experimental + predicted.

Volledige bibliografie in het accordeon REFERENTIES (onderaan de pagina) — Chicago Manual of Style 17th ed., Author-Date.

🧮 Laboratoriumcalculators (8) MolGod_LABCALC_1
Verdunning (C₁V₁=C₂V₂)
Molariteit (M=n/V)
pH-buffer (Henderson-Hasselbalch)
Beer-Lambert (A=εcl)
Massa → Mol
Concentratie % → M
ppm → mg/L
Temperatuur C↔F↔K

Geverifieerde formules: IUPAC Gold Book ↗, DOI ↗

📊 Spectroscopische spectradatabases MolGod_SPECDB_3
📋 Generator van laboratoriumprotocollen MolGod_PROTOCOL_1

Protocol gegenereerd op basis van: GHS SDS, Aldrich Lab Guide ↗

🏷️ Etikettengenerator (QR) MolGod_LABEL_1
DL-menthol• MENTHOL / 1490-04-6• CAS: 89-78-1• Formule: C10H20O• Massa: 156.26 g/molGEVAARGHS-GEVARENAANDUIDINGEN:(zelfclassificatie leveranciers — niet-bindend)H315: Veroorzaakt huidirritatie.H319: Veroorzaakt ernstige oogirritatie.P302+P352 P305+P351+P338 P332+P313 P337+P313 P280 P501 P264DH ScientificScience first. Commerce as consequence.Batchnr.: Nettogewicht: Prod.:
Deskryptory Lipinskiego (struktura)

Radardiagram van drug-likeness (Lipinski Ro5 / Veber). Groene zone = overeenstemming met de criteria.

Voorspellende gegevens — eigenschappen berekend in silico (SMILES/RDKit). Deze vervangen geen klinische studies. Niet gebruiken voor de beoordeling van geneesmiddelen zonder experimentele verificatie.

