| Literature DB >> 20632164 |
Roland J W Meesters1, Jeroen J A van Kampen, Mariska L Reedijk, Rachel D Scheuer, Lennard J M Dekker, David M Burger, Nico G Hartwig, Albert D M E Osterhaus, Theo M Luider, Rob A Gruters.
Abstract
Kaletra (Abott Laboratories) is a co-formulated medication used in the treatment of HIV-1-infected children, and it contains the two antiretroviral protease inhibitor drugs lopinavir and ritonavir. We validated two new ultrafast and high-throughput mass spectrometric assays to be used for therapeutic drug monitoring of lopinavir and ritonavir concentrations in whole blood and in plasma from HIV-1-infected children. Whole blood was blotted onto dried blood spot (DBS) collecting cards, and plasma was collected simultaneously. DBS collecting cards were extracted by an acetonitrile/water mixture while plasma samples were deproteinized with acetone. Drug concentrations were determined by matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization-triple quadrupole tandem mass spectrometry (MALDI-QqQ-MS/MS). The application of DBS made it possible to measure lopinavir and ritonavir in whole blood in therapeutically relevant concentrations. The MALDI-QqQ-MS/MS plasma assay was successfully cross-validated with a commonly used high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC)-ultraviolet (UV) assay for the therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) of HIV-1-infected patients, and it showed comparable performance characteristics. Observed DBS concentrations showed as well, a good correlation between plasma concentrations obtained by MALDI-QqQ-MS/MS and those obtained by the HPLC-UV assay. Application of DBS for TDM proved to be a good alternative to the normally used plasma screening. Moreover, collection of DBS requires small amounts of whole blood which can be easily performed especially in (very) young children where collection of large whole blood amounts is often not possible. DBS is perfectly suited for TDM of HIV-1-infected children; but nevertheless, DBS can also easily be applied for TDM of patients in areas with limited or no laboratory facilities.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2010 PMID: 20632164 PMCID: PMC2919689 DOI: 10.1007/s00216-010-3952-9
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Anal Bioanal Chem ISSN: 1618-2642 Impact factor: 4.142
Fig. 1Molecular structures of a LPV, b RTV, and c internal standard NFV and respective fragmentations of the sodium adducts of LPV, RTV, and NFV and MRM transition
Precision and accuracy of the MALDI-QqQ-MS/MS assay at three DBS and plasma concentration levels
| Analyte | Dried blood spots (DBS) | Plasma | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nominal concentration (μmol/L) | ||||||||||||
| 50.0 | 10.0 | 1.0 | 4.0 | 2.0 | 1.0 | |||||||
| LPV | RTV | LPV | RTV | LPV | RTV | LPV | RTV | LPV | RTV | LPV | RTV | |
| Within-run validationa | ||||||||||||
| Mean observed concentration (μmol/L) | 49.9 | 50.7 | 10.7 | 10.6 | 0.9 | 0.9 | 3.7 | 4.0 | 1.9 | 2.1 | 1.1 | 1.2 |
| Accuracy (% errorb) | −0.3 | 1.4 | 7.2 | 5.6 | −8.1 | −10.8 | −8.6 | 0.5 | −3.7 | 5.2 | 8.8 | 12.4 |
| Precision (% CV) | 4.7 | 6.4 | 11.7 | 11.9 | 16.5 | 12.8 | 7.5 | 12.5 | 10.3 | 13.4 | 11.2 | 8.8 |
| Between-run validationc | ||||||||||||
| Mean observed concentration (μmol/L) | 51.2 | 49.4 | 10.9 | 9.6 | 1.2 | 1.0 | 3.7 | 4.2 | 2.0 | 2.2 | 1.1 | 1.1 |
