-
Something wrong with this record ?
Matrix effects in ultra-high performance supercritical fluid chromatography-mass spectrometry analysis of vitamin E in plasma: The effect of sample preparation and data processing
V. Pilařová, K. Plachká, F. Svec, L. Nováková
Language English Country Netherlands
Document type Journal Article
- MeSH
- Solid Phase Extraction methods MeSH
- Mass Spectrometry * methods MeSH
- Calibration MeSH
- Humans MeSH
- Chromatography, Supercritical Fluid * methods MeSH
- Vitamin E * blood analysis MeSH
- Check Tag
- Humans MeSH
- Publication type
- Journal Article MeSH
The approaches to matrix effects determination and reduction in ultra-high performance supercritical fluid chromatography with mass spectrometry detection have been evaluated in this study using different sample preparation methods and investigation of different calibration models. Five sample preparation methods, including protein precipitation, liquid-liquid extraction, supported liquid extraction, and solid phase extraction based on both "bind and elute" and "interferent removal" modes, were optimized with an emphasis on the matrix effects and recovery of 8 forms of vitamin E, including α-, β-, γ-, and δ-tocopherols and tocotrienols, from plasma. The matrix effect evaluation included the use and comparison of external and internal calibration using three models, i.e., least square with no transformation and no weighting (1/x0), with 1/x2 weighting, and with logarithmic transformation. The calibration model with logarithmic transformation provided the lowest %-errors and the best fits. Moreover, the type of the calibration model significantly affected not only the fit of the data but also the matrix effects when evaluating them based on the comparison of calibration curve slopes. Indeed, based on the used calibration model, the matrix effects calculated from calibration slopes ranged from +92% to - 72% for α-tocopherol and from -77% to +19% in the case of δ-tocotrienol. Thus, it was crucial to calculate the matrix effect by Matuszewski's post-extraction approach at six concentration levels. Indeed, a strong concentration dependence was observed for all optimized sample preparation methods, even if the stable isotopically labelled internal standards (SIL-IS) were used for compensation. The significant differences between individual concentration levels and compounds were observed, even when the tested calibration range covered only one order of magnitude. In methods with wider calibration ranges, the inappropriate use of calibration slope comparison instead of the post-extraction addition approach could result in false negative results of matrix effects. In the selected example of vitamin E, solid-phase extraction was the least affected by matrix effects when used in interferent removal mode, but supported liquid extraction resulted in the highest recoveries. We showed that the calibration model, the use of a SIL-IS, and the analyte concentration level played a crucial role in the matrix effects. Moreover, the matrix effects can significantly differ for compounds with similar physicochemical properties and close retention times. Thus, in all bioanalytical applications, where different analytes are typically determined in one analytical run, it is necessary to carefully select the data processing in addition to the method for the sample preparation, SIL-IS, and chromatography.
