Analytical and Bioanalytical Chemistry

, Volume 406, Issue 3, pp 771–784 | Cite as

Determination of urine caffeine and its metabolites by use of high-performance liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry: estimating dietary caffeine exposure and metabolic phenotyping in population studies

  • Michael E. Rybak
  • Ching-I Pao
  • Christine M. Pfeiffer
Research Paper

Abstract

We have developed and validated a high-performance liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometric (LC-MS/MS) method for determining urine caffeine and 14 caffeine metabolites suitable for estimating caffeine exposure and metabolic phenotyping in population studies. Sample preparation consisted solely of a series of simple reagent treatments at room temperature. Stable isotope-labeled analogs were used as internal standards for all analytes. We developed rapid LC-MS/MS separations for both positive and negative ion mode electrospray ionizations to maximize measurement sensitivity. Limits of detection were 0.05–0.1 μmol/L depending on the analytes. Method imprecision, based on total coefficients of variation, was generally <7 % when analyte concentration was >1 μmol/L. Analyte recoveries were typically within 10 % of being quantitative (100 %), and good agreement was observed among analytes measured across different MS/MS transitions. We applied this method to the analysis of a convenience set of human urine samples (n = 115) and were able to detect a majority of the analytes in ≥99 % of samples as well as calculate caffeine metabolite phenotyping ratios for cytochrome P450 1A2 and N-acetyltransferase 2. Whereas existing LC-MS/MS methods are limited in number of caffeine metabolites for which they are validated, or are designed for studies in which purposely elevated caffeine levels are expected, our method is the first of its kind designed specifically for the rapid, sensitive, accurate, and precise measurement of urine caffeine and caffeine metabolites at concentrations relevant to population studies.

Figure

The determination of caffeine and its metabolites by LC-MS/MS. Both positive and negative ion mode electrospray ionization were used to maximize measurement sensitivity and selectivity, allowing the development of a robust method suitable for estimating caffeine exposure and metabolic phenotyping in population studies

Keywords

Caffeine Urine Biomarkers Dietary intake Phenotyping Mass spectrometry NHANES 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank Teresa D. Douglas of the Nutritional Health Sciences Program, Graduate Division of Biological and Biomedical Sciences, Emory University (Atlanta, GA), for her contributions in standard and sample preparation, and Patrick W. Simon of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Environmental Health, for his contributions in sample preparation and analyses related to this work.

Disclaimer

The findings and conclusions in this report are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official views or positions of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention/Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry or the Department of Health and Human Services.