MW156.3LogP3HBD1HBA1RotB1TPSA20.2 Ų
✓ Lipinski Ro5✓ Veber✓ Egan✗ Ghose (MW=156)✗ REOS (MW=156)✓ Lead-like Ro3
EigenschapWaardeBeoordeling
Absorptie (GI)hoog✓
BBB-permeabiliteitja (dringt door)
Biobeschikbaarheid (Daina 2017)
55%
CYP450-profielCYP1A2 inhibitorCYP2C9 non-inhibitorCYP2C19 non-inhibitorCYP2D6 inhibitorCYP3A4 non-inhibitor
PAINS-waarschuwingen0✓
Brenk-waarschuwingen0✓
pKa (pH 7.4)16 (predicted)
hERG (cardiotox.)✓ nee
P-gp-substraat—
Ames-mutageniteit✓ nee
DILI (hepatotox.)—
LogS (wateroplosb.)—
Bronnen (ADMET-methodologie)
  1. Lipinski, Christopher A., Franco Lombardo, Beryl W. Dominy, and Paul J. Feeney. 1997. "Experimental and computational approaches to estimate solubility and permeability in drug discovery and development settings." Advanced Drug Delivery Reviews 23 (1-3): 3-25.
  2. Veber, Daniel F., Stephen R. Johnson, Hung-Yuan Cheng, et al. 2002. "Molecular properties that influence the oral bioavailability of drug candidates." Journal of Medicinal Chemistry 45 (12): 2615-2623.
  3. Daina, Antoine, Olivier Michielin, and Vincent Zoete. 2017. "SwissADME: a free web tool to evaluate pharmacokinetics, drug-likeness and medicinal chemistry friendliness." Scientific Reports 7: 42717.
  4. Egan, William J., and Gregory Lauri. 2002. "Prediction of intestinal permeability." Advanced Drug Delivery Reviews 54 (3): 273-289.
  5. Baell, Jonathan B., and Georgina A. Holloway. 2010. "New substructure filters for removal of pan assay interference compounds (PAINS) from screening libraries." Journal of Medicinal Chemistry 53 (7): 2719-2740.
  6. Brenk, Ruth, Alessandro Schipani, Daniel James, et al. 2008. "Lessons learnt from assembling screening libraries for drug discovery for neglected diseases." ChemMedChem 3 (3): 435-444.
  7. Ertl, Peter, and Ansgar Schuffenhauer. 2009. "Estimation of synthetic accessibility score of drug-like molecules based on molecular complexity and fragment contributions." Journal of Cheminformatics 1: 8.
  8. Bickerton, G. Richard, Gaia V. Paolini, Jérémy Besnard, Sorel Muresan, and Andrew L. Hopkins. 2012. "Quantifying the Chemical Beauty of Drugs." Nature Chemistry 4 (2): 90-98.
  9. Hopkins, Andrew L., and Colin R. Groom. 2002. "The Druggable Genome." Nature Reviews Drug Discovery 1 (9): 727-730.
  10. Ghose, Arup K., Vellarkad N. Viswanadhan, and John J. Wendoloski. 1999. "A Knowledge-Based Approach in Designing Combinatorial or Medicinal Chemistry Libraries for Drug Discovery." Journal of Combinatorial Chemistry 1 (1): 55-68.
  11. Tice, Raymond R., Christopher P. Austin, Robert J. Kavlock, and John R. Bucher. 2013. "Improving the Human Hazard Characterization of Chemicals: A Tox21 Update." Environmental Health Perspectives 121 (7): 756-765.
  12. Leeson, Paul D., and Brian Springthorpe. 2007. "The Influence of Drug-Like Concepts on Decision-Making in Medicinal Chemistry." Nature Reviews Drug Discovery 6 (11): 881-890.
  13. Hann, Michael M. 2011. "Molecular Obesity, Potency and Other Addictions in Drug Discovery." MedChemComm 2 (5): 349-355.
  14. Davies, Mark, Michał Nowotka, George Papadatos, et al. 2015. "ChEMBL Web Services: Streamlining Access to Drug Discovery Data and Utilities." Nucleic Acids Research 43 (W1): W612-W620.
  15. Walters, W. Patrick, and Mark A. Murcko. 2002. "Prediction of 'Drug-Likeness.'". Advanced Drug Delivery Reviews 54 (3): 255–271. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169-409X(02)00003-0.
  16. Congreve, Miles, Robin Carr, Christopher Murray, and Harren Jhoti. 2003. "A 'Rule of Three' for Fragment-Based Lead Discovery?" Drug Discovery Today 8 (19): 876–877. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1359-6446(03)02831-9.
  17. Brenk, Ruth, Alessandro Schipani, Daniel James, Agata Krasowski, Iain Hugh Gilbert, Julie Frearson, and Paul Graham Wyatt. 2008. "Lessons Learnt from Assembling Screening Libraries for Drug Discovery for Neglected Diseases." ChemMedChem 3 (3): 435-444.
  18. Schomburg, Karen T., Sascha Bietz, Hans Briem, Andrea M. Henzler, Stefan Urbaczek, and Matthias Rarey. 2014. "Facing the Challenges of Structure-Based Target Prediction by Inverse Virtual Screening." Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling 54 (6): 1676-1686.
  19. Bemis, Guy W., and Mark A. Murcko. 1996. "The Properties of Known Drugs. 1. Molecular Frameworks." Journal of Medicinal Chemistry 39 (15): 2887-2893.
  20. Schomburg, Karen T., and Matthias Rarey. 2014. "What Is the Potential of Structure-Based Target Prediction Methods?" Future Medicinal Chemistry 6 (17): 1987-1989.
  21. Kazemi A, Iraji A, Esmaealzadeh N et al.. (2025). "Peppermint and menthol: a review on their biochemistry, pharmacological activities, clinical applications, and safety considerations.". Critical reviews in food science and nutrition. https://doi.org/10.1080/10408398.2023.2296991
  22. &NA;. 1993. "Menthol benefits not all in the mind." Inpharma Weekly &NA; (909): 20. https://doi.org/10.2165/00128413-199309090-00053. [DOI ↗]
  23. Bolton, Evan E., Yanli Wang, Paul A. Thiessen, and Stephen H. Bryant. 2008. "PubChem: Integrated Platform of Small Molecules and Biological Activities." Annual Reports in Computational Chemistry 4: 217-241. [DOI ↗]
  24. Kim, Sunghwan, Jie Chen, Tiejun Cheng, et al. 2023. "PubChem 2023 update." Nucleic Acids Research 51 (D1): D1373-D1380. [DOI ↗]
  25. Kim, Sunghwan, Tiejun Cheng, Jianyong He, Chen Cheng, et al. 2021. "PubChem Protein, Pathway, Reaction, and Disease Specifications." Journal of Cheminformatics 13: 16. [DOI ↗]
  26. Hähnke, Volker D., Sunghwan Kim, and Evan E. Bolton. 2018. "PubChem chemical structure standardization." Journal of Cheminformatics 10: 36. [DOI ↗]
  27. Wang, Yanli, Stephen H. Bryant, Tiejun Cheng, Jiyao Wang, et al. 2017. "PubChem BioAssay: 2017 update." Nucleic Acids Research 45 (D1): D955-D963. [DOI ↗]
  28. Cheng, Tiejun, et al. 2014. "Computation of Octanol-Water Partition Coefficients by Guiding an Additive Model with Knowledge." Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling 54 (3): 793-805. [DOI ↗]
  29. Wilkinson, Mark D., et al. 2016. "The FAIR Guiding Principles for scientific data management and stewardship." Scientific Data 3: 160018. [DOI ↗]
  30. Hersey, Anne, et al. 2015. "Chemical databases: curation or integration by user-defined equivalence?" Drug Discovery Today: Technologies 14: 17-24.
  31. Colby Flade. 2022. "Menthol." Flade, Colby. ↗
  32. United States. Food and Drug Administration. 2013. "Preliminary scientific evaluation of the possible public health effects of methol verson nonmenthol cigarettes." Food and Drug Administration. ↗
  33. United States. Food and Drug Administration. 2011. "Menthol cigarettes." Food and Drug Administration. ↗
  34. Veber, Daniel F., Stephen R. Johnson, Hung-Yuan Cheng, Brian R. Smith, Keith W. Ward, and Kenneth D. Kopple. 2002. "Molecular Properties That Influence the Oral Bioavailability of Drug Candidates." Journal of Medicinal Chemistry 45 (12): 2615-2623.
  35. ECHA. 2024. "REACH Guidance." European Chemicals Agency. ↗
  36. Groom, Colin R., Ian J. Bruno, Matthew P. Lightfoot, and Suzanna C. Ward. 2016. "The Cambridge Structural Database." Acta Crystallographica Section B 72 (2): 171-179. ↗
🧪 Assistent voor bereiding van oplossingen (Smart Prep) MolGod_PREP_2

Voer in wat u wilt bereiden — ik genereer een SOP

Voorbeelden hieronder — klik om in te voegen:
Voorgedefinieerde recepten:
📚 Overzicht van de wetenschappelijke literatuur — CAS 89-78-1MolGod_LITHUB_MAIN
⭐ Belangrijkste bevindingen (wetenschappelijke literatuur) 2 publicaties
🏆 CAS 89-78-1 — multi-criteria ranking (W12): 30% citaties · 20% recentheid · 20% onderwerp · 15% historisch · 15% open access.
  1. #1
    Gerloff J; Sundar IK; Freter R et al. (2017) · Applied in vitro toxicology
    Waarom het belangrijk is: Verplicht citaat (canon) · 162 citaties
    SCORE 10.34 Analytiek MUST-CITE Citaties: 162 DOI ↗
  2. #2
    Kazemi A, Iraji A, Esmaealzadeh N et al. (2025) · Critical reviews in food science and nutrition
    Waarom het belangrijk is: Recent (2025) · overzichtsartikel
    SCORE 4.8 Overzicht DOI ↗ PubMed ↗
📈 HPLC-gradiënt — optimalisator (LSS) SJABLOON

Gradiënt gebaseerd op PubChem XLogP3 + LSS (Snyder et al. 2010, hfdst. 9).