References provided by Crossref.org
- 000
- 00000naa a2200000 a 4500
- 001
- bmc24018634
- 003
- CZ-PrNML
- 005
- 20241024111251.0
- 007
- ta
- 008
- 241015e20240802ne f 000 0|eng||
- 009
- AR
- 024 7_
- $a 10.1016/j.talanta.2024.126658 $2 doi
- 035 __
- $a (PubMed)39137659
- 040 __
- $a ABA008 $b cze $d ABA008 $e AACR2
- 041 0_
- $a eng
- 044 __
- $a ne
- 100 1_
- $a Pilařová, Veronika $u Department of Analytical Chemistry, Faculty of Pharmacy in Hradec Králové, Charles University, Heyrovského 1203, 500 03, Hradec Králové, Czech Republic
- 245 10
- $a Matrix effects in ultra-high performance supercritical fluid chromatography-mass spectrometry analysis of vitamin E in plasma: The effect of sample preparation and data processing / $c V. Pilařová, K. Plachká, F. Svec, L. Nováková
- 520 9_
- $a The approaches to matrix effects determination and reduction in ultra-high performance supercritical fluid chromatography with mass spectrometry detection have been evaluated in this study using different sample preparation methods and investigation of different calibration models. Five sample preparation methods, including protein precipitation, liquid-liquid extraction, supported liquid extraction, and solid phase extraction based on both "bind and elute" and "interferent removal" modes, were optimized with an emphasis on the matrix effects and recovery of 8 forms of vitamin E, including α-, β-, γ-, and δ-tocopherols and tocotrienols, from plasma. The matrix effect evaluation included the use and comparison of external and internal calibration using three models, i.e., least square with no transformation and no weighting (1/x0), with 1/x2 weighting, and with logarithmic transformation. The calibration model with logarithmic transformation provided the lowest %-errors and the best fits. Moreover, the type of the calibration model significantly affected not only the fit of the data but also the matrix effects when evaluating them based on the comparison of calibration curve slopes. Indeed, based on the used calibration model, the matrix effects calculated from calibration slopes ranged from +92% to - 72% for α-tocopherol and from -77% to +19% in the case of δ-tocotrienol. Thus, it was crucial to calculate the matrix effect by Matuszewski's post-extraction approach at six concentration levels. Indeed, a strong concentration dependence was observed for all optimized sample preparation methods, even if the stable isotopically labelled internal standards (SIL-IS) were used for compensation. The significant differences between individual concentration levels and compounds were observed, even when the tested calibration range covered only one order of magnitude. In methods with wider calibration ranges, the inappropriate use of calibration slope comparison instead of the post-extraction addition approach could result in false negative results of matrix effects. In the selected example of vitamin E, solid-phase extraction was the least affected by matrix effects when used in interferent removal mode, but supported liquid extraction resulted in the highest recoveries. We showed that the calibration model, the use of a SIL-IS, and the analyte concentration level played a crucial role in the matrix effects. Moreover, the matrix effects can significantly differ for compounds with similar physicochemical properties and close retention times. Thus, in all bioanalytical applications, where different analytes are typically determined in one analytical run, it is necessary to carefully select the data processing in addition to the method for the sample preparation, SIL-IS, and chromatography.
- 650 12
- $a vitamin E $x krev $x analýza $7 D014810
- 650 12
- $a superkritická fluidní chromatografie $x metody $7 D025924
- 650 12
- $a hmotnostní spektrometrie $x metody $7 D013058
- 650 _2
- $a lidé $7 D006801
- 650 _2
- $a kalibrace $7 D002138
- 650 _2
- $a extrakce na pevné fázi $x metody $7 D052616
- 655 _2
- $a časopisecké články $7 D016428
- 700 1_
- $a Plachká, Kateřina $u Department of Analytical Chemistry, Faculty of Pharmacy in Hradec Králové, Charles University, Heyrovského 1203, 500 03, Hradec Králové, Czech Republic
- 700 1_
- $a Svec, Frantisek $u Department of Analytical Chemistry, Faculty of Pharmacy in Hradec Králové, Charles University, Heyrovského 1203, 500 03, Hradec Králové, Czech Republic
- 700 1_
- $a Nováková, Lucie $u Department of Analytical Chemistry, Faculty of Pharmacy in Hradec Králové, Charles University, Heyrovského 1203, 500 03, Hradec Králové, Czech Republic. Electronic address: nol@email.cz
- 773 0_
- $w MED00004484 $t Talanta $x 1873-3573 $g Roč. 280 (20240802), s. 126658
- 856 41
- $u https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39137659 $y Pubmed
- 910 __
- $a ABA008 $b sig $c sign $y - $z 0
- 990 __
- $a 20241015 $b ABA008
- 991 __
- $a 20241024111245 $b ABA008
- 999 __
- $a ok $b bmc $g 2201502 $s 1230607
- BAS __
- $a 3
- BAS __
- $a PreBMC-MEDLINE
- BMC __
- $a 2024 $b 280 $c - $d 126658 $e 20240802 $i 1873-3573 $m Talanta $n Talanta $x MED00004484
- LZP __
- $a Pubmed-20241015