References

  1. 1.
    Ashihara H, Sano H, Crozier A (2008) Caffeine and related purine alkaloids: biosynthesis, catabolism, function and genetic engineering. Phytochemistry 69:841–856CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Higdon JV, Frei B (2006) Coffee and health: a review of recent human research. Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr 46:101–123CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Tunnicliffe JM, Erdman KA, Reimer RA, Lun V, Shearer J (2008) Consumption of dietary caffeine and coffee in physically active populations: physiological interactions. Appl Physiol Nutr Metab 3:1301–1310CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    What We Eat In America, Data Tables, 2009–2010 (2013) US Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service, Beltsville Human Nutrition Research Center, Food Surveys and Research Group, Beltsville. http://www.ars.usda.gov/SP2UserFiles/Place/12355000/pdf/0910/tables_1-40_2009-2010.pdf. Accessed 13 Sept 2013
  5. 5.
    Glade MJ (2010) Caffeine—not just a stimulant. Nutr 26:932–938CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Cornelis MC, El-Sohemy A, Campos H (2007) Genetic polymorphism of the adenosine A(2A) receptor is associated with habitual caffeine consumption. Am J Clin Nutr 86:240–244Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Ferre S, Ciruela F, Borycz J, Solinas M, Quarta D, Antoniou K, Quiroz C, Justinova Z, Lluis C, Franco R, Goldberg SR (2008) Adenosine A(1)-A(2A) receptor heteromers: new targets for caffeine in the brain. Front Biosci 3:2391–2399CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ferre SJ (2008) An update on the mechanisms of the psychostimulant effects of caffeine. Neurochem 105:1067–1079CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Noordzij M, Uiterwaal CSPM, Arends LR, Kok FJ, Grobbee DE, Geleijnse JM (2005) Blood pressure response to chronic intake of coffee and caffeine: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. J Hypertens 23:921–928CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Winkelmayer WC, Stampfer MJ, Willett WC, Curhan GC (2005) Habitual caffeine intake and the risk of hypertension in women. JAMA-J Am Med Assoc 294:2330–2335CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Grobbee DE, Brimm EB, Giovannucci E, Colditz G, Stampfer M, Willett W (1990) Coffee, caffeine and cardiovascular disease in men. New Engl J Med 323:1026–1032CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kawachi I, Colditz GA, Stone CB (1994) Does coffee drinking increase the risk of coronary heart disease? Results from a meta-analysis. Br Heart J 72:269–275CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Larsson SC, Wolk A (2007) Coffee consumption and risk of liver cancer: a meta-analysis. Gastrenterology 132:2850–1745Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Giovannucci E (1997) Meta-analysis of coffee consumption and risk of colorectal cancer. Am J Epidemiol 147:1043–1052CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Fernandes O, Sabharwal M, Smiley T, Pastuszak A, Koren G, Einarson T (1998) Moderate to heavy caffeine consumption during pregnancy and relationship to spontaneous abortion and abnormal fetal growth: a meta-analysis. Reprod Toxicol 12:435–444CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Stein MA, Krasowski M, Leventhal BL, Phillips W, Bender BG (1996) Behavioral and cognitive effects of methylxanthines: a meta-analysis of theophylline and caffeine. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med 150:284–288CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Bracken MB, Triche E, Grosso L, Hellenbrand K, Belanger K, Leaderer BP (2002) Heterogeneity in assessing self-reports of caffeine exposure: implications for studies of health effects. Epidemiol 13:165–171CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Crews HM, Olivier L, Wilson LA (2001) Urinary biomarkers for assessing dietary exposure to caffeine. Food Addit Contam 18:1075–1087CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Grosso LM, Triche E, Benowitz NL, Bracken MB (2008) Prenatal caffeine assessment: fetal and maternal biomarkers or self-reported intake? Ann Epidemiol 2008:172–178CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Klebanoff MA, Levine RJ, Dersimonian R, Clemens JD, Wilkins DG (1998) Serum caffeine and paraxanthine as markers for reported caffeine intake in pregnancy. Ann Epidemiol 8:107–111CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Arnaud MJ (1987) The pharmacology of caffeine. Prog Drug Res 31:273–313Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Caubet MS, Comte B, Brazier JL (2004) Determination of urinary C-13-caffeine metabolites by liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry: the use of metabolic ratios to assess CYP1A2 activity. J Pharm Biomed Anal 34:379–389CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Kot M, Daniel WA (2008) Caffeine as a marker substrate for testing cytochrome P450 activity in human and rat. Pharmacol Rep 60:789–797Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Hakooz NMK (2009) Caffeine metabolic ratios for the in vivo evaluation of CYP1A2, N-acetyltransferase 2, xanthine oxidase and CYP2A6 enzymatic activities. Curr Drug Metab 10:329–338CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Miners JO, Birkett DJ (1996) The use of caffeine as a metabolic probe for human drug metabolizing enzymes. Gen Pharmacol 27:245–249CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Begas E, Kouvaras E, Tsakalof A, Papakosta S, Asprodini EK (2007) In vivo evaluation of CYP1A2 CYP2A6, NAT-2 and xanthine oxidase activities in a Greek population sample by the RP-HPLC monitoring of caffeine metabolic ratios. Biomed Chromatogr 21:190–200CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Gunes A, Ozbey G, Vural EH, Uluoglu C, Scordo MG, Zengil H, Dahl ML (2009) Influence of genetic