  • Kolom: C18
  • Buffer: phosphate
  • Debiet: 1 mL/min
  • logP: 3 (PubChem XLogP3)
  • Ramp: 29% → 95% B, 15 min
  • Totale analysetijd: 28 min
t (min) %A %B flow (mL/min) Opmerking
0 71 29 1 start (evenwicht)
2 71 29 1 einde van de initiële hold
17 5 95 1 einde van de LSS-ramp
22 5 95 1 kolomspoeling
23 71 29 1 terug naar init
28 71 29 1 her-equilibratie
📚 Wetenschappelijke referenties (Chicago Author-Date)
  1. Snyder, Lloyd R., John W. Dolan, and Joseph J. Kirkland. 2010. Introduction to Modern Liquid Chromatography. Wiley. — Chapter 9 — gradient elution, LSS theory (cited as Snyder et al. 2010 in tool description).
  2. Schoenmakers, Peter J. 1986. Optimization of Chromatographic Selectivity: A Guide to Method Development. Elsevier. — Numerical optimization of gradient programs.
  3. Snyder, L. R., and J. W. Dolan. 2007. High-Performance Gradient Elution: The Practical Application of the Linear-Solvent-Strength Model. Wiley. — Foundational LSS reference for the %B_init = 5 + 8·logP heuristic implemented here.
  4. Nikitas, Pavlos, and Adrian Pappa-Louisi. 2009. "Retention models for isocratic and gradient elution in reversed-phase liquid chromatography." Journal of Chromatography A 1216: 1737-1755. [DOI ↗] — Modern review of gradient retention models — basis for non-LSS extensions.
  5. Carr, Peter W.. 2009. "The new physical chemistry of HPLC." Journal of Chromatography A 1216: 1764-1772. [DOI ↗]
  6. Dong, Michael W. 2019. HPLC and UHPLC for Practicing Scientists. Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119313793. — Modern UHPLC gradient programming, sub-2 µm scaling rules.
  7. Wu, Naijun, and Anton M. Clausen. 2007. "Fundamental and practical aspects of ultrahigh pressure liquid chromatography for fast separations." Journal of Separation Science 30: 1167-1182. [DOI ↗]
  8. Stoll, Dwight R., and Peter W. Carr. 2017. "Two-Dimensional Liquid Chromatography: A State of the Art Tutorial." Analytical Chemistry 89: 519-531. [DOI ↗] — Reference for orthogonal gradient design (2D-LC second dimension).
  9. Dolan, John W.. 2013. "When to Modify Method Conditions." LCGC North America 31: 192-199.
  10. Meyer, Veronika R. 2010. Practical High-Performance Liquid Chromatography. Wiley. — Chapter 7 — practical gradient design with isokratyczny scouting.

REST: /wp-json/molgod/v1/hplc/gradient/89-78-1

📐 HPLC-pieksymmetriecalculator (USP Tf / As)

Bereken de USP-tailingfactor (Tf) en de asymmetrie (As) uit de piekhalfbreedtes. Voer a (linker halfbreedte) en b (rechter halfbreedte) in, gemeten op 5% of 10% van de piekhoogte.

📚 Referenties (Chicago Author-Date)
  1. USP General Chapter <621>. 2024. "Chromatography." United States Pharmacopeial Convention. [link ↗] — Defines USP Tailing Factor T = (a+b)/(2a) measured at 5% peak height.
  2. International Council for Harmonisation (ICH). 2023. "Validation of Analytical Procedures Q2(R2)." ICH Expert Working Group. [link ↗] — Tailing factor is a system suitability parameter (Section 6).
  3. Foley, Joe P., and John G. Dorsey. 1983. "Equations for calculation of chromatographic figures of merit for ideal and skewed peaks." Analytical Chemistry 55: 730-737 https://doi.org/10.1021/ac00255a033 [link ↗] — Original asymmetry factor As = b/a at 10% height (Foley & Dorsey 1983).
  4. Snyder, Lloyd R., Joseph J. Kirkland, and John W. Dolan. 2010. "Introduction to Modern Liquid Chromatography." Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470508183 [link ↗] — Chapter 2.4 — peak shape diagnostics and remedies.
  5. Dolan, John W.. 2003. "Peak tailing and resolution." LCGC North America 21: 610-614 [link ↗] — How tailing factor degrades effective resolution.
  6. Vivó-Truyols, Gabriel, and Hans-Gerd Janssen. 2010. "Probabilistic approach to peak deconvolution in chromatography." Analytical Chemistry 82: 8525-8531 https://doi.org/10.1021/ac101742z [link ↗] — Modern numerical deconvolution for asymmetric peaks.
  7. Kromidas, Stavros. 2017. "HPLC Made to Measure: A Practical Handbook for Optimization." Wiley-VCH. — Practical Tf and As thresholds for routine QC.
  8. Dong, Michael W.. 2019. "HPLC and UHPLC for Practicing Scientists." Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119313793 [link ↗]
  9. Meyer, Veronika R.. 2010. "Practical High-Performance Liquid Chromatography." Wiley.
  10. Heyden, Yvan Vander, et al.. 2009. "Robustness of pharmaceutical liquid chromatographic methods." Journal of Chromatography B 877: 2120-2129 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jchromb.2008.10.052 [link ↗]
📊 Calculator voor resolutie en schotelgetal (Rs, N, H)

Bereken de resolutie Rs, het aantal theoretische schotels N en de HETP (H) voor een paar HPLC-pieken. Voer de retentietijden, piekbreedtes (op 50% of aan de basis) en de kolomlengte in.

