Abstract
From the viewpoint of regulatory guidelines, validation of LC-UV and LC-MS based methods have the same requirements. Matrix effects are not considered for most method validations if they do not influence reproducibility or assay linearity. Since matrix effects can strongly suppress ionizaton efficiency and therefore reduce sensitivity, they must be evaluated (and discussed in the context of method development)—prior to method qualification. The severity of matrix effects is directly dependent upon chromatographic performance. We suggest that evaluation of matrix effects and LC efficiency is essential information for method assessment, optimization and transfer to other mass spectrometers, and should be a mandatory part of routine LC/MS method validation.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Taverniers, I.; De Loose, M.; Van Bockstaele, E. Trends in quality in the analytical laboratory. II. Analytical method validation and quality assurance. Trends Anal. Chem. 2004, 23(8), 535–552.
Zheng, J. J.; Lynch, E. D.; Unger, S. E. Comparison of SPE and fast LC to eliminate mass spectrometric matrix effects from microsomal incubation products. J. Pharm. Biomed. Anal. 2002, 28, 279–285.
Stüber, M.; Reemtsma, T. Evaluation of three calibration methods to compensate matrix effects in environmental analysis with LC-ESI-MS. Anal. Bioanal. Chem. 2004, 378, 910–916.
Taylor, P. J. Matrix effects: The Achilles heel of quantitative high-performance liquid chromatography-electrospray-tandem mass spectrometry. Clin. Biochem. 2005, 38(4), 328–334.
Basilicata, P.; Miraglia, N.; Pieri, M.; Acampora, A.; Soleo, L.; Sannolo, N. Application of the standard addition approach for the quantification of urinary benzene. J. Chromatogr. B 2005, 818(2), 293–299.
Kloepfer, A.; Quintana, J.; B.; Reemtsma, T. Operational options to reduce matrix effects in liquid chromatography-electrospray ionization-mass spectrometry analysis of aqueous environmental samples. J. Chromatogr. A 2005, 1067, 153–160.
Zrostlikova, J.; Hajslova, J.; Poustka, J.; Begany, P. Alternative calibration approaches to compensate the effect of coextracted matrix components in liquid chromatography-electrospray ionization tandem mass spectrometry analysis of pesticide residues in plant materials. J. Chromatogr. A 2002, 973, 13–26.
Souverain, S.; Rudaz, S.; Veuthey, J.-L. Matrix effect in LC-ESI-MS and LC-APCI-MS with off-line and on-line extraction procedures. J. Chromatogr. A 2004, 1058, 61–66.
Alder, L.; Lüderitz, S.; Lindtner, K.; Stan, H.-J. The ECHO technique—the more effective way of data evaluation in liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry analysis. J. Chromatogr. A 2004, 1058(1/2), 67–79.
Dams, R.; Huestis, M.; Lambert, W.; Murphy, C. Matrix effect in bioanalysis of illicit drugs with LC-MS/MS: Influence of ionization type, sample preparation, and biofluid. J. Am. Soc. Mass Spectrom. 2003, 14(11), 1290–1294.
Bonfiglio, R.; King, R.; Olah, T.; Merkle, K. The effects of sample preparation methods on variability of the electrospray ionization response for model drug compounds. Rapid Commun. Mass Spectrom. 1999, 13, 1175–1185.
Avery, M. Quantitative characterization of differential ion suppression on liquid chromatography/atmospheric pressure ionization mass spectrometric bioanalytical methods. Rapid. Commun. Mass Spectrom. 2003, 17, 197–201.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Published online September 28, 2005.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Rogatsky, E., Stein, D. Evaluation of matrix effect and chromatography efficiency: new parameters for validation of method development. J Am Soc Mass Spectrom 16, 1757–1759 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jasms.2005.07.012
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jasms.2005.07.012