4.2 Article

Testosterone measurement by liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry: the importance of internal standard choice

Journal

ANNALS OF CLINICAL BIOCHEMISTRY
Volume 49, Issue -, Pages 600-602

Publisher

ROYAL SOC MEDICINE PRESS LTD
DOI: 10.1258/acb.2012.012037

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: Testosterone measurement by liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) is well accepted as the preferred technique for the analysis of testosterone. Variation is seen between assays and is likely to be due to method differences. One area of inconsistency among assays is the choice of internal standard. We investigated the effects of three internal standards. Methods: Testosterone with two deuterium (D2), five deuterium (D5) and three carbon 13 enrichment (C13) were separately assessed. Samples were extracted using ether following the addition of 10 mu L of internal standard. All aliquots were prepared in triplicate, one for each type of internal standard. After mixing, the ether was transferred to a 96-deep well block, and then evaporated to dryness. Extracts were reconstituted with 50% mobile phases and analysed using a Waters ACQUITY UPLC and Quattro Premier tandem mass spectrometer. This method had previously been shown to have excellent agreement with a reference method using the D2 internal standard and this was considered the target. Results: Lower results were obtained when using D5 testosterone when compared with D2 testosterone. The C13 internal standard also gave lower results, but was closer to the D2 target than the D5 internal standard. Conclusions: The choice of internal standard alone can have a significant affect on the results obtained by LC-MS/MS assays for testosterone using this chromatography. The effects of the combination of chromatography and internal standard choice should be investigated during method development. Ann Clin Biochem 2012; 49: 600-602. DOI: 10.1258/acb.2012.012037

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available