📚 Referenties (Chicago Author-Date)
  1. Snyder, Lloyd R., Joseph J. Kirkland, and John W. Dolan. 2010. "Introduction to Modern Liquid Chromatography." 3rd ed. John Wiley & Sons. ISBN 978-0-470-16754-0. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470508183 [link ↗] — Chapter 2 covers resolution, plate count and HETP fundamentals (Snyder et al. 2010).
  2. USP General Chapter <621>. 2024. "Chromatography." USP-NF 2024 ed. United States Pharmacopeial Convention. [link ↗] — Defines Rs >= 1.5 acceptance criterion and N calculation methods.
  3. Dolan, John W.. 2003. "How much resolution is enough?." LCGC North America 21: 350-353 [link ↗] — Practical guidance on Rs targets for routine method development.
  4. Van Deemter, J. J., F. J. Zuiderweg, and A. Klinkenberg. 1956. "Longitudinal diffusion and resistance to mass transfer as causes of nonideality in chromatography." Chemical Engineering Science 5: 271-289 https://doi.org/10.1016/0009-2509(56)80003-1 [link ↗] — Origin of N = 5.54·(tr/w0.5)² half-height plate count formulation.
  5. Giddings, J. Calvin. 1965. "Dynamics of Chromatography, Part I: Principles and Theory." Marcel Dekker. ISBN 978-0-8247-1357-7. — Resolution equation Rs = (1/4)·√N·(α-1)/α·k/(1+k) (master equation).
  6. Foley, Joe P., and John G. Dorsey. 1983. "Equations for calculation of chromatographic figures of merit for ideal and skewed peaks." Analytical Chemistry 55: 730-737 https://doi.org/10.1021/ac00255a033 [link ↗] — Skewed-peak corrections to apparent N.
  7. Knox, John H.. 1977. "Practical aspects of LC theory." Journal of Chromatographic Science 15: 352-364 https://doi.org/10.1093/chromsci/15.9.352 [link ↗]
  8. Carr, Peter W.. 2009. "The new physical chemistry of HPLC." Journal of Chromatography A 1216: 1764-1772 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chroma.2008.11.094 [link ↗]
  9. Dong, Michael W.. 2019. "HPLC and UHPLC for Practicing Scientists." 2nd ed. Wiley. ISBN 978-1-119-31378-3. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119313793 [link ↗]
  10. Meyer, Veronika R.. 2010. "Practical High-Performance Liquid Chromatography." 5th ed. Wiley. ISBN 978-0-470-68218-0.
🧪 System Suitability — live calculator (USP <621>)

Voer gegevens van 5-6 injecties in (areas, tr, tailing, plates) — de calculator berekent %RSD, gemiddelden en controleert de conformiteit met USP <621>. Je kunt CSV plakken (door komma's gescheiden) of afzonderlijke waarden bewerken.

📚 Referenties (Chicago Author-Date)
  1. USP General Chapter <621>. 2024. "Chromatography (System Suitability section)." USP-NF 2024 ed. United States Pharmacopeial Convention. [link ↗] — Defines RSD area < 2%, tailing < 2.0, N > 2000 acceptance criteria.
  2. International Council for Harmonisation (ICH). 2023. "Validation of Analytical Procedures Q2(R2)." ICH Expert Working Group. [link ↗] — Section 5.4 — system suitability is part of method validation.
  3. US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). 2018. "Reviewer Guidance: Validation of Chromatographic Methods." US Food and Drug Administration. [link ↗] — CDER reviewer perspective on chromatographic validation expectations.
  4. Snyder, Lloyd R., Joseph J. Kirkland, and John W. Dolan. 2010. "Introduction to Modern Liquid Chromatography." 3rd ed. Wiley. — Chapter 2 — system suitability fundamentals (RSD, Tf, N).
  5. Heyden, Yvan Vander, et al.. 2009. "Robustness of pharmaceutical liquid chromatographic methods." — Robustness vs. system suitability — design-of-experiments framework.
  6. Rozet, Eric, et al.. 2013. "Analysis of recent pharmaceutical regulatory documents on analytical method validation."
  7. European Medicines Agency (EMA). 2011. "Guideline on bioanalytical method validation EMEA/CHMP/EWP/192217/2009." EMA. [link ↗] — EMA companion guideline with bioanalytical SS criteria.
  8. Dong, Michael W.. 2019. "HPLC and UHPLC for Practicing Scientists." 2nd ed. Wiley. — UHPLC-specific suitability adjustments (n=5 vs. n=6).
  9. Kazakevich, Yuri V., and Rosario LoBrutto, eds.. 2007. "HPLC for Pharmaceutical Scientists." Wiley-Interscience.
  10. AOAC International. 2016. "Appendix F: Guidelines for Standard Method Performance Requirements." AOAC INTERNATIONAL. [link ↗] — Alternative SS thresholds for food/dietary samples.
📤 Voeg dit molecuul in op uw site

Heeft u een blog, forum of wetenschappelijke dienst? Voeg het interactieve 3D-molecuul in op uw website — elke lezer ziet het,met daaronder een link naar onze winkel waar hij het reagens kan kopen.

🔗 HTML-iframe-code (het eenvoudigst — werkt overal)

Kopieer en plak in de HTML-editor van uw site:

Pas width en height aan je lay-out aan.

⚙ WordPress Shortcode (voor andere winkels met MOL-GOD)

🌐 Directe link (voor e-mails, chats, LinkedIn, Twitter)

LinkedIn Twitter/X Facebook
QR code CAS 89-78-1

📱 QR code (voor het afdrukken op flyers / etiketten / catalogi)

Plaats het in een productcatalogus, op een fleslabel of een flyer. De klant scant het — ziet het 3D-molecuul op zijn telefoon, met een link naar uw winkel.

⬇ PNG downloaden

🖼 Open Graph image (voor social-media-metatags)

Wanneer u de link deelt, haalt Facebook/LinkedIn/Discord automatisch het afbeeldingsvoorbeeld op:

Preview
📋 Licentie: De embed behoudt een backlink naar DH Scientific (vereist — de winkel is de gegevensbron). Chemische gegevens zijn afkomstig van PubChem (CC0 — publiek domein). De embed is GRATIS voor educatief, commercieel en hobbygebruik.
📚 REFERENTIES (Verzamelde bibliografie, Chicago Author-Date) 126 items

Alle wetenschappelijke bronnen die in de accordeons hierboven voor CAS 89-78-1 worden geciteerd.Formaat: Chicago Manual of Style 17e ed., Author-Date-systeem.

🗄️ Wetenschappelijke databanken

  1. NIST. n.d. NIST Chemistry WebBook: CAS 89-78-1. Gaithersburg, MD: National Institute of Standards and Technology. https://webbook.nist.gov/cgi/cbook.cgi?ID=89-78-1.
  2. AIST. n.d. Spectral Database for Organic Compounds (SDBS): CAS 89-78-1. Tsukuba, Japan: National Institute of Advanced Industrial Science and Technology. https://sdbs.db.aist.go.jp/.
  3. Linstrom, Peter J., and William G. Mallard, eds. n.d. NIST Chemistry WebBook: NIST Standard Reference Database Number 69. Gaithersburg, MD: National Institute of Standards and Technology. https://doi.org/10.18434/T4D303.
  4. PubChem. n.d. PubChem Compound Summary: CAS 89-78-1. Bethesda, MD: National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI), National Library of Medicine. https://pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/#query=89-78-1.
  5. U.S. EPA. n.d. CompTox Chemicals Dashboard: CAS 89-78-1. Research Triangle Park, NC: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. https://comptox.epa.gov/dashboard/chemical/details/DTXSID1020805.

