ArticleRapid communications in mass spectrometry : RCM2021
Development and validation of a rapid liquid chromatography/tandem mass spectrometry method to quantitate gabapentin and buprenorphine in human serum.
Article in Rapid communications in mass spectrometry : RCM, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Determination of Antiepileptics in Biological Samples-A Review.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Analytical Approaches for the Determination of Buprenorphine, Methadone and Their Metabolites in Biological Matrices.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
rationaleGabapentin has shown initial promise as an opioid-sparing medication in pain patients as well as a treatment for opioid withdrawal and liquid chriomatography/tandem mass spectrometry (LC/MS/MS) is often used for clinical monitoring. Despite reports of validated tandem mass spectrometric methods for the determination of gabapentin and buprenorphine, mechanisms for the collision-induced fragmentation have not been adequetely described.
methodsA rapid analytical method has been developed to determine gabapentinoid, gabapentin, and the partial opioid agonist, buprenorphine, in 20 μL of human serum using LC/MS/MS with a chromatographic run time of 2 min. A simplified sample cleanup procedure using methanol precipitation of serum proteins/lipids followed by evaporation and reconstitution in mobile phase was demonstrated. Gabapentin and buprenorphine were detected following positive ion electrospray ionization using multiple-reaction monitoring. The internal standard approach was used for quantitation with labeled gabapentin-D10 and buprenorphine-D4 serving as internal standards. Using organic reaction principals and stable isotope labels, collision-induced fragmentation mechanisms for both gabapentin and buprenorphine are proposed. The method was validated according to the FDA Guidance for Industry - Bioanalytical Method Validation.
resultsAccuracy was demonstrated by error values ≤15% for buprenorphine and ≤6% for gabapentin. The inter-day precision was ≤4.88% and 15.59% for gabapentin and buprenorphine and the intra-day precision was ≤5.20% and 11.65% for gabapentin and buprenorphine. The lower limit of quantitation corresponded to 10 ng/mL for gabapentin and 1 ng/mL for buprenorphine in serum. Recoveries were 104 ± 2.55% and 85 ± 2.03% for gabapentin and buprenorphine, respectively.
conclusionsConcentrations of gabapentin and buprenorphine were determined for five authentic human serum samples to further validate the utility of the method and applicable to therapeutic drug monitoring beyond its use as a drug screening assay. Furthermore, new mechanisms for the collision-induced dissociation of gabapentin and buprenorphine have been proposed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.