Comparison Between an Automated and Manual Extraction for the Determination of Immunosuppressive Drugs Whole Blood Concentrations by Liquid Chromatography Tandem Mass Spectrometry

Background The whole blood extraction for liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry (LC‐MS/MS) of simultaneous quantification of cyclosporine A (Cys A), tacrolimus (Tacrs), sirolimus (Siros), and everolimus (Evers) is still performed manually in many laboratories. The analytical results obtaine...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of clinical laboratory analysis 2016-11, Vol.30 (6), p.924-929
Main Authors: Deslandes, Guillaume, Grégoire, Matthieu, Renaud, Christian, Monteil-Ganière, Catherine, Azoulay, Claudine, Pineau, Alain, Jolliet, Pascale, Dailly, Eric
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Automatic Data Processing - methods
automation
Chromatography
Chromatography, Liquid - methods
cyclosporine A
Drug Monitoring - methods
everolimus
Female
Humans
Immunosuppressive Agents - blood
Leukocytes
Linear Models
Male
Mass spectrometry
Pharmacology
sirolimus
tacrolimus
Tandem Mass Spectrometry - methods
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Background The whole blood extraction for liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry (LC‐MS/MS) of simultaneous quantification of cyclosporine A (Cys A), tacrolimus (Tacrs), sirolimus (Siros), and everolimus (Evers) is still performed manually in many laboratories. The analytical results obtained with an automated method using a liquid handler versus a classical manual preparation were compared. Methods Cys A (n = 36), Tacrs (n = 50), Siros (n = 34), Evers (n = 38) whole blood samples of patients were analyzed by LC‐MS/MS assay after manual preparation and automated process using a liquid handling platform including a centrifugation step. Results The comparison between manual and automated extraction investigated by a linear regression showed a high correlation between results [(Tacrs “automated”) = 1.0927 × (Tacrs “manual”) − 0.36; (Cys A “automated”) = 1.0284 × (Cys A “manual”) + 0.0312; (Siros “automated”) = 0.9923 × (Siros “manual”) + 0.4001; (Evers “automated”) = 1.0000 × (Evers “manual”) − 0.0600]. Conclusion The results obtained by the automated and manual preparation are consistent. The automated method is applied for high‐throughput therapeutic drug monitoring of immunosuppressive drugs in routine practice, leading to an increase in quality.
ISSN:0887-8013
1098-2825
DOI:10.1002/jcla.21958