Keywords
Herbal medicinal products - EGb 761 - quality - extract characterization -
Ginkgo biloba
- Ginkgoaceae -
Ginkgo biloba leaf extract - proanthocyanidins - PACs - HPLC
Abbreviations
BfArM:
Bundesinstitut für Arzneimittel und Medizinprodukte (Federal Institute for Drugs and
Medical Devices), The Federal Institute for Drugs and Medical Devices is an independent
federal higher authority within the portfolio of the Federal Ministry of Health, Germany.
PACs:
proanthocyanidins
Ph. Eur.:
European Pharmacopeia
Introduction
Ginkgo biloba L. (Ginkgoaceae) leaf dry extracts are active pharmaceutical ingredients in herbal
medicinal products in many regions around the globe. Main indications include the
improvement of (age-associated) cognitive impairment and quality of life in patients
with mild dementia [1], [2], [3], tinnitus [4], and vertigo [5].
The herbal drug “Ginkgo leaf” is described in the monograph of the Ph. Eur. [6] together with the monograph “Ginkgo dry extract, refined and quantified” [7]. The Committee on Herbal Medicinal Products of the European Medicines Agency publishes
monographs as a basis for harmonized safety and efficacy assessment of national regulatory
authorities in Europe. Such a monograph was published on G. biloba L., folium [8], summarizing the current knowledge about the clinical application of herbal medicinal
products containing Ginkgo extracts complying with the Ph. Eur. The concept for classification of extracts in
Europe is laid down in the monograph “Herbal Drug Extracts” of the Ph. Eur. [9]. According to the monograph “Ginkgo dry extract, refined and quantified” [7] of the Ph. Eur., Ginkgo extract is
classified as a so-called quantified extract where some compounds are acknowledged
to contribute to the clinical efficacy of the respective medicinal products and are
thus used as active markers for quality control. The clinical efficacy and safety
of the extract, which is the actual active ingredient, relies on the overall composition
of the extract and consequentially on the particular manufacturing process.
For the quantified Ginkgo extract, the active markers specified in the monographs are the flavonol glycosides
(specified at 22.0 to 27.0%) and terpene trilactones (specified at 2.6 to 3.2% for
bilobalide and 2.8 to 3.4% for ginkgolides A, B, and C). However, both groups of compounds
add up to only approximately 30% of the extract mass balance, whereas the remaining
70% of the compounds are either unspecified or even unknown. According to the concept
of the monograph “Herbal Drug Extracts” of the Ph. Eur. in case of quantified extracts,
it is implied that additional compounds are relevant for clinical efficacy.
Recently, we published a new method with the objective to enable quantification of
an additional group of compounds called proanthocyanidins (PACs), with a remarkable
phytochemical complexity in Ginkgo extract [10]. PACs belong to the flavonoid family and are composed of polymerized flavan-3-ol
units. These units, also known as catechins, are linked either by carbon-carbon bonds
in B-type PACs or with an additional ether bond in A-type PACs. The degree of polymerization
of proanthocyanidins can vary, resulting in different molecular weights and chain
lengths. The predominant PACs found in G. biloba include B-type proanthocyanidins, which are primarily composed of (epi-)gallocatechin
and (epi-)catechin units linked through carbon-carbon bonds at positions 4β → 6 and 4β → 8 [10], [11] (see [Fig. 1]).
Fig. 1 Chemical basic structures of catechin monomers and proanthocyanidins.
Phytochemical properties of PACs were reported in detail [10] for the proprietary Ginkgo leaf extract EGb 761 [12], which is one of the herbal active ingredients most intensely investigated in clinical
studies and can thus be regarded as a benchmark for evidence-based herbal medicinal
products. A consistent quantity of approximately 7% PACs was found in Ginkgo extract EGb 761 [10]. This portion can be considered as relevant in the mass balance of the extract since
it is in the same percentage range compared to, e.g., the specified terpene trilactones.
Preclinical studies conducted on PACs from G. biloba
[13], [14], [15], [16] reported pharmacological activities such as neuroprotection or antiamnesic activity,
with potential relevance for the treatment of
neurological disorders, suggesting that PACs might contribute to the overall efficacy
profile.