polymorphisms, smoking, gender and age on CYP1A2 activity in a Turkish population. Pharmacogenomics 10:769–778CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Muscat JE, Pittman B, Kleinman W, Lazarus P, Stellman SD, Richie JP (2008) Comparison of CYP1A2 and NAT2 phenotypes between black and white smokers. Biochem Pharmacol 76:929–937CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Nyeki A, Biollaz J, Kesselring UW, Decosterd LA (2001) Extractionless method for the simultaneous high-performance liquid chromatographic determination of urinary caffeine metabolites for N-acetyltransferase 2, cytochrome P450 1A2 and xanthine oxidase activity assessment. J Chromatogr, B 755:73–84CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Ghotbi R, Christensen M, Roh HK, Ingelman-Sundberg M, Aklillu E, Bertilsson L (2007) Comparisons of CYP1A2 genetic polymorphisms, enzyme activity and the genotype-phenotype relationship in Swedes and Koreans. Eur J Clin Pharmacol 63:537–546CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Kalow W, Tang BK (1991) Caffeine as a metabolic probe—exploration of the enzyme-inducing effect of cigarette smoking. Clin Pharmacol Ther 49:44–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Campbell ME, Grant DM, Inaba T, Kalow W (1987) Biotransformation of caffeine, paraxanthine, theophylline, and theobromine by polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon-inducible cytochrome(s) P-450 in human-liver microsomes. Drug Metab Dispos 15:237–249Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Fuhr U, Rost KL (1994) Simple and reliable CYP1A2 phenotyping by the paraxanthine/caffeine ratio in plasma and in saliva. Pharmacogenetics 4:109–116CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Nordmark A, Lundgren S, Cnattingius S, Rane A (1999) Dietary caffeine as a probe agent for assessment of cytochrome P4501A2 activity in random urine samples. Br J Clin Pharmacol 7:397–402Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Jetter A, Kinzig-Schippers M, Illauer M, Hermann R, Erb K, Borlak J, Wolf H, Smight G, Cascorbi I, Sorgel F, Fuhr U (2004) Phenotyping of N-acetyltransferase type 2 by caffeine from uncontrolled dietary exposure. Eur J Clin Pharmacol 60:17–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Schneider H, Ma L, Glatt H (2003) Extractionless method for the determination of urinary caffeine metabolites using high-performance liquid chromatography coupled with tandem mass spectrometry. J Chromatogr, B 789:227–237CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Weimann A, Sabroe M, Poulsen HE (2005) Measurement of caffeine and five of the major metabolites in urine by high-performance liquid chromatography/tandem mass spectrometry. J Mass Spectrom 40:307–316CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Zambonin CG, Aresta A, Palmisano F (2004) Determination of methylxanthines in urine by liquid chromatography with diode array UV detection. J Pharm Biomed Anal 36:621–624CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Marchei E, Pellegrini M, Pacifici R, Palmi I, Pichini S (2005) Development and validation of a high-performance liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry assay for methylxanthines and taurine in dietary supplements. J Pharm Biomed Anal 37:499–507CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Vonaparti A, Lyris E, Panderi I, Koupparis M, Georgakopoulos C (2009) Direct injection liquid chromatography/electrospray ionization mass spectrometric horse urine analysis for the quantification and confirmation of threshold substances for doping control. II. Determination of theobromine. Rapid Commun Mass Spectrom 23:1020–1028CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Thevis M, Opfermann G, Krug O, Schänzer W (2004) Electrospray ionization mass spectrometric characterization and quantitation of xanthine derivatives using isotopically labelled analogues: an application for equine doping control analysis. Rapid Commun Mass Spectrom 18:1553–1560CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Baud-Camus F, Marquet P, Soursac M, Davrinche C, Farinotti R (2001) Determination of N-acetylation phenotype using caffeine as a metabolic probe and high-performance liquid chromatography with either ultraviolet detection or electrospray mass spectrometry. J Chromatogr, B 760:55–63CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    NHANES-About the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (2013) US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Health Statistics, Hyattsville. http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nhanes/about_nhanes.htm. Accessed 18 Sept 2013
  44. 44.
    Caudill SP, Schleicher RL, Pirkle JL (2007) Multi-rule quality control for the age-related eye disease study. Stat Med 27:4094–4106CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Taylor JK (1987) Quality assurance of chemical measurements. Lewis, Boca RatonGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Food US, Administration D (2001) Guidance for industry, bioanalytical method validation. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, RockvilleGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Bianco G, Abate S, Labella C, Cataldi TR (2009) Identification and fragmentation pathways of caffeine metabolites in urine samples via liquid chromatography with positive electrospray ionization coupled to a hybrid quadrupole linear ion trap (LTQ) and Fourier transform ion cyclotron resonance mass spectrometry and tandem mass spectrometry. Rapid Commun Mass Spectrom 23:1065–1074CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg (outside the USA) 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Michael E. Rybak
    • 1
  • Ching-I Pao
    • 1
  • Christine M. Pfeiffer
    • 1
  1. 1.U.S. Centers for Disease Control and PreventionNational Center for Environmental HealthAtlantaUSA

Personalised recommendations