Advertisement

Analytical and Bioanalytical Chemistry

, Volume 411, Issue 2, pp 339–351 | Cite as

Comprehensive MS-based screening and identification of pharmaceutical transformation products formed during enzymatic conversion

  • Lara F. Stadlmair
  • Sylvia Grosse
  • Thomas LetzelEmail author
  • Jörg E. Drewes
  • Johanna Grassmann
Research Paper

Abstract

In this study, transformation products (TPs) of diclofenac, mefenamic acid, and sotalol derived from peroxidase- and laccase-catalyzed transformations were studied with different mass spectrometry (MS)-based workflows. A straightforward pre-screening of enzymatic degradation rate was performed using a robotic nano-ESI source coupled to single quadrupole MS. Accurate mass data and information on molecular hydrophobicity were obtained from a serial coupling of reversed phase liquid chromatography (RPLC) with hydrophilic interaction liquid chromatography (HILIC) to a time-of-flight-mass spectrometer (ToF-MS). These parameters were combined with fragmentation information from product ion scan operated in enhanced mode (EPI) with precursor selection in Q3 and data from multiple reaction monitoring (MRM) modes using a hybrid triple quadrupole-linear ion trap-mass spectrometer (QqQ/LIT-MS). “Suspect” MRM modes did not provide a significant sensitivity improvement compared to EPI experiments. The complementarity of the data from different MS-based workflows allowed for an increase of identification confidence. Overall, this study demonstrated that dimerization, hydroxylation, and dehydration reactions were the predominant mechanisms found for diclofenac and mefenamic acid during enzyme-catalyzed transformation, whereas a degradation product was observed for the peroxidase-catalyzed conversion of sotalol. Results can contribute to understand enzymatic mechanisms and provide a basis for assessing risks and benefits of enzyme-based remediation.

Graphical abstract

Keywords

Mass spectrometer HPLC Pharmaceuticals Oxidative enzymes Transformation products 

Notes

Funding information

This study was partially supported by the Bavarian State Ministry of the Environment and Consumer Protection.

Compliance with ethical standards

Disclaimer

All authors are aware of and accept responsibility for this manuscript.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Supplementary material

216_2018_1442_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (510 kb)
ESM 1 (PDF 510 kb)