In contrast to the well-controlled quantified markers flavonol glycosides and terpene
trilactones, which are part of Ginkgo leaf extract specifications in herbal medicinal products, there is scarce knowledge
concerning the contents of PACs in different G. biloba leaf extracts and no systematic comparisons have been reported so far. Given the
potential contribution of PACs to the pharmacological activity of Ginkgo extracts, we were interested in assessing the levels of PACs in different herbal
medicinal products containing G. biloba leaf extracts in the market. For this reason, a HPLC method for PACs in G. biloba leaf extract was applied after suitable sample preparation to several herbal medicinal
products containing G. biloba leaf extracts. Choosing Germany as a benchmark market was due to the high level of
regulation for Ginkgo extracts and a number of Ginkgo herbal medicinal products available from a range of marketing
authorization holders. All 14 chosen Ginkgo products were purchased in Germany. All these products received marketing authorization
as herbal medicinal products by the German authority BfArM [17]. The Ginkgo extracts contained in these products must comply with the monograph “Ginkgo dry extract, refined and quantified” [7], with mandatory specifications on flavonol glycosides and terpene trilactones. Hence,
these parameters were not considered in our assessment, and the focus was solely on
the PACs.
Our interest was to get an idea to what extent a so far little noticed group of compounds
like PACs are present in the products, and to assess batch-to-batch consistency. Therefore,
for each product, three batches were analyzed for PACs, covering a period of several
years during which these herbal medicinal products were marketed.
Finally, we transferred the analytical method to a third-party laboratory to show
suitability of the method for industrial analytical purposes.
Results and Discussion
The results obtained by HPLC for PAC contents in the 14 herbal medicinal products
are summarized in [Table 1]. Results obtained by us, and results obtained by the third-party laboratory are
indicated.
Table 1 Results for PACs expressed as % values calculated in respect to the declared amount
of Ginkgo extract in a single dose of each product; 14 herbal medicinal products with Ginkgo extract and 3 individual batches each. Laboratory 1 is Dr. Willmar Schwabe GmbH &
Co. KG and laboratory 2 is the Central Laboratory of German Pharmacists e. V. (Zentrallaboratorium
Deutscher Apotheker e. V.).
No
|
Product
|
Company*
|
Batch
|
Lab. 1
|
Lab. 2
|
PACs [%] single
|
PACs [%] mean
|
* The term company refers to the entity responsible for placing the respective product
on the market according to the valid marketing authorization
|
1
|
Gingonin
|
TAD Pharma GmbH, Cuxhaven
|
SC5122
|
x
|
|
0.86
|
0.66
|
SD5445
|
x
|
|
0.80
|
SH9656
|
|
x
|
0.31
|
2
|
Ginkgo-Maren
|
HERMES Arzneimittel GmbH, Großhessenlohe
|
92 102C
|
x
|
|
0.34
|
0.42
|
00 901A
|
x
|
|
0.60
|
10 702A
|
|
x
|
0.32
|
3
|
Ginkgovital Heumann
|
Heumann Pharma GmbH & Co. KG, Nürnberg
|
1 183 020 700
|
x
|
|
0.83
|
0.58
|
1 362 720 500
|
|
x
|
0.27
|
1 425 210 500
|
x
|
|
0.65
|
4
|
Kaveri
|
KSK-Pharma Vertriebs AG, Berghausen
|
173 084
|
x
|
|
0.63
|
0.49
|
181 120
|
x
|
|
0.44
|
192 057
|
x
|
|
0.40
|
5
|
Gingobeta
|
betapharm Arzneimittel GmbH, Augsburg
|
1 324 390 100
|
x
|
|
1.00
|
0.69
|
1 324 390 300
|
|
x
|
0.37
|
1 394 210 200
|
x
|
|
0.70
|
6
|
Doppelherz Ginkgo
|
Queisser Pharma GmbH & Co. KG, Flensburg
|
3 001 079
|
x
|
|
0.59
|
0.60
|
50 129
|
|
x
|
0.55
|
010 031
|
x
|
|
0.65
|
7
|
Binko
|
Klinge Pharma GmbH, Bad Ems
