| Literature DB >> 27764191 |
Adnan A Kadi1, Hany W Darwish1,2, Mohamed W Attwa1,2, Sawsan M Amer2.
Abstract
In the current work, a rapid, specific, sensitive and validated liquid chromatography tandem mass-spectrometric method was developed for the quantification of ponatinib (PNT) in human plasma and rat liver microsomes (RLMs) with its application to metabolic stability. Chromatographic separation of PNT and vandetanib (IS) were accomplished on Agilent eclipse plus C18 analytical column (50 mm × 2.1 mm, 1.8 μm particle size) maintained at 21±2°C. Flow rate was 0.25 mLmin-1 with run time of 4 min. Mobile phase consisted of solvent A (10 mM ammonium formate, pH adjusted to 4.1 with formic acid) and solvent B (acetonitrile). Ions were generated by electrospray (ESI) and multiple reaction monitoring (MRM) was used as basis for quantification. The results revealed a linear calibration curve in the range of 5-400 ngmL-1 (r2 ≥ 0.9998) with lower limit of quantification (LOQ) and lower limit of detection (LOD) of 4.66 and 1.53 ngmL-1 in plasma, 4.19 and 1.38 ngmL-1 in RLMs. The intra- and inter-day precision and accuracy in plasma ranged from1.06 to 2.54% and -1.48 to -0.17, respectively. Whereas in RLMs ranged from 0.97 to 2.31% and -1.65 to -0.3%. The developed procedure was applied for quantification of PNT in human plasma and RLMs for study metabolic stability of PNT. PNT disappeared rapidly in the 1st 10 minutes of RLM incubation and the disappearance plateaued out for the rest of the incubation. In vitro half-life (t1/2) was 6.26 min and intrinsic clearance (CLin) was 15.182± 0.477.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27764191 PMCID: PMC5072736 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0164967
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Fig 1Chemical structure of ponatinib (PNT) and Vandetanib (IS).
Fig 2TIC chromatogram of MRM of PNT (5–400 ngmL-1) and IS (100 ngmL-1).
Fig 3MRM mass spectra and the expected fragmentation pathway of (a) PNT and (b) vandetanib (IS).
Data of back-calculated PNT concentration of the calibration standards from RLMs and plasma matrices.
| Nominal Concentration(ngmL−1) | Plasma | RLMs | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Meana | Precision (RSD %) | Accuracy (RE %) | Meana | Precision (RSD %) | Accuracy (RE %) | |
| 5 | 4.94±0.09 | 1.75 | -1.14 | 4.97±0.08 | 1.53 | -0.60 |
| 10 | 10.21±0.08 | 0.82 | 2.10 | 10.27±0.07 | 0.71 | 2.65 |
| 20 | 19.51±0.34 | 1.77 | -2.45 | 19.61±0.16 | 0.80 | -1.95 |
| 30 | 30.65±0.90 | 2.93 | 2.17 | 30.81±0.67 | 2.18 | 2.70 |
| 40 | 39.78±0.80 | 2.02 | -0.55 | 39.99±0.54 | 1.35 | -0.03 |
| 50 | 49.42±0.50 | 1.01 | -1.16 | 49.69±0.23 | 0.46 | -0.62 |
| 100 | 98.87±0.97 | 0.98 | -1.13 | 99.41±0.51 | 0.52 | -0.59 |
| 150 | 146.35±1.52 | 1.04 | -2.43 | 147.14±0.22 | 0.15 | -1.90 |
| 200 | 200.23±2.73 | 1.36 | 0.11 | 201.30±1.19 | 0.59 | 0.65 |
| 300 | 298.42±4.33 | 1.45 | -0.53 | 300.01±1.93 | 0.64 | 0.003 |
| 400 | 398.01±3.77 | 0.95 | -0.50 | 400.15±1.45 | 0.36 | 0.04 |
Average of six determinations
Intra-day and inter-day precision and accuracy of the proposed methods.