| Accuracy (% errorb) | 2.4 | −1.2 | 9.0 | −4.3 | 10.1 | 1.0 | −7.1 | 3.8 | 1.5 | 10.8 | 8.4 | 13.7 |
| Precision (% CV) | 11.4 | 9.8 | 12.2 | 11.3 | 18.2 | 18.3 | 12.0 | 14.6 | 13.2 | 12.4 | 12.1 | 11.0 |
aWithin-run results summarize ten spots per QC sample at each concentration level in one experiment
b% error = (mean observed concentration − nominal concentration)/(nominal concentration) × 100%
cBetween-run results summarize three different experiments from three consecutive days with ten spots per QC sample at each concentration level
Stability experiments with DBS-QC samples containing LPV and RTV under different storage conditions
| Nominal concentration (μmol/L) | Storage conditions/time | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Refrigerator (4 °C)a | Dessicator (20 °C)a | |||||||
| 24 h | 20 days | |||||||
| LPV | RTV | LPV | RTV | |||||
| Mean (SD) | % errorb | Mean (SD) | % errorb | Mean (SD) | % errorb | Mean (SD) | % errorb | |
| 50.0 | 49.9 (6.1) | −0.2 | 48.5 (4.0) | −3.0 | 49.7 (3.3) | −0.6 | 49.2 (3.9) | −1.6 |
| 10.0 | 10.5 (0.9) | 5.0 | 10.4 (1.4) | 4.0 | 9.4 (1.1) | −6.0 | 10.1 (0.7) | 1.0 |
| 1.0 | 1.1 (0.1) | 10.0 | 0.9 (0.1) | −10.0 | 0.93 (0.15) | −7.0 | 1.1 (0.2) | 10.0 |
aResults summarize ten spots per QC sample at each concentration level in one experiment
b% error = (mean observed concentration − nominal concentration)/(nominal concentration) × 100%
Stability experiments with plasma QC samples containing LPV and RTV under different storage conditions
| Nominal concentration (μmol/L) | Storage conditions/time | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Refrigerator (4 °C)a | Freezer (−20 °C)a | Freezer (−20 °C)a | ||||||||||
| 24 h | 20 days | 3 freeze–thaw cycles | ||||||||||
| LPV | RTV | LPV | RTV | LPV | RTV | |||||||
| Mean (SD) | % errorb | Mean (SD) | % errorb | Mean (SD) | % errorb | Mean (SD) | % errorb | Mean (SD) | % errorb | Mean (SD) | % errorb | |
| 4.0 | 3.81 (0.05) | −4.8 | 3.92 (0.07) | −2.0 | 3.90 (0.36) | −2.5 | 3.79 (0.27) | −5.3 | 3.78 (0.53) | −5.5 | 3.76 (0.51) | −6.0 |
| 2.0 | 1.88 (0.12) | −6.0 | 1.86 (0.09) | −7.0 | 1.86 (0.38) | −7.0 | 1.75 (0.12) | −12.5 | 1.94 (0.35) | −3.0 | 1.97 (0.24) | −1.5 |
| 1.0 | 0.94 (0.24) | −6.0 | 1.07 (0.20) | 7.0 | 0.95 (0.11) | −5.0 | 0.87 (0.05) | 12.0 | 0.93 (0.16) | −7.0 | 0.94 (0.14) | −6.0 |
aResults summarize ten spots per QC sample at each concentration level in one experiment
b% error = (mean observed concentration − nominal concentration)/(nominal concentration) × 100%
Fig. 2Comparison of drug levels in plasma and DBS samples from HIV-1-infected children: a LPV and b RTV
Fig. 3a Comparison of observed LPV concentrations by HPLC-UV assay and newly developed MALDI-QqQ-MS/MS assay. b Bland–Altman plot of differences between observed LPV concentrations by MALDI-QqQ-MS/MS and HPLC-UV assay. c Comparison of observed RTV concentrations by HPLC-UV assay and the new MALDI-QqQ-MS/MS assay. d Bland–Altman plot of differences between observed RTV concentrations by MALDI-QqQ-MS/MS and HPLC-UV assay. Patients (n = 19) LPV and RTV plasma concentrations were measured by the newly developed MALDI-QqQ-MS/MS plasma assay and cross-validated with an accredited HPLC-UV assay. Solid line represents mean, and dotted lines represent mean ± 2 SD (standard deviation of mean)