ArticleFrontiers in psychiatry2026
Study on the stability of antipsychotic drugs in clinical samples within serum collection tubes with and without separating gel.
Article in Frontiers in psychiatry, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The study evaluated loss due to adsorption of selected antipsychotic drugs in serum samples collected in blood collection tubes with and without separation gel using real clinical specimens. Methods: Clinical serum specimens (n = 30 per drug) were obtained from paired blood collection tubes with and without separation gel. After clotting for approximately 2 h at room temperature, samples were centrifuged, and Day 0 drug concentrations were measured by LC-MS/MS within 2 h after centrifugation. To distinguish intrinsic analyte instability from separation-gel-associated loss, serum aliquots from both gel and non-gel tubes were stored in the dark in a monitored refrigerator set at 4°C, with recorded temperatures ranging from 3.6°C to 4.8°C, and reanalyzed on Days 2 and 7. Results: On Day 0, the concentrations of clozapine and aripiprazole were significantly lower in separation-gel tubes than in non-gel tubes, with mean relative reductions of 7.86% and 5.02%, respectively, although both remained within the predefined ±15% acceptance criterion. In non-gel tubes, clozapine remained stable during refrigerated storage, with residual concentrations of 99.1% on Day 2 and 98.3% on Day 7 relative to Day 0. In contrast, clozapine in gel tubes decreased to 95.0% on Day 2 and 89.6% on Day 7. The gel versus non-gel difference was significant on Day 7, with a mean additional loss of 8.7% in gel tubes compared with non-gel tubes (p < 0.001). Aripiprazole showed a lower concentration in gel tubes on Day 0 but no further time-dependent loss in either tube type during storage. No relevant loss was observed for the remaining antipsychotic drugs and metabolites. Conclusion: Under the tested conditions, most analytes showed no clinically relevant concentration loss during 7 days of refrigerated storage. Clozapine showed a measurable decrease in separation-gel tubes but not in non-gel tubes, suggesting an additional gel-associated contribution that may affect TDM interpretation near clinical decision thresholds. Aripiprazole showed an early tube-related difference without further storage-dependent loss. These findings should be interpreted within the evaluated tube brand, gel formulation, storage condition, and concentration ranges.
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.