ArticleJournal of pharmaceutical health care and sciences2023
Evaluation of the clinical and quantitative performance of a practical HPLC-UV platform for in-hospital routine therapeutic drug monitoring of multiple drugs.
Article in Journal of pharmaceutical health care and sciences, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- How Feasible is the Use of Saliva for Antiviral Therapeutic Drug Monitoring? A Systematic Review and Analysis.Clinical pharmacokinetics · 2026Pooled it
- Metrological Evaluation of Metopimazine HPLC Assay: ISO-GUM and Monte Carlo Simulation Approaches.Pharmaceutics · 2025Article
- Standardization and validation of a high-efficiency liquid chromatography with a diode-array detector (HPLC-DAD) for voriconazole blood level determination.Biomedica : revista del Instituto Nacional de Salud · 2024Article
- Antimicrobial resistance: Current challenges and future directions.Medical journal, Armed Forces IndiaReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn-hospital therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) requires a suitable quantification method for target drugs from the viewpoint of precision, throughput, and testing costs. We previously developed a practical HPLC-UV platform for quantification of serum levels of various drugs. In this report, the platform was effectively applied to the quantification of patient serum levels of five different drugs by clinical professionals in our hospital during their daily work.
methodsThe residual sera of patients receiving carbamazepine (CBZ), phenytoin (PHT), lamotrigine (LTG), vancomycin (VCM), or voriconazole (VRCZ) were used in the present clinical study. The quantification method for each drug consisted of rapid solid-phase extraction (SPE) of each drug in the patient serum, followed by optimized HPLC-UV analysis of the drug in the SPE eluate. Furthermore, patient serum levels of PHT, CBZ, and VCM were also measured by ligand-binding assay using a cobas
resultsAll analytical conditions of the present method using our HPLC-UV platform were well optimized for each target drug quantification in the patient's serum, and the quantification method for each drug was fully validated for accuracy, precision and reproducibility. Furthermore, Passing-Bablok regression analysis and Bland-Altman analysis revealed that patient serum levels of PHT, CBZ, and VCM quantified by our HPLC-UV platform were closely correlated with those quantified by the cobas
conclusionsOur HPLC-UV platform can be performed without requiring special analytical techniques. This platform is expected to be used for the measurement of blood levels of multiple drugs for in-hospital routine TDM.
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.