📐 Standaarden / Richtlijnen

  1. ICH. 2003. "Stability Testing of New Drug Substances and Products: Q1A(R2)." Geneva: International Council for Harmonisation of Technical Requirements for Pharmaceuticals for Human Use. https://database.ich.org/sites/default/files/Q1A%28R2%29%20Guideline.pdf.
  2. National Fire Protection Association (NFPA). 2024. "NFPA 30: Flammable and Combustible Liquids Code." NFPA, Quincy, MA. https://www.nfpa.org/codes-and-standards/all-codes-and-standards/list-of-codes-and-standards/detail?code=30.
  3. Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). 2023. "29 CFR 1910.106 — Flammable Liquids." U.S. Department of Labor, Federal Register. https://www.osha.gov/laws-regs/regulations/standardnumber/1910/1910.106.
  4. European Chemicals Agency (ECHA). 2024. "Annex VI to Regulation (EC) No 1272/2008 (CLP) — Harmonised Classification and Labelling." ECHA, Helsinki / Official Journal of the European Union. https://echa.europa.eu/regulations/clp/clp-classification.
  5. European Committee for Standardization (CEN). 2016. "EN 374-1:2016 — Protective gloves against dangerous chemicals and micro-organisms — Part 1: Terminology and performance requirements for chemical risks." CEN, Brussels. https://standards.cencenelec.eu/dyn/www/f?p=205:110:::::FSP_PROJECT,FSP_ORG_ID:38536,6080&cs=1B0DAA8B85DF42E4A2C70E5D71F0BFA32.
  6. European Committee for Standardization (CEN). 2001. "EN 166:2001 — Personal eye-protection — Specifications." CEN, Brussels. https://standards.cencenelec.eu/dyn/www/f?p=CEN:110:0::::FSP_PROJECT:6541&cs=1F1A4E0A78C4DB6A28DBE2E8C29D89DCF.
  7. European Committee for Standardization (CEN). 2009. "EN 14605:2005+A1:2009 — Protective clothing against liquid chemicals — Performance requirements for clothing with liquid-tight (Type 3) or spray-tight (Type 4) connections." CEN, Brussels. https://standards.cencenelec.eu/dyn/www/f?p=CEN:110:0::::FSP_PROJECT:21581&cs=1A04A2D3C7CC58E9E6CB58D55F7EBFB7E.
  8. National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH). 2017. "Recommendations for Chemical Protective Clothing: A Companion to the NIOSH Pocket Guide." U.S. Department of Health & Human Services / CDC. https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/ncpc/default.html.
  9. Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). 2011. "Personal Protective Equipment — General requirements." U.S. Department of Labor — 29 CFR 1910.132. https://www.osha.gov/laws-regs/regulations/standardnumber/1910/1910.132.

📖 Boeken

  1. Hansen, Charles M. 2007. Hansen Solubility Parameters: A User's Handbook, 2nd ed.. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press. https://www.routledge.com/Hansen-Solubility-Parameters-A-Users-Handbook/Hansen/p/book/9780849372483.
  2. Barton, Allan F. M. 1991. CRC Handbook of Solubility Parameters and Other Cohesion Parameters: 2nd ed.. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press. https://www.routledge.com/CRC-Handbook-of-Solubility-Parameters-and-Other-Cohesion-Parameters/Barton/p/book/9780849301766.
  3. Connors, Kenneth A., Gordon L. Amidon, and Valentino J. Stella. 1986. Chemical Stability of Pharmaceuticals: A Handbook for Pharmacists, 2nd ed.. New York: Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/0471734683.
  4. Rumble, John R., ed. 2019. CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics: 100th Edition. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press. https://hbcp.chemnetbase.com/.
  5. Urben, Peter G. 2017. Bretherick's Handbook of Reactive Chemical Hazards, 8th Edition. Academic Press / Elsevier, Oxford. https://www.sciencedirect.com/book/9780081010594.

📄 Wetenschappelijke artikelen (peer-reviewed)

  1. Stefanis, Emmanuel, and Costas Panayiotou. 2008. "Prediction of Hansen Solubility Parameters with a New Group-Contribution Method." International Journal of Thermophysics 29: 568-585. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10765-008-0415-z.
  2. Stoll, Vincent S., and John S. Blanchard. 1990. "Buffers: Principles and Practice: In Methods in Enzymology, vol. 182." San Diego: Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/0076-6879(90)82008-P.

