Literature DB >> 31955085

Assessing accuracy, precision and selectivity using quality controls for non-targeted analysis.

Brian Ng1, Natalia Quinete2, Piero R Gardinali3.   

Abstract

The benchmarks to assess reproducibility are not well defined for non-target analysis. Parameters to evaluate analytical performance, such as accuracy, precision and selectivity, are well defined for target analysis, but remain elusive for non-target screening analysis. In this study, quality control (QC) guidelines are proposed to assure reliable data in non-target screening methodologies using a simple set of standards. Workflow reproducibility was assessed using an in-house QC mixture containing selected compounds with a wide range of polarity that can be detected either by electrospray ionization (ESI) in positive or negative mode. The analysis was performed by online solid phase extraction (SPE) liquid chromatography coupled to high resolution mass spectrometry (LC-HRMS). Data processing was done by a commercially available software, Compound Discoverer v. 3.0 using an environmental working template, which searched a multitude of databases, including Chemspider, EPA Toxcast, MzCloud among others. We have specifically evaluated method specificity, precision, accuracy and reproducibility in terms of peak area and retention time variability, true positive identification rate, intraday (within days) and interday (consecutive days) variations and the use of QC samples to reduce false positives. The method showed a satisfactory accuracy with an identification rate of ≥70% for most of the QC compounds. Precision estimated based on peak area relative standard deviation (RSD) ranged between 30 and 50% for most of the compounds. Data normalization to a single internal standard did not improve peak area variability. Retention time precision showed great repeatability and reproducibility (RSD ≤ 5%). In addition, a simple model of RT vs log Kow was designed based on our QC mixtures to efficiently reduced false positives by an average of 49.1%.
Copyright © 2020 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Keywords:  Environmental workflow; LC-HRMS; Non-target analysis; Orbitrap; Organic pollutants; Quality control

Year:  2020        PMID: 31955085     DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.136568

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Sci Total Environ        ISSN: 0048-9697            Impact factor:   7.963


  4 in total

1.  An Introduction to the Benchmarking and Publications for Non-Targeted Analysis Working Group.

Authors:  Benjamin J Place; Elin M Ulrich; Jonathan K Challis; Alex Chao; Bowen Du; Kristin Favela; Yong-Lai Feng; Christine M Fisher; Piero Gardinali; Alan Hood; Ann M Knolhoff; Andrew D McEachran; Sara L Nason; Seth R Newton; Brian Ng; Jamie Nuñez; Katherine T Peter; Allison L Phillips; Natalia Quinete; Ryan Renslow; Jon R Sobus; Eric M Sussman; Benedikt Warth; Samanthi Wickramasekara; Antony J Williams
Journal:  Anal Chem       Date:  2021-11-29       Impact factor: 6.986

2.  Development of a Data Analysis Tool to Determine the Measurement Variability of Consensus Mass Spectra.

Authors:  Benjamin J Place
Journal:  J Am Soc Mass Spectrom       Date:  2021-02-16       Impact factor: 3.109

3.  Simultaneous Determination of the Five Constituents in Maiwei Dihuang Pills by the HPLC-DAD Method.

Authors:  Danchun Jia; Hong Cai; Yuan Ke
Journal:  Evid Based Complement Alternat Med       Date:  2021-09-02       Impact factor: 2.629

4.  Change in the chemical content of untreated wastewater of Athens, Greece under COVID-19 pandemic.

Authors:  Nikiforos Alygizakis; Aikaterini Galani; Nikolaos I Rousis; Reza Aalizadeh; Meletios-Athanasios Dimopoulos; Nikolaos S Thomaidis
Journal:  Sci Total Environ       Date:  2021-07-30       Impact factor: 7.963

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.