4.5 Article

Gas Chromatography-Tandem Mass Spectrometry Verification of Sulfur Mustard Exposure in Humans through the Conversion of Protein Adducts to Free Sulfur Mustard

期刊

CHEMICAL RESEARCH IN TOXICOLOGY
卷 33, 期 7, 页码 1941-1949

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acs.chemrestox.0c00134

关键词

-

资金

  1. Defense Threat Reduction Agency - Joint Science and Technology Office, Medical ST Division

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Exposures to sulfur mustard (HD; bis(2-chloroethyll) sulfide) are well-known to result in the formation of adducts with free aspartate and glutamate residues of plasma proteins (Lawrence, R. J., Smith, J. R, and Capacio, B. R. 2008 32, (1), 31-36). A modified version of the analytical method reported previously for the verification of HD exposure has been developed (Lawrence, R. J., Smith, J. R., and Capacio, B. R. 2008 32, (1), 31-36). The method reported herein involves the reaction of hydrochloric acid with HD-adducted plasma proteins, resulting in the simultaneous cleavage and conversion of the adduct to free HD. A water scavenger, 2,2-dimethoxypropane, was added to the mixture to increase the reaction yield. Deuterated (d(8)) thiodiglycol was added as an internal standard and underwent conversion to deuterated sulfur mustard. The analytes were isolated by hexane liquid-liquid extraction and subsequently analyzed by gas chromatography tandem mass spectrometry (GC-MS-MS). An interday and intraday study was performed to evaluate the accuracy and precision of the method. Individual calibration curves with quality control (QC) standards were prepared on 5 days, and a calibration curve with five sets of QCs was prepared on a single day. All results were within the acceptable limits of the validation criteria. Linearity, limit of detection, and limit of quantitation were also verified for each calibration curve. This highly sensitive (pg/mL limit of detection) method can be used for rapid analysis of a definitive marker of sulfur mustard exposure.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据