|
1 290 980 700
|
|
x
|
0.43
|
0.47
|
1 290 980 600
|
x
|
|
0.48
|
1 290 980 500
|
x
|
|
0.50
|
8
|
Ginkgo AL
|
Aliud Pharma GmbH, Laichingen
|
91 232
|
x
|
|
0.62
|
0.61
|
93 440
|
|
x
|
0.40
|
145 223E
|
x
|
|
0.81
|
9
|
Ginkgo-ADGC
|
KSK-Pharma Vertriebs AG, Berghausen
|
181 122
|
x
|
|
0.32
|
0.30
|
192 081
|
x
|
|
0.36
|
132 105
|
|
x
|
0.21
|
10
|
Ginkgo AbZ
|
AbZ Pharma GmbH, Ulm
|
138 415A
|
|
x
|
0.31
|
0.66
|
143 481B
|
x
|
|
0.55
|
144 046A
|
x
|
|
1.13
|
11
|
Ginkgo 1 A Pharma
|
1 A Pharma GmbH, Holzkirchen
|
KF8018
|
|
x
|
0.38
|
0.70
|
LP5482-AA
|
x
|
|
0.98
|
LW8733
|
x
|
|
0.74
|
12
|
Ginkobil
|
Ratiopharm GmbH, Ulm
|
2 440 220
|
x
|
|
4.80
|
4.50
|
2 740 622
|
|
x
|
4.21
|
2 750 622
|
|
x
|
4.48
|
13
|
Gingium
|
Hexal AG, Holzkirchen
|
LP6994
|
|
x
|
0.95
|
1.29
|
LP7481
|
|
x
|
1.09
|
LV9288
|
x
|
|
1.84
|
14
|
Tebonin
|
Dr. Willmar Schwabe GmbH & Co. KG, Karlsruhe
|
0 300 421
|
|
x
|
6.17
|
5.86
|
0 480 122
|
|
x
|
5.77
|
0 490 322
|
|
x
|
5.64
|
Twelve of the fourteen products consistently showed very low PAC contents of approximately
1%, calculated on the basis of the labelled extract quantity, whereas the product
with EGb 761 contributed approximately 6% PACs. One product was found to have PAC
contents at a level in-between.
Three batches of a product were analyzed, and the mean value is reported. Except for
product number 4, which is no longer available on the German market, at least one
batch of each product was tested in the third-party laboratory as indicated in the
table. For product number 14, only results of this laboratory are reported.
The results from [Table 1] are visualized in [Fig. 2], indicating the origin of each individual data point.
Fig. 2 Results for products numbers 1 to 14 as summarized in [Table 1]. Mean values are indicated by the bars, while the corresponding individual results
of single batches are indicated by dots (laboratory 1) or squares (laboratory 2),
respectively. Laboratory 1 is Dr. Willmar Schwabe GmbH & Co. KG and laboratory 2 is
the Central Laboratory of German Pharmacists e. V. (Zentrallaboratorium Deutscher
Apotheker e. V.).
Differences are also obvious in exemplary chromatograms of the 14 products as shown
in [Fig. 3]. In all samples, peaks for delphinidin and cyanidin are detectable. Intensities
of the peaks correlate to the calculated quantities of PACs. Only product number 14
shows relevant areas, as indicated by the dark-labelled peaks on the top of the figure.
Fig. 3 Overlay of exemplary chromatograms received by reversed-phase C18 HPLC at 530 nm
for the 14 herbal medicinal products. After acidic hydrolysis of the PACs in the samples,
the anthocyanidins delphinidin and cyanidin were detectable and could be used for
quantification. The assignment of products numbers 1 to 14 corresponds to [Table 1].
The majority of randomized placebo-controlled clinical trials on G. biloba leaf extracts have been conducted with EGb 761 [18], [19]. The results of these studies have considerably contributed to the HMPC assessment
report and monograph, which is a reference for marketing authorizations in the European
Union and other countries. The HMPC monograph includes the same quality parameters
as the monograph in the Ph. Eur., in which, however, only approximately one-third
of the Ginkgo extract composition is described and specified. Accordingly, the vast majority of
the extract components are defined neither in quality nor in quantity. However, it
is to be expected that constituents other than the flavonol glycosides and terpene
trilactones may also be of importance for the efficacy and safety of G. biloba leaf extracts.