References

  1. 1.
    Gavrilescu M, Demnerova K, Aamand J, Agathoss S, Fava F. Emerging pollutants in the environment: present and future challenges in biomonitoring, ecological risks and bioremediation. New Biotechnol. 2015;32(1):147–56.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nbt.2014.01.001.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Jelić A, Gros M, Petrović M, Ginebreda A, Barceló D. Occurrence and Elimination of pharmaceuticals during conventional wastewater treatment. In: Guasch H, Ginebreda A, Geiszinger A, editors. Emerging and priority pollutants in Rivers: bringing science into river management plans. Berlin: Springer Berlin Heidelberg; 2012. p. 1–23.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Heberer T. Occurrence, fate, and removal of pharmaceutical residues in the aquatic environment: a review of recent research data. Toxicol Lett. 2002;131(1–2):5–17.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Petrie B, Barden R, Kasprzyk-Hordern B. A review on emerging contaminants in wastewaters and the environment: current knowledge, understudied areas and recommendations for future monitoring. Water Res. 2015;72:3–27.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2014.08.053.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Verlicchi P, Al Aukidy M, Zambello E. Occurrence of pharmaceutical compounds in urban wastewater: removal, mass load and environmental risk after a secondary treatment—a review. Sci Total Environ. 2012;429:123–55.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Naghdi M, Taheran M, Brar SK, Kermanshahi-pour A, Verma M, Surampalli RY. Removal of pharmaceutical compounds in water and wastewater using fungal oxidoreductase enzymes. Environ Pollut. 2018;234:190–213.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2017.11.060.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Stadlmair LF, Letzel T, Drewes JE, Grassmann J. Enzymes in removal of pharmaceuticals from wastewater: a critical review of challenges, applications and screening methods for their selection. Chemosphere. 2018;205:649–61.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2018.04.142.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Luo Y, Guo W, Ngo HH, Nghiem LD, Hai FI, Zhang J, et al. A review on the occurrence of micropollutants in the aquatic environment and their fate and removal during wastewater treatment. Sci Total Environ. 2014;473:619–41.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Hollender J, Zimmermann SG, Koepke S, Krauss M, McArdell CS, Ort C, et al. Elimination of organic micropollutants in a municipal wastewater treatment plant upgraded with a full-scale post-ozonation followed by sand filtration. Environ Sci Technol. 2009;43(20):7862–9.  https://doi.org/10.1021/es9014629.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ahuja SK, Ferreira GM, Moreira AR. Utilization of enzymes for environmental applications. Crit Rev Biotechnol. 2004;24(2–3):125–54.  https://doi.org/10.1080/07388550490493726.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Torres E, Bustos-Jaimes I, Le Borgne S. Potential use of oxidative enzymes for the detoxification of organic pollutants. Appl Catal B. 2003;46(1):1–15.  https://doi.org/10.1016/s0926-3373(03)00228-5.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Rao MA, Scelza R, Acevedo F, Diez MC, Gianfreda L. Enzymes as useful tools for environmental purposes. Chemosphere. 2014;107(0):145–62.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2013.12.059.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Demarche P, Junghanns C, Nair RR, Agathos SN. Harnessing the power of enzymes for environmental stewardship. Biotechnol Adv. 2012;30(5):933–53.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biotechadv.2011.05.013.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Schwarz J, Aust MO, Thiele-Bruhn S. Metabolites from fungal laccase-catalysed transformation of sulfonamides. Chemosphere. 2010;81(11):1469–76.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2010.08.053.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Lu J, Huang Q. Removal of acetaminophen using enzyme-mediated oxidative coupling processes: I. Reaction rates and pathways. Environ Sci Technol. 2009;43:7062–7.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hata T, Kawai S, Okamura H, Nishida T. Removal of diclofenac and mefenamic acid by the white rot fungus Phanerochaete sordida YK-624 and identification of their metabolites after fungal transformation. Biodegradation. 2010;21(5):681–9.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Zhao R, Li X, Hu M, Li S, Zhai Q, Jiang Y. Efficient enzymatic degradation used as pre-stage treatment for norfloxacin removal by activated sludge. Bioprocess Biosyst Eng. 2017;40(8):1261–70.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00449-017-1786-y.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kobakhidze A, Elisashvili V, Corvini PF, Cvancarova M. Biotransformation of ritalinic acid by laccase in the presence of mediator TEMPO. New Biotechnol. 2017.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nbt.2017.08.008.
  19. 19.