| 19.70 | 19.89 | 147.95 | 147.72 | 299.21 | 299.48 | |
| 0.31 | 0.50 | 1.67 | 1.61 | 3.16 | 3.66 | |
| 1.58 | 2.54 | 1.13 | 1.09 | 1.06 | 1.22 | |
| -1.48 | -0.55 | -1.37 | -1.52 | -0.26 | -0.17 | |
| 19.67 | 19.97 | 147.75 | 147.88 | 299.1 | 299.07 | |
| 0.29 | 0.46 | 1.59 | 1.86 | 3.08 | 2.90 | |
| 1.49 | 2.31 | 1.07 | 1.26 | 1.03 | 0.97 | |
| -1.65 | -0.16 | -1.05 | -1.42 | -0.3 | -0.31 | |
* Average of twelve determinations of day 1.
** Average of six determinations in three consecutive days.
Recovery of QC samples for determining the concentration of PNT in plasma and RLMs matrix.
| Nominal Concentration (ngmL−1) | Plasma | RLMs | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 20 ngmL−1 | 150 ngmL−1 | 300 ngmL−1 | 20 ngmL−1 | 150 ngmL−1 | 300 ngmL−1 | |
| 19.51 | 146.35 | 298.42 | 19.61 | 147.14 | 300.01 | |
| 97.55 | 97.57 | 99.47 | 98.05 | 98.09 | 100.00 | |
| 0.34 | 1.52 | 4.33 | 0.16 | 0.22 | 1.93 | |
| 1.77 | 1.04 | 1.45 | 0.80 | 0.15 | 0.64 | |
PNT Stability data and dilution integrity in plasma matrix under different conditions.
| Nominal Concentration(ng.mL−1) | Mean (ngmL−1) | Recovery % | Precision (CV %) | Accuracy (RE %) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 20.28 | 101.40 | 2.12 | 1.41 | ||
| 147.77 | 98.51 | 1.37 | -1.49 | ||
| 298.54 | 99.51 | 0.67 | -0.49 | ||
| 19.81 | 99.05 | 2.38 | -0.94 | ||
| 147.86 | 98.57 | 1.09 | -1.43 | ||
| 299.61 | 99.87 | 1.22 | -0.13 | ||
| 20.29 | 101.45 | 2.17 | 1.46 | ||
| 147.87 | 98.58 | 1.57 | -1.42 | ||
| 298.83 | 99.61 | 1.01 | -0.39 | ||
| 19.62 | 98.10 | 1.65 | -1.90 | ||
| 147.76 | 98.51 | 1.21 | -1.49 | ||
| 298.93 | 99.64 | 0.96 | -0.36 | ||
| 176.49 | 98.05 | 1.63 | -1.95 | ||
| 358.28 | 99.52 | 1.77 | -0.48 | ||
PNT Stability data and dilution integrity in RLMs matrix under different conditions.
| Nominal Concentration(ng.mL−1) | Mean (ngmL−1) | Recovery % | Precision (CV %) | Accuracy (RE %) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 19.86 | 99.30 | 1.48 | -0.67 | |
| 148.26 | 98.84 | 1.36 | -1.16 | |
| 298.25 | 99.42 | 0.96 | -0.58 | |
| 19.47 | 97.35 | 0.55 | -2.63 | |
| 147.25 | 98.17 | 0.63 | -1.82 | |
| 299.95 | 99.98 | 1.11 | -0.02 | |
| 20.34 | 101.70 | 2.07 | 1.68 | |
| 146.98 | 97.99 | 1.19 | -2.00 | |
| 299.37 | 99.79 | 0.72 | -0.21 | |
| 20.20 | 101.00 | 2.07 | 0.97 | |
| 148.99 | 99.33 | 1.48 | -0.67 | |
| 298.70 | 99.57 | 1.21 | -0.43 | |
| 177.77 | 98.76 | 1.54 | -1.24 | |
| 360.85 | 100.24 | 0.50 | 0.24 | |
Fig 4The metabolic stability profile of PNT after incubation with RLMs.
Metabolic reaction was stopped at different time points.