The manufacturing process of the Ginkgo extract EGb 761 has been published in detail [20]. In the course of the last few years, more and more companies have applied for a
certificate of suitability (CEP) for their G. biloba leaf extracts to confirm compliance with the monographs of the Ph. Eur. and many
certificates have been granted [21]. The parameters relating to the requirements of the Ph. Eur. can be considered compliant
in this case. However, the knowledge about other quality aspects is unknown to the
public. Therefore, we started a product screening for the quantification of PACs.
This was the first time the previously published HPLC method for Ginkgo PACs was used to analyze herbal medicinal products containing Ginkgo leaf extract at the finished product level.
The results for PACs reported in this study show very low amounts in some products
and quantitatively relevant amounts on the other side of the spectrum ([Table 1]). In the case of the products with low amounts of PACs, it can be assumed that additional
compounds are present to account for the unknown portion in the extract composition.
Most of the products show PAC contents below 1%, whereas product number 14 has a content
of approximately 6% and product number 12 is between 1 and 6%. The individual results
are consistent for each product. The results obtained by laboratory 1 and laboratory
2 are comparable, which confirms suitability of this methodology and transferability
between different laboratories.
The reasons for these differences in the composition of the extracts may be due to
differences concerning the drug material used or due to details of the extraction
process of the different manufacturers, which are, however, not disclosed to the public
in all cases.
The slightly lower content of 6% of product number 14 in comparison to the quantity
published before for the corresponding Ginkgo extract EGb 761 [10] is believed to be correlated to the complex sample preparation caused by matrix
effects in the herbal medicinal product consisting of a variety of pharmaceutical
excipients.
Our analytical comparison demonstrates that in some of the herbal medicinal products
containing G. biloba leaf extracts, the contents of PACs is quite significant, up to 6%, and thus in the
same quantitative range as the Ph. Eur. specified amount of Ginkgo terpene trilactones (5.4 to 6.6%). At the same time, PACs have been reported to exert
various pharmacological effects, such as antioxidant or anti-inflammatory activities.
Although it has not yet been established whether and to what extent PACs contribute
to the overall pharmacological or clinical efficacy of Ginkgo extracts, a potential impact of different contents in PACs cannot be ruled out [22].
Our findings lead us to the conclusion that the phytochemical composition of Ginkgo herbal medicinal products available on the German market differs substantially. Such
differences should also be considered when the clinical evidence generated with one
product is transferred to products with an obviously different phytochemical composition,
which can be distinguished by a closer look at their phytochemistry. Therefore, we
suggest to further characterize the composition of G. biloba leaf dry extracts in general in order to support a serious discussion on whether
extracts or their effects can be compared or not. It is in the realm of possibility
that many extracts considered “bioequivalent” based on todayʼs requirements of the
Ph. Eur. are actually quite different in their composition, and thus may differ in
their clinical efficacy and safety.
Materials and Methods
Test samples
Fourteen products containing Ginkgo extracts available in German pharmacies were selected. Thirteen were film-coated
tablets that contained either 120 or 240 mg Ginkgo extract as single-dose active pharmaceutical ingredient as indicated on the label
and in the package leaflet. One product was a hard gelatin capsule with 120 mg Ginkgo extract. All of them were authorized as herbal medicinal products in Germany by the
Federal Institute for Drug and Medical Devices. From each product, three individual
batches were purchased in German pharmacies. Among the products, only product number
14 (Tebonin) contained Ginkgo extract EGb 761 [12], the material used in the recently reported development of a new HPLC method for
quantification of PACs in Ginkgo extract [10]. Voucher specimens of all products are deposited in the archive of Dr. Willmar Schwabe
GmbH & Co. KG.
Solvents, reagents, and chemicals
Methanol (p. a.), o-phosphoric acid, and hydrochloric acid were purchased from Merck.
Deionized water was obtained by a water purification system (Evoqua, Water Technologies).
For the preparation of the hydrolysis solution, 1 part methanol and 1 part 1.5 M hydrochloric
acid were mixed (v/v). The hydrolysis solution must be prepared fresh for each analysis.