    Stadlmair LF, Letzel T, Drewes JE, Grassmann J. Mass spectrometry based in vitro assay investigations on the transformation of pharmaceutical compounds by oxidative enzymes. Chemosphere. 2017;174:466–77.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2017.01.140.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Huber C, Preis M, Harvey PJ, Grosse S, Letzel T, Schröder P. Emerging pollutants and plants – metabolic activation of diclofenac by peroxidases. Chemosphere. 2016;146:435–41.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2015.12.059.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Bartha B, Huber C, Schroder P. Uptake and metabolism of diclofenac in Typha latifolia--how plants cope with human pharmaceutical pollution. Plant Sci. 2014;227:12–20.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.plantsci.2014.06.001.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Picó Y, Barceló D. Transformation products of emerging contaminants in the environment and high-resolution mass spectrometry: a new horizon. Anal Bioanal Chem. 2015;407(21):6257–73.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00216-015-8739-6.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Kosjek T, Heath E, Petrović M, Barceló D. Mass spectrometry for identifying pharmaceutical biotransformation products in the environment. TrAC Trends Anal Chem. 2007;26(11):1076–85.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Evgenidou EN, Konstantinou IK, Lambropoulou DA. Occurrence and removal of transformation products of PPCPs and illicit drugs in wastewaters: a review. Sci Total Environ. 2015;505:905–26.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2014.10.021.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Drewes JE, Letzel T. Chemicals of emerging concern and their transformation products in the aqueous environment. assessing transformation products of chemicals by non-target and suspect screening− strategies and workflows volume 1. ACS Publications; 2016. p. 3–9.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Letzel T, Bayer A, Schulz W, Heermann A, Lucke T, Greco G, et al. LC-MS screening techniques for wastewater analysis and analytical data handling strategies: sartans and their transformation products as an example. Chemosphere. 2015;137:198–206.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2015.06.083. Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Stadlmair LF, Letzel T, Graßmann J. Monitoring enzymatic degradation of emerging contaminants using a chip-based robotic nano-ESI-MS tool. Anal Bioanal Chem. 2018;410(1):27–32.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00216-017-0729-4.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Schymanski EL, Jeon J, Gulde R, Fenner K, Ruff M, Singer HP, et al. Identifying small molecules via high resolution mass spectrometry: communicating confidence. Environ Sci Technol. 2014;48(4):2097–8.  https://doi.org/10.1021/es5002105.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Greco G, Grosse S, Letzel T. Serial coupling of reversed-phase and zwitterionic hydrophilic interaction LC/MS for the analysis of polar and nonpolar phenols in wine. J Sep Sci. 2013;36(8):1379–88.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Grosse S, Letzel T. User Manual for STOFF-IDENT Database 2016;4.2:1–33.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Rajab M, Greco G, Heim C, Helmreich B, Letzel T. Serial coupling of RP and zwitterionic hydrophilic interaction LC-MS: suspects screening of diclofenac transformation products by oxidation with a boron-doped diamond electrode. J Sep Sci. 2013;36(18):3011–8.  https://doi.org/10.1002/jssc.201300562. Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Marco-Urrea E, Perez-Trujillo M, Cruz-Morato C, Caminal G, Vicent T. Degradation of the drug sodium diclofenac by Trametes versicolor pellets and identification of some intermediates by NMR. J Hazard Mater. 2010;176(1–3):836–42.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2009.11.112.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Stülten D, Zühlke S, Lamshöft M, Spiteller M. Occurrence of diclofenac and selected metabolites in sewage effluents. Sci Total Environ. 2008;405(1–3):310–6.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2008.05.036.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Pérez S, Barceló D. First evidence for occurrence of hydroxylated human metabolites of diclofenac and aceclofenac in wastewater using QqLIT-MS and QqTOF-MS. Anal Chem. 2008;80(21):8135–45.  https://doi.org/10.1021/ac801167w.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Hommes G, Gasser CA, Ammann EM, Corvini PFX. Determination of oxidoreductase activity using a high-throughput microplate respiratory measurement. Anal Chem. 2013;85(1):283–91.  https://doi.org/10.1021/ac302716j.Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Lucas FW, Mascaro LH, Fill TP, Rodrigues-Filho E, Franco-Junior E, Homem-de-Mello P, et al. Diclofenac on boron-doped diamond electrode: from electroanalytical determination to prediction of the electrooxidation mechanism with HPLC-ESI/HRMS and computational simulations. Langmuir. 2014;30(19):5645–54.  https://doi.org/10.1021/la4044123. Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Keen OS, Thurman EM, Ferrer I, Dotson AD, Linden KG. Dimer formation during UV photolysis of diclofenac. Chemosphere. 2013;93(9):1948–56.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2013.06.079.Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Venkataraman H, Den Braver MW, Vermeulen NP, Commandeur JN. Cytochrome P450-mediated bioactivation of mefenamic acid to quinoneimine intermediates and inactivation by human glutathione S-transferases. Chem Res Toxicol. 2014;27(12):2071–81.Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Khalit WNAW, Tay KS. Aqueous chlorination of mefenamic acid: kinetics, transformation by-products and ecotoxicity assessment. Environ Sci Processes Impacts. 2016;18(5):555–61.Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Jeon JR, Baldrian P, Murugesan K, Chang YS. Laccase-catalysed oxidations of naturally occurring phenols: from in vivo biosynthetic pathways to green synthetic applications. Microb Biotechnol. 2012;5(3):318–32.Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Gao J, Ellis LB, Wackett LP. The University of Minnesota biocatalysis/biodegradation database: improving public access. Nucleic Acids Res. 2010;38(Database issue):D488–91.  https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gkp771.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Lara F. Stadlmair
    • 1
  • Sylvia Grosse
    • 1
  • Thomas Letzel
    • 1
    Email author
  • Jörg E. Drewes
    • 1
  • Johanna Grassmann
    • 1
  1. 1.Chair of Urban Water Systems Engineering, Department of Civil, Geo and Environmental EngineeringTechnical University of MunichGarchingGermany

Personalised recommendations