ArticleJournal of pharmaceutical and biomedical analysis2023
Development and validation of an LC-MS/MS method to measure the BRAF inhibitors dabrafenib and encorafenib quantitatively and four major metabolites semi-quantitatively in human plasma.
Article in Journal of pharmaceutical and biomedical analysis, 2023. 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, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Simultaneous Estimation of Avutometinib and Defactinib in Rat Plasma by Using LC-MS/MS and Its Application to Pharmacokinetic Studies.Biomedical chromatography : BMC · 2026Article
- Performance Comparison of Liquid Chromatography and Paper Spray Ionization with Mass Spectrometry for Measuring Kinase Inhibitors in Human Plasma.ACS pharmacology & translational science · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
This article describes the development and validation of a liquid-chromatography coupled with tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) assay for the simultaneous quantitation of the BRAF inhibitors dabrafenib and encorafenib, and semi-quantitation of their major metabolites (i.e., carboxy-dabrafenib, desmethyl-dabrafenib, hydroxy-dabrafenib, M42.5A) in human plasma. Analytes were extracted from human plasma by protein precipitation, followed by reversed phase high-performance liquid chromatography. Analyte detection was performed using tandem mass spectrometry with heated electrospray ionization operating in positive ion mode. The assay was validated in accordance with the current U.S. Food and Drug Administration Guidance on Bioanalytical Method Validation. Results showed that measurements were both accurate (94.6-112.0 %) and precise (within-run: 1.9-3.4 %; between-run: 1.7-12.0 %) spanning a concentration range of 5 to 2000 ng/mL for dabrafenib and 10 to 4000 ng/mL for encorafenib. Recoveries for these analytes were consistent with mean values ranging from 85.6 % to 90.9 %. The mean internal standard-normalized matrix factors for each drug ranged between 0.87 and 0.98 and were found to be precise (% RSD <6.4 %). Dabrafenib and encorafenib were stable in the final extract and in human plasma held under various storage conditions. The metabolites also passed the validation criteria for precision and selectivity. Finally, the clinical applicability of the assay was confirmed by (semi-)quantitation of all six analytes in plasma samples from cancer patients receiving standard-of-care treatment with dabrafenib and encorafenib. Reproducibility of the measured analyte concentrations in study samples was confirmed successfully by incurred sample reanalysis. In conclusion, this sensitive LC-MS/MS assay has been validated successfully and is suitable for therapeutic drug monitoring of dabrafenib and encorafenib and clinical pharmacokinetic studies with these BRAF inhibitors.
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.