Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36364446›Full record

ArticleMolecules (Basel, Switzerland)2022

Comparison of LC-MS

Qiang Sun, Haiwei Cao, Yong Liu, Yanyan Li, Jing Huang

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Molecules (Basel, Switzerland), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 33% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Qiang SunDepartment of Laboratory Medicine, The First Hospital of Jilin University, Changchun 130061, China.
Haiwei CaoDepartment of Laboratory Medicine, The First Hospital of Jilin University, Changchun 130061, China.
Yong LiuGenetic Diagnosis Center, The First Hospital of Jilin University, Changchun 130061, China.
Yanyan LiDepartment of Laboratory Medicine, The First Hospital of Jilin University, Changchun 130061, China.
Jing HuangDepartment of Laboratory Medicine, The First Hospital of Jilin University, Changchun 130061, China.
Jilin University · CNFirst Hospital of Jilin University · CN

Funding

First Hospital of Jilin University JDYY2021-A0009Project of Jilin Provincial Department of science and technology 20200404167YY
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A simple sample preprocessing method was developed for the quantitative determination of amantadine (AMT) in human plasma by liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry cubed (LC-MS3). The LC-MS3 system comprised a Shimadzu Exion LC-20AD HPLC pump coupled with a QTRAP 5500 mass spectrometer. First, the plasma samples were pretreated using acetonitrile as the extracting solution to precipitate protein. Next, amantadine and amantadine-d15 (AMT-d15) were separated on an Agilent Poroshell 120 SB-C18 column (4.6 mm × 50 mm, 2.7 μm) using isocratic elution with solvent A (70% 0.1% formic acid) and solvent B (30% acetonitrile) at a flow rate of 0.8 mL/min. The total run time for each sample was 3 min. The system used triple-stage fragmentation transitions at m/z 152.2→135.3→107.4 for AMT quantification in the positive ion mode and m/z 167.0→150.3→118.1 for AMT-d15 quantification. The LC-MS3 assay was linear (r > 0.995) with a concentration range of 50−1500 ng/mL. The lower limit of quantification (LLOQ) was 50 ng/mL, and the intra-day and inter-day accuracies and precisions were less than 8.0% at all concentrations. In addition, the recoveries and matrix effect for AMT in human plasma were within acceptable limits. In terms of stability, AMT had no significant degradation under all conditions. All the results met the requirements of the guidelines of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for biological method validation. The novelty of the MS3 assay was that it presented a methodology with higher selectivity and sensitivity. This method was successfully applied to 44 human plasma samples, and the obtained quantitative results were compared with another liquid chromatography-multiple reaction monitoring (LC-MRM) method. The Passing-Bablok regression coefficients and Bland-Altman plot revealed no difference between the LC-MS3 and LC-MRM methods, implying that the developed LC-MS3 method is a reliable and accurate assay for AMT determination in human plasma. These results are also a proof of concept for determining chemicals in biological samples by the LC-MS3 strategy.

Indexed as

AmantadineTandem Mass SpectrometryAcetonitrilesChromatography, High Pressure LiquidChromatography, LiquidHumansReproducibility of ResultsSolventsAcetonitrilesAmantadineSolventsamantadineLC-MS3therapeutic drug monitoring

Identifiers

PMID36364446
PMCPMC9655109
OpenAlexW4308476459

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.