🌐 Websites

  1. ECHA. 2023. "Guidance on the Application of the CLP Criteria." European Chemicals Agency. https://echa.europa.eu/guidance-documents/guidance-on-clp.
  2. European Parliament. 2006. "Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 (REACH)." Official Journal of the European Union L 396: 1–849.
  3. ECHA. 2023. "Candidate List of Substances of Very High Concern for Authorisation." European Chemicals Agency. https://echa.europa.eu/candidate-list-table.
  4. European Parliament. 2008. "Regulation (EC) No 1272/2008 on Classification, Labelling and Packaging of Substances and Mixtures (CLP)." Official Journal of the European Union L 353: 1–1355.
  5. ECHA. 2017. "Guidance on the Compilation of Safety Data Sheets." Version 3.1. European Chemicals Agency. ECHA-17-G-01-EN. https://echa.europa.eu/documents/10162/23047722/sds_en.pdf.
  6. ECHA. 2022. "Restrictions Under REACH — Annex XVII." European Chemicals Agency. https://echa.europa.eu/substances-restricted-under-reach.
  7. United Nations. 2021. Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labelling of Chemicals (GHS). 9th revised ed. ST/SG/AC.10/30/Rev.9. New York and Geneva: United Nations. https://unece.org/ghs-rev9-2021.
  8. ECHA. 2020. "Understanding REACH." European Chemicals Agency. https://echa.europa.eu/regulations/reach/understanding-reach.
  9. U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration (2024) — 29 CFR 1910.120 — Hazardous Waste Operations and Emergency Response (HAZWOPER) https://www.osha.gov/hazwoper.
  10. National Fire Protection Association (2018) — NFPA 472: Standard for Competence of Responders to Hazardous Materials/Weapons of Mass Destruction Incidents https://www.nfpa.org/codes-and-standards/nfpa-472.
  11. European Parliament and Council (2012) — Directive 2012/18/EU on the Control of Major-Accident Hazards Involving Dangerous Substances (Seveso III) https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex:32012L0018.
  12. U.S. National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (2024) — NIOSH Pocket Guide to Chemical Hazards https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/npg/.
  13. European Chemicals Agency (2020) — Guidance on the Compilation of Safety Data Sheets (SDS), Version 3.1 https://echa.europa.eu/documents/10162/23047722/sds_en.pdf.
  14. Snyder, Lloyd R., John W. Dolan, and Joseph J. Kirkland. 2010. Introduction to Modern Liquid Chromatography. Wiley.
  15. Schoenmakers, Peter J.. 1986. Optimization of Chromatographic Selectivity: A Guide to Method Development. Elsevier.
  16. Snyder, L. R., and J. W. Dolan. 2007. High-Performance Gradient Elution: The Practical Application of the Linear-Solvent-Strength Model. Wiley.
  17. Nikitas, Pavlos, and Adrian Pappa-Louisi. 2009. "Retention models for isocratic and gradient elution in reversed-phase liquid chromatography." Journal of Chromatography A 1216: 1737-1755. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chroma.2008.10.005.
  18. Carr, Peter W.. 2009. "The new physical chemistry of HPLC." Journal of Chromatography A 1216: 1764-1772. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chroma.2008.11.094.
  19. Dong, Michael W.. 2019. HPLC and UHPLC for Practicing Scientists. Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119313793.
  20. Wu, Naijun, and Anton M. Clausen. 2007. "Fundamental and practical aspects of ultrahigh pressure liquid chromatography for fast separations." Journal of Separation Science 30: 1167-1182. https://doi.org/10.1002/jssc.200700026.
  21. Stoll, Dwight R., and Peter W. Carr. 2017. "Two-Dimensional Liquid Chromatography: A State of the Art Tutorial." Analytical Chemistry 89: 519-531. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.analchem.6b03506.
  22. Dolan, John W.. 2013. "When to Modify Method Conditions." LCGC North America 31: 192-199. https://www.chromatographyonline.com/view/when-modify-method-conditions.
  23. Meyer, Veronika R.. 2010. Practical High-Performance Liquid Chromatography. Wiley.
  24. Van Deemter, J. J., F. J. Zuiderweg, and A. Klinkenberg. 1956. "Longitudinal diffusion and resistance to mass transfer as causes of nonideality in chromatography." https://doi.org/10.1016/0009-2509(56)80003-1.
  25. Giddings, J. Calvin. 1965. "Dynamics of Chromatography, Part I: Principles and Theory." Marcel Dekker.
  26. Poppe, Hans. 1997. "Some reflections on speed and efficiency of modern chromatographic methods." https://doi.org/10.1016/S0021-9673(97)00376-2.
  27. Wu, Naijun, and Anton M. Clausen. 2007. "Fundamental and practical aspects of ultrahigh pressure liquid chromatography for fast separations." https://doi.org/10.1002/jssc.200700026.
  28. Carr, Peter W.. 2009. "The new physical chemistry of HPLC." https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chroma.2008.11.094.
  29. Knox, John H.. 1977. "Practical aspects of LC theory." https://doi.org/10.1093/chromsci/15.9.352.
  30. Snyder, L. R., J. J. Kirkland, and J. L. Glajch. 1997. "Practical HPLC Method Development." Wiley.
  31. Engelhardt, Heinz. 2014. "100 Years of Chromatography." Wiley-VCH.
  32. Sadek, Paul C.. 2002. "The HPLC Solvent Guide." Wiley-Interscience.
  33. Snyder, L. R.. 1978. "Classification of the solvent properties of common liquids." https://doi.org/10.1093/chromsci/16.6.223.
  34. Reichardt, Christian, and Thomas Welton. 2010. "Solvents and Solvent Effects in Organic Chemistry." Wiley-VCH.
  35. Vailaya, Anant, and Csaba Horváth. 1998. "Retention thermodynamics in hydrophobic interaction chromatography." https://doi.org/10.1021/ie980212h.
  36. Krstulović, Andrea M., and Phyllis R. Brown. 1981. "Reversed-phase High-Performance Liquid Chromatography." Wiley.
  37. Boysen, Reinhard I., and Milton T. W. Hearn. 2009. "Multi-modal HPLC of proteins." https://doi.org/10.1093/chromsci/47.8.645.
  38. USP General Chapter <621>. 2024. "Chromatography." United States Pharmacopeial Convention. https://www.usp.org/harmonization-standards/pdg/general-chapters/chromatography.
  39. International Council for Harmonisation (ICH). 2023. "Validation of Analytical Procedures Q2(R2)." ICH Expert Working Group. https://database.ich.org/sites/default/files/ICH_Q2-R2_Document_Step4_Guideline_2023_1101.pdf.
  40. Foley, Joe P., and John G. Dorsey. 1983. "Equations for calculation of chromatographic figures of merit for ideal and skewed peaks." https://doi.org/10.1021/ac00255a033.
