Advertisement

Method Development, Validation, and Sample Analysis for Regulated Quantitative Bioanalysis Using LC-MS/MS

  • Min MengEmail author
  • Patrick K. Bennett
Chapter

Abstract

There are three primary stages of the regulated bioanalysis process using Liquid Chromatography–Tandem Mass Spectrometry (LC-MS/MS): method development, method validation, and sample analysis including incurred sample reanalysis (ISR). Robust and rugged LC-MS/MS methods are essential in support of drug discovery, toxicology studies, and clinical trials. The development of a robust bioanalytical method requires careful consideration of many critical parameters, such as accuracy and precision, linearity, matrix effect, sensitivity, selectivity, stability, throughput, and ruggedness (or reproducibility). Because bioanalytical data is critical for determining the safety and efficacy of a new drug, a bioanalytical method must be validated following the Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) guidance for the industry, the recommendations from various white papers and Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs). A complete regulated method validation in biological matrix minimally requires three interday precision and accuracy runs, various short- and long-term solution and matrix stability assessments, extraction recovery, dilution capability and linearity, extract stability, reinjection reproducibility, selectivity and specificity, assessment of matrix effects, interference from concomitant medications and prodrug/metabolites, etc. The final evaluation of any high quality bioanalytical method is not complete until it passes the ultimate test of regulated sample analysis and incurred sample reanalysis (ISR) which are also conducted ­following the similar rules as validation.

