Quantitative analysis of endogenous compounds
•Quantification of endogenous analytes in biological matrices.•Presents an overview of the four approaches.•Summarize their applications, and compare their advantages and disadvantages.•Discuss validation requirements and compatibility with FDA guidelines. Accurate quantitative analysis of endogenou...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of pharmaceutical and biomedical analysis 2016-09, Vol.128, p.426-437 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 437 |
---|---|
container_issue | |
container_start_page | 426 |
container_title | Journal of pharmaceutical and biomedical analysis |
container_volume | 128 |
creator | Thakare, Rhishikesh Chhonker, Yashpal S. Gautam, Nagsen Alamoudi, Jawaher Abdullah Alnouti, Yazen |
description | •Quantification of endogenous analytes in biological matrices.•Presents an overview of the four approaches.•Summarize their applications, and compare their advantages and disadvantages.•Discuss validation requirements and compatibility with FDA guidelines.
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. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1016/j.jpba.2016.06.017 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1809047759</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S073170851630334X</els_id><sourcerecordid>1809047759</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c356t-9c7bfe9cf15025e931c48f0b37ab7fa00faefc936a6c93c3a9204554f3c72ce63</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kE1LxDAQhoMo7rr6BzxIj15aJ03StOBFxC9YEEHBW0jTiaT0y6Zd2H9vll09CsPMHJ73ZeYl5JJCQoFmN3VSD6VO0rAnEIrKI7KkuWRxmvHPY7IEyWgsIRcLcuZ9DQCCFvyULFLJOM9YuiTx26y7yU16chuMdKebrXc-6m2EXdV_YdfPPjJ9O_RzV_lzcmJ14_HiMFfk4_Hh_f45Xr8-vdzfrWPDRDbFhZGlxcJYKiAVWDBqeG6hZFKX0moAq9GagmU6C90wXaTAheCWGZkazNiKXO99h7H_ntFPqnXeYNPoDsNBiuZQAJdSFAFN96gZe-9HtGoYXavHraKgdjGpWu1iUruYFISiMoiuDv5z2WL1J_nNJQC3ewDDlxuHo_LGYWewciOaSVW9-8__B8XWePg</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1809047759</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Quantitative analysis of endogenous compounds</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Access via ScienceDirect (Elsevier)</source><creator>Thakare, Rhishikesh ; Chhonker, Yashpal S. ; Gautam, Nagsen ; Alamoudi, Jawaher Abdullah ; Alnouti, Yazen</creator><creatorcontrib>Thakare, Rhishikesh ; Chhonker, Yashpal S. ; Gautam, Nagsen ; Alamoudi, Jawaher Abdullah ; Alnouti, Yazen</creatorcontrib><description>•Quantification of endogenous analytes in biological matrices.•Presents an overview of the four approaches.•Summarize their applications, and compare their advantages and disadvantages.•Discuss validation requirements and compatibility with FDA guidelines.
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.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0731-7085</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1873-264X</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.jpba.2016.06.017</identifier><identifier>PMID: 27344632</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>England: Elsevier B.V</publisher><subject>Background subtraction ; Biomarker ; Chemistry Techniques, Analytical - methods ; Chemistry Techniques, Analytical - standards ; Chromatography, Liquid - methods ; Guidelines as Topic ; LC–MS/MS ; Standard addition ; Surrogate analyte ; Surrogate matrix ; Tandem Mass Spectrometry - methods ; United States ; United States Food and Drug Administration ; Validation Studies as Topic</subject><ispartof>Journal of pharmaceutical and biomedical analysis, 2016-09, Vol.128, p.426-437</ispartof><rights>2016 Elsevier B.V.</rights><rights>Copyright © 2016 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c356t-9c7bfe9cf15025e931c48f0b37ab7fa00faefc936a6c93c3a9204554f3c72ce63</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c356t-9c7bfe9cf15025e931c48f0b37ab7fa00faefc936a6c93c3a9204554f3c72ce63</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jpba.2016.06.017$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,3550,27924,27925,45995</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27344632$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Thakare, Rhishikesh</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chhonker, Yashpal S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gautam, Nagsen</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Alamoudi, Jawaher Abdullah</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Alnouti, Yazen</creatorcontrib><title>Quantitative analysis of endogenous compounds</title><title>Journal of pharmaceutical and biomedical analysis</title><addtitle>J Pharm Biomed Anal</addtitle><description>•Quantification of endogenous analytes in biological matrices.•Presents an overview of the four approaches.•Summarize their applications, and compare their advantages and disadvantages.•Discuss validation requirements and compatibility with FDA guidelines.