  41. Snyder, Lloyd R., Joseph J. Kirkland, and John W. Dolan. 2010. "Introduction to Modern Liquid Chromatography." Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470508183.
  42. Dolan, John W.. 2003. "Peak tailing and resolution." https://www.chromatographyonline.com/view/peak-tailing-and-resolution.
  43. Vivó-Truyols, Gabriel, and Hans-Gerd Janssen. 2010. "Probabilistic approach to peak deconvolution in chromatography." https://doi.org/10.1021/ac101742z.
  44. Kromidas, Stavros. 2017. "HPLC Made to Measure: A Practical Handbook for Optimization." Wiley-VCH.
  45. Heyden, Yvan Vander, et al.. 2009. "Robustness of pharmaceutical liquid chromatographic methods." https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jchromb.2008.10.052.
  46. United States Pharmacopeial Convention. 2024. "USP <621> Chromatography." In United States Pharmacopeia and National Formulary, USP 47-NF 42. Rockville, MD: USP. https://www.uspnf.com/.
  47. European Pharmacopoeia Commission. 2024. "2.2.46 Chromatographic Separation Techniques." In European Pharmacopoeia, 11th ed. Strasbourg: Council of Europe — EDQM. https://www.edqm.eu/en/european-pharmacopoeia-ph-eur-11th-edition.
  48. International Council for Harmonisation (ICH). 2022. "ICH Q2(R2): Validation of Analytical Procedures." International Council for Harmonisation. https://database.ich.org/sites/default/files/ICH_Q2%28R2%29_Guideline_2022_1130.pdf.
  49. International Council for Harmonisation (ICH). 1996. "ICH Q3A: Impurities in New Drug Substances." International Council for Harmonisation. https://database.ich.org/sites/default/files/Q3A%28R2%29%20Guideline.pdf.
  50. International Organization for Standardization. 2017. "ISO/IEC 17025:2017 General Requirements for the Competence of Testing and Calibration Laboratories." Geneva: ISO. https://www.iso.org/standard/66912.html.
  51. Kolthoff, Izaak Maurits, and Philip J. Elving, eds. 1978. Treatise on Analytical Chemistry, Part I: Theory and Practice. 2nd ed. New York: Wiley-Interscience.
  52. Skoog, Douglas A., F. James Holler, and Stanley R. Crouch. 2018. Principles of Instrumental Analysis. 7th ed. Boston: Cengage Learning.
  53. Christian, Gary D., Purnendu K. Dasgupta, and Kevin A. Schug. 2014. Analytical Chemistry. 7th ed. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
  54. EURACHEM/CITAC. 2012. "Quantifying Uncertainty in Analytical Measurement." 3rd ed. EURACHEM/CITAC Guide CG 4. https://www.eurachem.org/images/stories/Guides/pdf/QUAM2012_P1.pdf.
  55. Snyder, Lloyd R., Joseph J. Kirkland, and John W. Dolan. 2010. "Introduction to Modern Liquid Chromatography." John Wiley & Sons. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470508183.
  56. Dolan, John W.. 2003. "How much resolution is enough?." https://www.chromatographyonline.com/view/how-much-resolution-enough.
  57. USP General Chapter <621>. 2024. "Chromatography (System Suitability section)." United States Pharmacopeial Convention. https://www.usp.org/harmonization-standards/pdg/general-chapters/chromatography.
  58. US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). 2018. "Reviewer Guidance: Validation of Chromatographic Methods." US Food and Drug Administration. https://www.fda.gov/media/74954/download.
  59. Rozet, Eric, et al.. 2013. "Analysis of recent pharmaceutical regulatory documents on analytical method validation." https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chroma.2007.03.111.
  60. European Medicines Agency (EMA). 2011. "Guideline on bioanalytical method validation EMEA/CHMP/EWP/192217/2009." EMA. https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/documents/scientific-guideline/guideline-bioanalytical-method-validation_en.pdf.
  61. Kazakevich, Yuri V., and Rosario LoBrutto, eds.. 2007. "HPLC for Pharmaceutical Scientists." Wiley-Interscience. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470087954.
  62. AOAC International. 2016. "Appendix F: Guidelines for Standard Method Performance Requirements." AOAC INTERNATIONAL. https://www.aoac.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/app_f.pdf.
  63. International Organization for Standardization. 1994. "ISO 5725-2:1994 Accuracy (Trueness and Precision) of Measurement Methods and Results — Part 2: Basic Method for the Determination of Repeatability and Reproducibility of a Standard Measurement Method." Geneva: ISO. https://www.iso.org/standard/11834.html.
  64. Heckert, N. A., and J. J. Filliben. 2003. "NIST/SEMATECH e-Handbook of Statistical Methods." NIST Handbook 151. Gaithersburg, MD: National Institute of Standards and Technology. https://www.itl.nist.gov/div898/handbook/.
  65. Grubbs, Frank E. 1950. "Sample Criteria for Testing Outlying Observations." Annals of Mathematical Statistics 21 (1): 27–58.
  66. Dixon, Wilfrid J. 1950. "Analysis of Extreme Values." Annals of Mathematical Statistics 21 (4): 488–506.
  67. Snedecor, George W., and William G. Cochran. 1989. Statistical Methods. 8th ed. Ames, IA: Iowa State University Press.
  68. Student [William Sealy Gosset]. 1908. "The Probable Error of a Mean." Biometrika 6 (1): 1–25.
  69. International Organization for Standardization. 2005. "ISO 3534-1:2006 Statistics — Vocabulary and Symbols — Part 1: General Statistical Terms and Terms Used in Probability." Geneva: ISO. https://www.iso.org/standard/40145.html.
  70. Thompson, Michael, Stephen L. R. Ellison, and Roger Wood. 2002. "Harmonized Guidelines for Single-Laboratory Validation of Methods of Analysis." Pure and Applied Chemistry 74 (5): 835–855.
  71. United Nations Economic Commission for Europe. 2024. European Agreement Concerning the International Carriage of Dangerous Goods by Road (ADR), Applicable as from 1 January 2025 (ECE/TRANS/352). Geneva: UNECE. https://unece.org/transport/dangerous-goods/adr-2025-edition.
  72. International Air Transport Association. 2026. Dangerous Goods Regulations (DGR). 67th ed. Montreal: IATA. https://www.iata.org/en/programs/cargo/dgr/.
  73. International Maritime Organization. 2024. International Maritime Dangerous Goods (IMDG) Code, 2024 Edition (Amendment 42-24). London: IMO. https://www.imo.org/en/OurWork/Safety/Pages/DangerousGoods-default.aspx.
  74. United Nations. 2025. Recommendations on the Transport of Dangerous Goods: Model Regulations (Orange Book). 24th revised ed. ST/SG/AC.10/1/Rev.24. New York and Geneva: United Nations. https://unece.org/transport/dangerous-goods/un-model-regulations.
  75. International Civil Aviation Organization. 2025. Technical Instructions for the Safe Transport of Dangerous Goods by Air (Doc 9284). 2025–2026 ed. Montreal: ICAO. https://www.icao.int/safety/DangerousGoods/Pages/technical-instructions.aspx.
