ArticleJournal of AOAC International2023
Interlaboratory Evaluation of Multiple LC-MS/MS Methods and a Commercial ELISA Method for Determination of Tetrodotoxin in Oysters and Mussels.
Article in Journal of AOAC International, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Development and characterization of tetrodotoxin reference materials.Analytical and bioanalytical chemistry · 2026Article
- Nanozyme-Based Colorimetric Assay on a Magnetic Microfluidic Platform for Integrated Detection of TTX.Biosensors · 2026Article
- Survey of Tetrodotoxins (TTXs) in Gastropods, Sea Urchins, and Blue Crabs from the Adriatic Sea: First Report inFoods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Article
- Polymeric Prodrugs using Dynamic Covalent Chemistry for Prolonged Local Anesthesia.Angewandte Chemie (International ed. in English) · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
35 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundGiven the recent detection of tetrodotoxin (TTX) in bivalve molluscs but the absence of a full collaborative validation study for TTX determination in a large number of shellfish samples, interlaboratory assessment of method performance was required to better understand current capabilities for accurate and reproducible TTX quantitation using chemical and immunoassay methods.
objectiveThe aim was to conduct an interlaboratory study with multiple laboratories, using results to assess method performance and acceptability of different TTX testing methods.
methodsHomogenous and stable mussel and oyster materials were assessed by participants using a range of published and in-house detection methods to determine mean TTX concentrations. Data were used to calculate recoveries, repeatability, and reproducibility, together with participant acceptability z-scores.
resultsMethod performance characteristics were good, showing excellent sensitivity, recovery, and repeatability. Acceptable reproducibility was evidenced by HorRat values for all LC-MS/MS and ELISA methods being less than the 2.0 limit of acceptability. Method differences between the LC-MS/MS participants did not result in statistically different results. Method performance characteristics compared well with previously published single-laboratory validated methods and no statistical difference was found in results returned by ELISA in comparison with LC-MS/MS.
conclusionThe results from this study demonstrate that current LC-MS/MS methods and ELISA are on the whole capable of sensitive, accurate, and reproducible TTX quantitation in shellfish. Further work is recommended to expand the number of laboratories testing ELISA and to standardize an LC-MS/MS protocol to further improve interlaboratory precision. HIGHLIGHTS: Multiple mass spectrometric methods and a commercial ELISA have been successfully assessed through an interlaboratory study, demonstrating excellent performance.
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.