Reference standard
Two sources for the reference standard were used: procyanidin B2 with a purity ≥ 98%
was purchased from Cayman Chemical Company. Additionally, procyanidin B2 was purchased
with a purity of 93% from Phytolab. The reference standard procyanidin B2 was hydrolyzed
in the reference solution to form the reference peak cyanidin in situ (see below).
Preparation of standard solutions
The reference standard (procyanidin B2) was weighed exactly into appropriate volumetric
flasks and dissolved in the hydrolysis solution to obtain a standard solution with
100 µg procyanidin B2/mL. For an example chromatogram, see Fig. 1S, Supporting Information. This standard solution was diluted with the hydrolysis solution
to prepare an additional standard solution with 10 µg procyanidin B2/mL. For an example
chromatogram, see Fig. 2S, Supporting Information. The standard solutions were hydrolyzed in parallel and in
the same way as described for the sample solutions (see below). The standard solutions
appeared clear after hydrolysis and were used directly for HPLC analysis without prior
filtration.
Preparation of sample solutions
All products that presented as film-coated tablets were milled without removing the
film coating at room temperature in a mixer mill (Retsch MM 400, 30 Hz, 1 min) resulting
in a fine powder. For one product that presented as a hard gelatin capsule, the capsule
was opened manually, and the filling powder was used directly. The weighed-in quantity
for the obtained powder was calculated with reference to the labelled quantity of
Ginkgo extract in the individual product. In all cases, quantities of the powder corresponding
to 100 mg Ginkgo extract were weighed exactly into 25 mL volumetric flasks, filled up to volume with
hydrolysis solution, and dissolved in an ultrasonic bath (SONOREX Super RK510, 160/320 W,
35 kHz, Company Bandelin) for 10 min at room temperature. The solution was stirred
for additional 20 min followed by centrifugation (2900 g, 10 min). The obtained test solutions were hydrolyzed in a boiling water bath in
tightly closed 10 mL hydrolysis
tubes with screw caps remaining above the surface. The time of 45 min was determined
to be the optimal duration to yield a complete hydrolysis. After hydrolysis, the closed
tubes were cooled in an ice bath and stored at ambient conditions until they reached
room temperature (23 °C). The sample solutions obtained were completely clear, and
no additional filtration or centrifugation was applied. The sample solutions were
transferred to HPLC vials and used directly for HPLC analysis. For chromatograms of
product numbers 8 and 14, see Figs. 3S and 4S, Supporting Information.
High-performance liquid chromatograpy analysis
The HPLC analysis was performed as previously described [10] on a Thermo UltiMate 3000 system with autosampler WPS-3000 TRS, pump LPG-3400 RS,
detector MWD-3000 RS, and column oven TCC-3000 SD (Thermo) using a Kromasil C18 (5 µm,
4 × 125 mm) column (MZ-Analysentechnik) without a pre-column. The mobile phase consisted
of water adjusted to pH 2.0 with o-phosphoric acid 85% solution (phase A) and methanol
(phase B). The following gradient was applied at a flow rate of 1.0 mL/min: isocratic
from 0.00 – 1.00 min at 60% eluent A, from 1.00 – 8.00 min linear from 60% eluent
A to 54.5% eluent A following 8.00 – 9.00 min linear 0% eluent A, 4 min column wash
with 0% eluent A, from 13.00 – 13.50 min to 60% eluent A and 6.5 min equilibration
period with 60% eluent A, resulting in a total run time of 20.00 min. A visual light
detection wavelength of 530 nm, a column temperature of 25 °C, and an injection volume
of 10 µL were applied.
The retention time for delphinidin was approximately 2.9 min, for cyanidin 4.6 min,
and for pelargonidin 6.3 min. Quantitation was done for the peaks of delphinidin and
cyanidin individually using the standard solutions of hydrolyzed procyanidin B2 and
both results were added for further calculation. Delphinidin was calculated as cyanidin.
Smaller peaks like pelargonidin were not considered in the sample solutions for quantitation
due to being off the dynamic detection range.