  76. International Conference on Harmonisation (ICH). 2005. "Validation of Analytical Procedures: Text and Methodology Q2(R1)." ICH Expert Working Group. https://database.ich.org/sites/default/files/Q2%28R1%29%20Guideline.pdf.
  77. United States Pharmacopeia (USP) Convention. 2024. "USP General Chapter <621> Chromatography." USP. https://www.usp.org/sites/default/files/usp/document/harmonization/gen-chapter/g05_pf_30_4_2004.pdf.
  78. European Medicines Agency (EMA). 2011. "Guideline on bioanalytical method validation EMEA/CHMP/EWP/192217/2009." EMA Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use. https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/documents/scientific-guideline/guideline-bioanalytical-method-validation_en.pdf.
  79. European Commission. 2014. "Commission Decision 2014/955/EU on the list of waste pursuant to Directive 2008/98/EC." Official Journal of the European Union. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:32014D0955.
  80. Ministerstwo Klimatu i Środowiska Rzeczypospolitej Polskiej. 2020. "Rozporządzenie Ministra Klimatu z dnia 2 stycznia 2020 r. w sprawie katalogu odpadów." Dziennik Ustaw RP 2020 poz. 10. https://isap.sejm.gov.pl/isap.nsf/DocDetails.xsp?id=WDU20200000010.
  81. Główny Inspektorat Ochrony Środowiska (GIOŚ). 2024. "Baza Danych O Odpadach (BDO) — System rejestracji firm utylizacyjnych." Ministerstwo Klimatu i Środowiska. https://bdo.mos.gov.pl/.
  82. Polska — Sejm RP. 2012. "Ustawa z dnia 14 grudnia 2012 r. o odpadach." Dz.U. 2013 poz. 21 (z późn. zm.). https://isap.sejm.gov.pl/isap.nsf/DocDetails.xsp?id=WDU20130000021.
  83. Furr, A. Keith, ed.. 2000. "CRC Handbook of Laboratory Safety." CRC Press.
  84. Pohanish, Richard P.. 2017. "Sittig's Handbook of Toxic and Hazardous Chemicals and Carcinogens." Elsevier.
  85. Lewis, Richard J.. 2012. "Sax's Dangerous Properties of Industrial Materials." Wiley.
  86. NIOSH. 2024. "Pocket Guide to Chemical Hazards." U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/npg/.
  87. OSHA. 2024. "Occupational Chemical Database — Hazardous Waste Operations (HAZWOPER)." Occupational Safety and Health Administration. https://www.osha.gov/chemicaldata.
  88. European Parliament and Council. 2008. "Directive 2008/98/EC on waste (Waste Framework Directive)." Official Journal of the European Union L 312/3. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:32008L0098.
  89. European Parliament and Council. 2009. "Regulation (EC) No 1272/2008 (CLP) on classification, labelling and packaging of substances and mixtures." Official Journal of the European Union L 353. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:32008R1272.
  90. United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE). 2023. "European Agreement concerning the International Carriage of Dangerous Goods by Road (ADR 2025)." UNECE. https://unece.org/transport/standards/transport/dangerous-goods/adr-2025.
  91. IPCS INCHEM. 2024. "International Programme on Chemical Safety — Waste Management Guidelines." WHO/UNEP/ILO. https://www.inchem.org/.
  92. European Parliament and Council. 2006. "Regulation (EC) No 1013/2006 on Shipments of Waste." Official Journal of the European Union L 190: 1–98. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:32006R1013.
  93. International Council for Harmonisation (ICH). 2000. "Q7 Good Manufacturing Practice Guide for Active Pharmaceutical Ingredients." ICH Expert Working Group. https://database.ich.org/sites/default/files/Q7%20Guideline.pdf.
  94. International Organization for Standardization. 2017. "ISO/IEC 17025:2017 General requirements for the competence of testing and calibration laboratories." ISO. https://www.iso.org/standard/66912.html.
  95. World Health Organization. 2010. "WHO Good Manufacturing Practices for Pharmaceutical Products: Main Principles (WHO Technical Report Series No. 957, Annex 3)." WHO Press. https://www.who.int/publications/m/item/trs957-annex3.
  96. International Council for Harmonisation (ICH). 2003. "ICH Q1A(R2): Stability Testing of New Drug Substances and Products." International Council for Harmonisation. https://database.ich.org/sites/default/files/Q1A%28R2%29%20Guideline.pdf.
  97. International Council for Harmonisation (ICH). 2006. "ICH Q3A(R2): Impurities in New Drug Substances." ICH. https://database.ich.org/sites/default/files/Q3A%28R2%29%20Guideline.pdf.
  98. International Council for Harmonisation (ICH). 1999. "ICH Q6A: Specifications for New Drug Substances and Products." ICH. https://database.ich.org/sites/default/files/Q6A%20Guideline.pdf.
  99. International Council for Harmonisation (ICH). 2008. "ICH Q10: Pharmaceutical Quality System." ICH. https://database.ich.org/sites/default/files/Q10%20Guideline.pdf.
  100. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. 2024. "21 CFR Part 211: Current Good Manufacturing Practice for Finished Pharmaceuticals." US Code of Federal Regulations. https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-21/chapter-I/subchapter-C/part-211.
  101. European Medicines Agency. 2014. "Guideline on Process Validation for Finished Products — Information and Data to Be Provided EMA/CHMP/CVMP/QWP/BWP/70278/2012." European Medicines Agency. https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/documents/scientific-guideline/guideline-process-validation-finished-products-information-data-be-provided-regulatory-submissions-revision-1_en.pdf.
  102. United States Pharmacopeial Convention. 2024. "United States Pharmacopeia and National Formulary, USP 47-NF 42." USP. https://www.uspnf.com/.
  103. European Pharmacopoeia Commission. 2024. "European Pharmacopoeia 11th Edition." Council of Europe — EDQM. https://www.edqm.eu/en/european-pharmacopoeia-ph-eur-11th-edition.
  104. Pharmaceutical Inspection Co-operation Scheme (PIC/S). 2021. "Guide to Good Manufacturing Practice for Medicinal Products PE 009-15." PIC/S Secretariat, Geneva. https://picscheme.org/en/publications.
  105. International Pharmaceutical Excipients Council (IPEC) and Pharmaceutical Quality Group (PQG). 2017. "Joint IPEC-PQG Good Manufacturing Practices Guide for Pharmaceutical Excipients." IPEC-Americas. https://ipecamericas.org/sites/default/files/IPECPQGGMPGuide2017.pdf.
📥 BibTeX downloaden📥 RIS downloadenImporteren in Zotero/Mendeley/EndNote/Papers.

Podobne produkty

Inne produkty z tej kategorii