Literature DB >> 27344632

Quantitative analysis of endogenous compounds.

Rhishikesh Thakare1, Yashpal S Chhonker1, Nagsen Gautam1, Jawaher Abdullah Alamoudi1, Yazen Alnouti2.   

Abstract

Accurate quantitative analysis of endogenous analytes is essential for several clinical and non-clinical applications. LC-MS/MS is the technique of choice for quantitative analyses. Absolute quantification by LC/MS requires preparing standard curves in the same matrix as the study samples so that the matrix effect and the extraction efficiency for analytes are the same in both the standard and study samples. However, by definition, analyte-free biological matrices do not exist for endogenous compounds. To address the lack of blank matrices for the quantification of endogenous compounds by LC-MS/MS, four approaches are used including the standard addition, the background subtraction, the surrogate matrix, and the surrogate analyte methods. This review article presents an overview these approaches, cite and summarize their applications, and compare their advantages and disadvantages. In addition, we discuss in details, validation requirements and compatibility with FDA guidelines to ensure method reliability in quantifying endogenous compounds. The standard addition, background subtraction, and the surrogate analyte approaches allow the use of the same matrix for the calibration curve as the one to be analyzed in the test samples. However, in the surrogate matrix approach, various matrices such as artificial, stripped, and neat matrices are used as surrogate matrices for the actual matrix of study samples. For the surrogate analyte approach, it is required to demonstrate similarity in matrix effect and recovery between surrogate and authentic endogenous analytes. Similarly, for the surrogate matrix approach, it is required to demonstrate similar matrix effect and extraction recovery in both the surrogate and original matrices. All these methods represent indirect approaches to quantify endogenous compounds and regardless of what approach is followed, it has to be shown that none of the validation criteria have been compromised due to the indirect analyses.
Copyright © 2016 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Keywords:  Background subtraction; Biomarker; LC–MS/MS; Standard addition; Surrogate analyte; Surrogate matrix

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27344632     DOI: 10.1016/j.jpba.2016.06.017

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Pharm Biomed Anal        ISSN: 0731-7085            Impact factor:   3.935


  25 in total

Review 1.  Direct and indirect quantification of phosphate metabolites of nucleoside analogs in biological samples.

Authors:  Nagsen Gautam; Jawaher Abdullah Alamoudi; Sushil Kumar; Yazen Alnouti
Journal:  J Pharm Biomed Anal       Date:  2019-10-03       Impact factor: 3.935

2.  A reliable LC-MS/MS method for the quantification of natural amino acids in mouse plasma: Method validation and application to a study on amino acid dynamics during hepatocellular carcinoma progression.

Authors:  Zhenzhen Liu; Mei-Juan Tu; Chao Zhang; Joseph L Jilek; Qian-Yu Zhang; Ai-Ming Yu
Journal:  J Chromatogr B Analyt Technol Biomed Life Sci       Date:  2019-06-02       Impact factor: 3.205

3.  Accurate quantification of PGE2 in the polyposis in rat colon (Pirc) model by surrogate analyte-based UPLC-MS/MS.

Authors:  Changhong Yun; Wan-Mohaiza Dashwood; Lawrence N Kwong; Song Gao; Taijun Yin; Qinglan Ling; Rashim Singh; Roderick H Dashwood; Ming Hu
Journal:  J Pharm Biomed Anal       Date:  2017-07-25       Impact factor: 3.935

4.  Guanosine primes acute myeloid leukemia for differentiation via guanine nucleotide salvage synthesis.

Authors:  Hanying Wang; Xin He; Zheng Li; Hongchuan Jin; Xian Wang; Ling Li
Journal:  Am J Cancer Res       Date:  2022-01-15       Impact factor: 6.166

5.  Analyte recovery in LC-MS/MS bioanalysis: An old issue revisited.

Authors:  Devendra Kumar; Nagsen Gautam; Yazen Alnouti
Journal:  Anal Chim Acta       Date:  2022-01-28       Impact factor: 6.558

6.  Development of a biomarker to monitor target engagement after treatment with dihydroorotate dehydrogenase inhibitors.

Authors:  Michael A Pontikos; Christopher Leija; Zhiyu Zhao; Xiaoyu Wang; Jessica Kilgore; Belen Tornesi; Nicole Adenmatten; Margaret A Phillips; Noelle S Williams
Journal:  Biochem Pharmacol       Date:  2022-08-31       Impact factor: 6.100

7.  Simultaneous LC-MS/MS analysis of eicosanoids and related metabolites in human serum, sputum and BALF.

Authors:  Rhishikesh Thakare; Yashpal S Chhonker; Nagsen Gautam; Amy Nelson; Richard Casaburi; Gerard Criner; Mark T Dransfield; Barry Make; Kendra K Schmid; Stephen I Rennard; Yazen Alnouti
Journal:  Biomed Chromatogr       Date:  2017-10-17       Impact factor: 1.902

8.  Determination of phosphatidylethanol 16:0/18:1 in whole blood by 96-well supported liquid extraction and UHPLC-MS/MS.

Authors:  Thomas Berg; Elin Eliassen; Benedicte Jørgenrud; Saranda Kabashi; Alexey Petukhov; Stig Tore Bogstrand
Journal:  J Clin Lab Anal       Date:  2018-07-25       Impact factor: 2.352

9.  Simultaneous quantification of vitamin E and vitamin E metabolites in equine plasma and serum using LC-MS/MS.

Authors:  Hadi Habib; Carrie J Finno; Ingrid Gennity; Gianna Favro; Erin Hales; Birgit Puschner; Benjamin C Moeller
Journal:  J Vet Diagn Invest       Date:  2021-04-13       Impact factor: 1.279

10.  Determination of non-cholesterol sterols in serum and HDL fraction by LC/MS-MS: Significance of matrix-related interferences.

Authors:  Sandra Vladimirov; Tamara Gojković; Aleksandra Zeljković; Zorana Jelić-Ivanović; Vesna Spasojević-Kalimanovska
Journal:  J Med Biochem       Date:  2020-09-02       Impact factor: 3.402

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.