Since the PAC fraction purified from Ginkgo extract EGb 761 was set to be 100% by convention as described in a previous publication
[10], a conversion factor was needed to determine the contents of PACs using procyanidin
B2. The applied HPLC assay correlates to a response factor of 2.12 for the water-free
fraction of PACs. Results obtained as procyanidin B2 in the products were multiplied
by 2.12 and these results are shown in [Table 1] for direct comparison.
Data analysis
Data processing and analysis was carried out using Chromeleon 7.2 SR5 software (Thermo).
[Fig. 2] and Fig. S5, Supporting Information, was produced with GraphPad Prism, version 9.3.4, for Windows
(GraphPad Software).
External results (laboratory 2)
As already described in the Introduction, besides analysis in the laboratory of the
authors, results from an external laboratory were also included in the study. Only
in the case of product number 4 was this not possible, as this product was no longer
available on the German market at the time the external analysis took place. For product
number 14, only external results are reported. For analysis by a third-party laboratory,
the method described above was transferred to the Central Laboratory of German Pharmacists
e. V. (Zentrallaboratorium Deutscher Apotheker e. V., https://zentrallabor.com/). Comparability of the results of both laboratories was evaluated and the results
were considered to be equivalent. The method was applied to challenge the validity
of the method and exclude any result bias by independent external reproducibility.
These external results are labelled in the table of the individual results ([Table 1]). Variability of results are the consequence of the variability of the batches tested.
Validation data
The method was comprehensively validated addressing the parameters precision, intermediate
precision, linearity, accuracy, selectivity, and robustness. As we found significantly
different contents of PACs, validation of precision and intermediate precision was
done on the 1 and 6% levels, and we selected a representative product for the lower
level (number 4) and for the higher level (number 14). The test for precision with
n = 6 individual sample preparations showed a relative standard deviation of 8.48%
for the lower level and 7.14% for the higher level. The test was repeated after 1
week for evaluation of intermediate precision with new sample preparation and new
calibration and showed a relative standard deviation of 7.91% for the lower level
and 6.30% for the higher level. Linearity of the method was already tested in a previous
publication [10] by linear regression, with 12 concentrations between 0.602 µg procyanidin B2/mL
to 120.400 µg
procyanidin B2/mL. The correlation coefficient was 0.999 946 with a y-intercept of
− 0.0181 area and a slope of 0.0353 area/µg/mL. As a real recovery rate of PACs for
the evaluation of accuracy in the products cannot be tested directly due to the indirect
principle of the method using the reference standard procyanidin B2, and because the
scope of the study was a comparison of products, we also applied an indirect approach
similar to the previous validation for the extract level [10]. As the reference substance cyanidin is formed in situ by the acidic hydrolysis of procyanidin B2, accuracy was addressed by the addition
of several selected levels of procyanidin B2 to an accurately weighed quantity of
the milled herbal medicinal products, which was done for all 14 herbal medicinal products
individually. This was necessary, as except for product number 14, no samples of authentic
excipient mixtures were available as well as no samples of the
individual pure Ginkgo extracts without excipients. The quantity of the milled herbal medicinal products
was half, as described in the test procedures, and was supplemented by the addition
of procyanidin B2 at five concentration levels each. For the evaluation of accuracy,
we focused on a graphical interpretation with a view on the linear relationship of
the received peak areas and the x- and y-intercepts, respectively. Fig. 5S (Supporting Information) shows that the method is applicable for all 14 products,
independent of the individual composition of pharmaceutical excipients, which offers
direct comparability of the obtained results. Selectivity was shown with a view on
the peak identification of delphinidin and cyanidin and their good chromatographic
separation, as already described in a previous publication [10]. Robustness of the method was tested by variation of the method parameters described
in the test procedures, such as
column temperature and pH value of mobile phase A within relevant ranges, and was
considered to be suitable. Also, the time required for an analysis series was suitable
to guarantee stability of reference and sample solutions.
Supporting information
Chromatograms of standard solutions at different concentrations and different samples
as well as a graphical figure of the standard addition results are available as Supporting
Information.
Contributorsʼ Statement
Sample preparation and analysis: T. Ritter; Design of the study: M. Wurglics, S. Germer;
Interpretation of the data: M. Wurglics, S. Germer; Drafting the manuscript: S. Germer