Keywords

Solid Phase Extraction Quality Control Sample Interday Precision High Quality Control Incur Sample Reanalysis 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. 1.
    Shah VP, Midha KK, Dighe S et al (1992) Analytical methods validation: bioavailability, bioequivalence, and pharmacokinetic studies. Pharm Res 9:588–592CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    FDA/CDER, Guidance for the industry: Bioanalytical method validation, May 2001, US Department of Health and Human Services, FDA (CDER) and (CVM), Rockville, MD, USAGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Viswanathan CT, Bansal S, Booth B et al (2007) Quantitative bioanalytical methods validation and implementation: best practices for chromatographic and ligand binding assays. AAPS J 9:E30–E42CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Yu RZ, Baker B, Chappell A, Geary RS, Cheung E, Levin AA (2002) Development of an ultrasensitive noncompetitive hybridization ligation enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay for the determination of phosphorothioate oligodeoxynucleotide in plasma. Anal Biochem 304(1):19–25CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Deverre JR, Boutet V, Boquet D, Ezan E, Grassi J, Grognet JM (1997) A competitive enzyme hybridization assay for plasma determination of phosphodiester and phosphorothioate antisense oligonucleotides. Nucleic Acids Res 25(18):3584–3589CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Deng P, Chen X, Zhang G, Zhong D (2010) Bioanalysis of an oligonucleotide and its metabolites by liquid chromatography–tandem mass spectrometry. J Pharm Biomed Anal 52:571–579CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Zhang G, Lin J, Srinivasan K, Kavetskaia O, Duncan JN (2007) Strategies for bioanalysis of an oligonucleotide class macromolecule from rat plasma using liquid chromatography–tandem mass spectrometry. Anal Chem 79(9):3416–3424CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Li WK, Tse FL (2010) Dried blood spot sampling in combination with LC-MS/MS for quantitative analysis of small molecules. Biomed Chromatogr 24(1):49–65CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Pan JW, Jiang XY, Chen YL (2010) Automatic supported liquid extraction (SLE) coupled with HILIC-MS/MS: an application to method development and validation of erlotinib in human plasma. Pharmaceutics 2:105–118CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Wang J, Aubry A et al (2010) Effect of mobile phase pH, aqueous-organic ratio, and buffer concentration on electrospray ionization tandem mass spectrometric fragmentation patterns: implications in liquid chromatography/tandem mass spectrometric bioanalysis. Rapid Commun Mass Spectrom 24:3221–3229CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Meng M, Rohde L, Čápka V et al (2010) Fast chiral chromatographic method development and validation for the quantitation of eszopiclone in human plasma using LC/MS/MS. J Pharma Biomed Analy 53(4):973–982CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Bennett PK, Meng M, Rohde L Software assisted chiral chromatographic method development for the quantitation of four chiral drugs in human plasma using LC/MS/MS, Presented at the 2009 ASMS conference, Philadelphia, PAGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    King R, Bonfiglio R, Fernandez-Metzler C et al (2000) Mechanistic investigation of ionization suppression in electrospray ionization. J Am Soc Mass Spectrom 11(11):942–950CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Ahnoff M, Wurzer A et al. (2003) Characterization of serum albumin and lysoPCs as major contributors to plasma sample matrix effects on electrospray ionization efficiency, Presented at the 2009 ASMS conference, Montreal, CanadaGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Bennett PK, Van Horne KC (2003) Identification of the major endogenous and persistent compounds in plasma, serum, and tissue that cause matrix effects with electrospray LC/MS techniques, Presented at the 2003 AAPS annual meeting and exposition, Salt Lake City, UtahGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Xia YQ, Jemal M (2009) Phospholipids in liquid chromatography/mass spectrometry bioanalysis: comparison of three tandem mass spectrometric techniques for monitoring plasma phospholipids, the effect of mobile phase composition on phospholipids elution and the association of phospholipids with matrix effects. Rapid Commun Mass Spectrom 23:2125–2138CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Meng M, Bennett PK Source for imprecision resulting from ionization suppression from strongly retained phospholipids and dioctyl phthalate, Presented at 2004 ASMS conference, Nashville, TNGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Little JL, Wempe MF, Buchanan CM (2006) Liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry/mass spectrometry method development for drug metabolism studies: examining lipid matrix ionization effects in plasma. J Chromatogr B 833:219–230CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Du L, White RL (2008) Reducing glycerophosphocholine lipid matrix interference effects in biological fluid assays by using high-turbulence liquid chromatography. Rapid Commun Mass Spectrom 22:3362–3370CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Ismaiel OA, Halquist MS, Elmamly MY et al (2008) Monitoring phospholipids for assessment of ion enhancement and ion suppression in ESI and APCI LC/MS/MS for chorpheniramine in human plasma and the importance of multiple source matrix effect evaluation. J Chromatogr B 875:333–343CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Carter SJ, Čápka V, Viccarone S An orthogonal approach to increasing assay ruggedness at low limits of quantition in LC/MS/MS assays, Presented at the 2007 ASMS conference, Indianapolis, IN, June 2007Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Voelker T, Tan L, Acheampong A et al Two dimensional PPE/SPE extraction coupled with three dimensional HPLC/UPLC/MS/MS for a 500 fg/mL LLOQ assay, Presented at the 2011 ASMS conference, Denver, June 2011Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Tan A, Hussain S, et al (2009) Internal standard response variations during incurred sample analysis by LC-MS/MS: case by case trouble shooting. J Chromatogr B 877(2):3201–3209Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Rocci ML, Devanarayan V, Haughey DB et al (2007) Confirmatory reanalysis of incurred bioanalytical samples. AAPS J 9(3):E336–E343CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Zhou S, Song Q et al (2005) Critical review of development, validation, and transfer for high throughput bioanalytical LC-MS/MS methods. Current Pharma Analysis 1:3–14CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Liu GW, Snapp HM, Ji QC, Arnold ME (2009) Strategy of accelerated method development for high-throughput bioanalytical assays using ultra high-performance liquid chromatography coupled with mass spectrometry. Anal Chem 81(22):9225–9232CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Jemal M, Zheng O, Xia YQ (2010) Systematic LC-MS/MS bioanalytical method development that incorporated plasma phospholipids risk avoidance, usage of incurred sample and well thought-out chromatography. Biomed Chromatogr 24(1):2–19CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Tandem LabsSouth Salt Lake CityUSA
  2. 2.Thermo Fisher ScientificSan JoseUSA

Personalised recommendations