Literature DB >> 32335688

Examining NTA performance and potential using fortified and reference house dust as part of EPA's Non-Targeted Analysis Collaborative Trial (ENTACT).

Seth R Newton1, Jon R Sobus2, Elin M Ulrich2, Randolph R Singh3,4, Alex Chao3, James McCord5, Sarah Laughlin-Toth3,6, Mark Strynar5.   

Abstract

Non-targeted analysis (NTA) methods are being increasingly used to aid in the identification of unknown compounds in the environment, a problem that has challenged environmental chemists for decades. Despite its increased use, quality assurance practices for NTA have not been well established. Furthermore, capabilities and limitations of certain NTA methods have not been thoroughly evaluated. Standard reference material dust (SRM 2585) was used here to evaluate the ability of NTA to identify previously reported compounds, as well as a suite of 365 chemicals that were spiked at various stages of the analytical procedure. Analysis of the unaltered SRM 2585 extracts revealed that several previously reported compounds can be identified by NTA, and that correct identification was dependent on concentration. A manual inspection of unknown features in SRM 2585 revealed the presence of two chlorinated and fluorinated compounds in high abundance, likely precursors to perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS) and perfluorohexane sulfonate (PFHxS). A retrospective analysis of data from the American Healthy Homes Survey revealed that these compounds were present in 42% of sampled homes. Spiking the dust at various stages of sample preparation revealed losses from extraction, cleanup, and instrumental analysis; the log Kow for individual compounds influenced the overall recovery levels but no pattern could be discerned from the various degrees of interference that the matrix had on the ionization efficiency of the spiked chemicals. Analysis of the matrix-free chemical mixture at low, medium, and high concentrations led to more correct identifications than analysis at one, very high concentration. Varying the spiked amount and identifying reported compounds at known concentrations allowed an estimation of the lower limits of identification (LOIs) for NTA, analogous to limits of detection in targeted analysis. The LOIs were much lower than levels in dust that would be likely to cause bioactivity in humans, indicating that NTA is useful for identifying and monitoring compounds that may be of toxicological concern. Graphical abstract.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Dust; ENTACT; Exposomics; Non-targeted analysis; SRM 2585; Suspect screening

Year:  2020        PMID: 32335688      PMCID: PMC7450823          DOI: 10.1007/s00216-020-02658-w

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Anal Bioanal Chem        ISSN: 1618-2642            Impact factor:   4.142


  27 in total

1.  A study of ion suppression effects in electrospray ionization from mobile phase additives and solid-phase extracts.

Authors:  Claude R Mallet; Ziling Lu; Jeff R Mazzeo
Journal:  Rapid Commun Mass Spectrom       Date:  2004       Impact factor: 2.419

2.  Novel Polyfluorinated Compounds Identified Using High Resolution Mass Spectrometry Downstream of Manufacturing Facilities near Decatur, Alabama.

Authors:  Seth Newton; Rebecca McMahen; James A Stoeckel; Michael Chislock; Andrew Lindstrom; Mark Strynar
Journal:  Environ Sci Technol       Date:  2017-01-13       Impact factor: 9.028

3.  Identifying known unknowns using the US EPA's CompTox Chemistry Dashboard.

Authors:  Andrew D McEachran; Jon R Sobus; Antony J Williams
Journal:  Anal Bioanal Chem       Date:  2016-12-16       Impact factor: 4.142

4.  Is Nontargeted Screening Reproducible?

Authors:  Ronald A Hites; Karl J Jobst
Journal:  Environ Sci Technol       Date:  2018-10-24       Impact factor: 9.028

5.  Using prepared mixtures of ToxCast chemicals to evaluate non-targeted analysis (NTA) method performance.

Authors:  Jon R Sobus; Jarod N Grossman; Alex Chao; Randolph Singh; Antony J Williams; Christopher M Grulke; Ann M Richard; Seth R Newton; Andrew D McEachran; Elin M Ulrich
Journal:  Anal Bioanal Chem       Date:  2019-01-05       Impact factor: 4.142