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.</description><subject>Background subtraction</subject><subject>Biomarker</subject><subject>Chemistry Techniques, Analytical - methods</subject><subject>Chemistry Techniques, Analytical - standards</subject><subject>Chromatography, Liquid - methods</subject><subject>Guidelines as Topic</subject><subject>LC–MS/MS</subject><subject>Standard addition</subject><subject>Surrogate analyte</subject><subject>Surrogate matrix</subject><subject>Tandem Mass Spectrometry - methods</subject><subject>United States</subject><subject>United States Food and Drug Administration</subject><subject>Validation Studies as Topic</subject><issn>0731-7085</issn><issn>1873-264X</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2016</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kE1LxDAQhoMo7rr6BzxIj15aJ03StOBFxC9YEEHBW0jTiaT0y6Zd2H9vll09CsPMHJ73ZeYl5JJCQoFmN3VSD6VO0rAnEIrKI7KkuWRxmvHPY7IEyWgsIRcLcuZ9DQCCFvyULFLJOM9YuiTx26y7yU16chuMdKebrXc-6m2EXdV_YdfPPjJ9O_RzV_lzcmJ14_HiMFfk4_Hh_f45Xr8-vdzfrWPDRDbFhZGlxcJYKiAVWDBqeG6hZFKX0moAq9GagmU6C90wXaTAheCWGZkazNiKXO99h7H_ntFPqnXeYNPoDsNBiuZQAJdSFAFN96gZe-9HtGoYXavHraKgdjGpWu1iUruYFISiMoiuDv5z2WL1J_nNJQC3ewDDlxuHo_LGYWewciOaSVW9-8__B8XWePg</recordid><startdate>20160905</startdate><enddate>20160905</enddate><creator>Thakare, Rhishikesh</creator><creator>Chhonker, Yashpal S.</creator><creator>Gautam, Nagsen</creator><creator>Alamoudi, Jawaher Abdullah</creator><creator>Alnouti, Yazen</creator><general>Elsevier B.V</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20160905</creationdate><title>Quantitative analysis of endogenous compounds</title><author>Thakare, Rhishikesh ; Chhonker, Yashpal S. ; Gautam, Nagsen ; Alamoudi, Jawaher Abdullah ; Alnouti, Yazen</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c356t-9c7bfe9cf15025e931c48f0b37ab7fa00faefc936a6c93c3a9204554f3c72ce63</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2016</creationdate><topic>Background subtraction</topic><topic>Biomarker</topic><topic>Chemistry Techniques, Analytical - methods</topic><topic>Chemistry Techniques, Analytical - standards</topic><topic>Chromatography, Liquid - methods</topic><topic>Guidelines as Topic</topic><topic>LC–MS/MS</topic><topic>Standard addition</topic><topic>Surrogate analyte</topic><topic>Surrogate matrix</topic><topic>Tandem Mass Spectrometry - methods</topic><topic>United States</topic><topic>United States Food and Drug Administration</topic><topic>Validation Studies as Topic</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Thakare, Rhishikesh</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chhonker, Yashpal S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gautam, Nagsen</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Alamoudi, Jawaher Abdullah</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Alnouti, Yazen</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Journal of pharmaceutical and biomedical analysis</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Thakare, Rhishikesh</au><au>Chhonker, Yashpal S.</au><au>Gautam, Nagsen</au><au>Alamoudi, Jawaher Abdullah</au><au>Alnouti, Yazen</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Quantitative analysis of endogenous compounds</atitle><jtitle>Journal of pharmaceutical and biomedical analysis</jtitle><addtitle>J Pharm Biomed Anal</addtitle><date>2016-09-05</date><risdate>2016</risdate><volume>128</volume><spage>426</spage><epage>437</epage><pages>426-437</pages><issn>0731-7085</issn><eissn>1873-264X</eissn><abstract>•Quantification of endogenous analytes in biological matrices.•Presents an overview of the four approaches.•Summarize their applications, and compare their advantages and disadvantages.•Discuss validation requirements and compatibility with FDA guidelines.
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.</abstract><cop>England</cop><pub>Elsevier B.V</pub><pmid>27344632</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.jpba.2016.06.017</doi><tpages>12</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0731-7085 |
ispartof | Journal of pharmaceutical and biomedical analysis, 2016-09, Vol.128, p.426-437 |
issn | 0731-7085 1873-264X |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1809047759 |
source | MEDLINE; Access via ScienceDirect (Elsevier) |
subjects | Background subtraction Biomarker Chemistry Techniques, Analytical - methods Chemistry Techniques, Analytical - standards Chromatography, Liquid - methods Guidelines as Topic LC–MS/MS Standard addition Surrogate analyte Surrogate matrix Tandem Mass Spectrometry - methods United States United States Food and Drug Administration Validation Studies as Topic |
title | Quantitative analysis of endogenous compounds |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-24T01%3A21%3A39IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Quantitative%20analysis%20of%20endogenous%20compounds&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20pharmaceutical%20and%20biomedical%20analysis&rft.au=Thakare,%20Rhishikesh&rft.date=2016-09-05&rft.volume=128&rft.spage=426&rft.epage=437&rft.pages=426-437&rft.issn=0731-7085&rft.eissn=1873-264X&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.jpba.2016.06.017&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1809047759%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1809047759&rft_id=info:pmid/27344632&rft_els_id=S073170851630334X&rfr_iscdi=true |