| Literature DB >> 26101692 |
Marwa Fouad1, Maxime Helvenstein2, Bertrand Blankert2.
Abstract
Generally, tyrosine kinase inhibitors have narrow therapeutic window and large interpatient variability compared to intrapatient variability. In order to support its therapeutic drug monitoring, two fast and accurate methods were developed for the determination of recently FDA approved anticancer tyrosine kinase inhibitors, afatinib and ibrutinib, in human plasma using ultra high performance liquid chromatography coupled to PDA detection. Diclofenac sodium was used as internal standard. The chromatographic separation was achieved on an Acquity UPLC BEH C18 analytical column using a mobile phase combining ammonium formate buffer and acetonitrile at a constant flow rate of 0.4 mL/min using gradient elution mode. A µSPE (solid phase extraction) procedure, using Oasis MCX µElution plates, was processed and it gave satisfying and reproducible results in terms of extraction yields. Additionally, the methods were successfully validated using the accuracy profiles approach (β = 95% and acceptance limits = ±15%) over the ranges 5-250 ng/mL for afatinib and from 5 to 400 ng/mL for ibrutinib in human plasma.Entities:
Year: 2015 PMID: 26101692 PMCID: PMC4458533 DOI: 10.1155/2015/215128
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Anal Methods Chem ISSN: 2090-8873 Impact factor: 2.193
Figure 1Chemical structures of (a) afatinib, (b) ibrutinib, and (c) diclofenac.
Figure 2Typical chromatogram of human plasma sample spiked with (1) afatinib at 250 ng/mL (RT: 2.38 min) and (2) diclofenac at 250 ng/mL (RT: 3.22 min).
Figure 3Typical chromatogram of human plasma sample spiked with (1) ibrutinib at 200 ng/mL (RT: 2.54 min) and (2) diclofenac at 250 ng/mL (RT: 2.66 min).
Validation data of linear regression of AFA and IBR in human plasma.
| Analyte | Regression model | VS |
Concentration | Trueness | Precision | Accuracy | Extraction efficiency |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Relative bias (%) | Repeatability/ |
| Average recovery (%) ( | ||||
| AFA | 1 | 5 | −0.24 | 5.60/5.65 | [−13.38; 12.90] | 88.0 ± 2.2 | |
| 2 | 25 | 1.31 | 5.54/4.94 | [−9.96; 12.58] | |||
| 3 | 75 | 0.63 | 2.70/2.63 | [−5.44; 6.71] | |||
| 4 | 125 | 1.29 | 2.23/2.42 | [−4.52; 7.09] | |||
| 5 | 175 | 0.56 | 1.87/1.66 | [−3.23; 4.36] | |||
| 6 | 250 | −0.25 | 1.63/1.91 | [−4.77; 4.27] | |||
| DICLO | 250 | Internal standard | 91 ± 7 | ||||
|
| |||||||
| IBR | 1 | 5 | −1.21 | 5.83/5.22 | [−12.96; 10.54] | 93.0 ± 9.0 | |
| 2 | 75 | 7.63 | 1.96/1.89 | [3.28; 11.98] | |||
| 3 | 150 | 0.77 | 1.85/2.83 | [−7.94; 9.48] | |||
| 4 | 250 | −0.47 | 1.77/3.47 | [−12.89; 11.95] | |||
| 5 | 350 | 0.43 | 2.02/3.48 | [−11.94; 12.79] | |||
| 6 | 400 | −0.07 | 1.87/2.25 | [−6.00; 5.85] | |||
| DICLO | 250 | Internal standard | 90 ± 8 | ||||
n: number of repetitions.
Figure 4Accuracy profile for afatinib in human plasma; β expectation tolerance interval set at 95% and λ acceptance limits set at ±15%. All tested concentrations were validated (from 5 to 250 ng/mL).
Figure 5Accuracy profile for ibrutinib in human plasma; β expectation tolerance interval set at 95% and λ acceptance limits set at ±15%. All tested concentrations were validated (from 5 to 400 ng/mL).