6.  The Next Generation Blueprint of Computational Toxicology at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

Authors:  Russell S Thomas; Tina Bahadori; Timothy J Buckley; John Cowden; Chad Deisenroth; Kathie L Dionisio; Jeffrey B Frithsen; Christopher M Grulke; Maureen R Gwinn; Joshua A Harrill; Mark Higuchi; Keith A Houck; Michael F Hughes; E Sidney Hunter; Kristin K Isaacs; Richard S Judson; Thomas B Knudsen; Jason C Lambert; Monica Linnenbrink; Todd M Martin; Seth R Newton; Stephanie Padilla; Grace Patlewicz; Katie Paul-Friedman; Katherine A Phillips; Ann M Richard; Reeder Sams; Timothy J Shafer; R Woodrow Setzer; Imran Shah; Jane E Simmons; Steven O Simmons; Amar Singh; Jon R Sobus; Mark Strynar; Adam Swank; Rogelio Tornero-Valez; Elin M Ulrich; Daniel L Villeneuve; John F Wambaugh; Barbara A Wetmore; Antony J Williams
Journal:  Toxicol Sci       Date:  2019-06-01       Impact factor: 4.849

7.  Compositional space: A guide for environmental chemists on the identification of persistent and bioaccumulative organics using mass spectrometry.

Authors:  Xianming Zhang; Robert A Di Lorenzo; Paul A Helm; Eric J Reiner; Philip H Howard; Derek C G Muir; John G Sled; Karl J Jobst
Journal:  Environ Int       Date:  2019-06-08       Impact factor: 9.621

8.  Suspect Screening Analysis of Chemicals in Consumer Products.

Authors:  Katherine A Phillips; Alice Yau; Kristin A Favela; Kristin K Isaacs; Andrew McEachran; Christopher Grulke; Ann M Richard; Antony J Williams; Jon R Sobus; Russell S Thomas; John F Wambaugh
Journal:  Environ Sci Technol       Date:  2018-02-26       Impact factor: 9.028

Review 9.  Structure-based thresholds of toxicological concern (TTC): guidance for application to substances present at low levels in the diet.

Authors:  R Kroes; A G Renwick; M Cheeseman; J Kleiner; I Mangelsdorf; A Piersma; B Schilter; J Schlatter; F van Schothorst; J G Vos; G Würtzen
Journal:  Food Chem Toxicol       Date:  2004-01       Impact factor: 6.023

Review 10.  Integrating tools for non-targeted analysis research and chemical safety evaluations at the US EPA.

Authors:  Jon R Sobus; John F Wambaugh; Kristin K Isaacs; Antony J Williams; Andrew D McEachran; Ann M Richard; Christopher M Grulke; Elin M Ulrich; Julia E Rager; Mark J Strynar; Seth R Newton
Journal:  J Expo Sci Environ Epidemiol       Date:  2017-12-29       Impact factor: 5.563

View more
  5 in total

Review 1.  Prevalence and Implications of Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS) in Settled Dust.

Authors:  Tina Savvaides; Jeremy P Koelmel; Yakun Zhou; Elizabeth Z Lin; Paul Stelben; Juan J Aristizabal-Henao; John A Bowden; Krystal J Godri Pollitt
Journal:  Curr Environ Health Rep       Date:  2022-01-05

2.  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

3.  Uncertainty estimation strategies for quantitative non-targeted analysis.

Authors:  Louis C Groff; Jarod N Grossman; Anneli Kruve; Jeffrey M Minucci; Charles N Lowe; James P McCord; Dustin F Kapraun; Katherine A Phillips; S Thomas Purucker; Alex Chao; Caroline L Ring; Antony J Williams; Jon R Sobus
Journal:  Anal Bioanal Chem       Date:  2022-06-14       Impact factor: 4.478

4.  patRoon: open source software platform for environmental mass spectrometry based non-target screening.

Authors:  Rick Helmus; Thomas L Ter Laak; Annemarie P van Wezel; Pim de Voogt; Emma L Schymanski
Journal:  J Cheminform       Date:  2021-01-06       Impact factor: 5.514

5.  Approaches for assessing performance of high-resolution mass spectrometry-based non-targeted analysis methods.

Authors:  Christine M Fisher; Katherine T Peter; Seth R Newton; Andrew J Schaub; Jon R Sobus
Journal:  Anal Bioanal Chem       Date:  2022-07-07       Impact factor: 4.478

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.