4.7 Article

Simultaneous measurement of total estradiol and testosterone in human serum by isotope dilution liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry

期刊

ANALYTICAL AND BIOANALYTICAL CHEMISTRY
卷 409, 期 25, 页码 5943-5954

出版社

SPRINGER HEIDELBERG
DOI: 10.1007/s00216-017-0529-x

关键词

CDC HoSt; Estradiol; Testosterone; Hormone; Serum; LC-MS/MS

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Reliable measurement of total testosterone and estradiol is critical for their use as biomarkers of hormone-related disorders in patient care and translational research. We developed and validated a mass spectrometry method to simultaneously quantify these analytes in human serum without chemical derivatization. Serum is equilibrated with isotopic internal standards and treated with acidic buffer to release hormones from their binding proteins. Lipids are isolated and polar impurities are removed by two serial liquid-liquid extraction steps. Total testosterone and estradiol are measured using liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) in combination of positive and negative electrospray ionization modes. The method shows broad analytical measurement range for both testosterone 0.03-48.5 nM (0.75-1400 ng/dL) and estradiol 11.0-5138 pM (2.99-1400 pg/mL) and excellent agreement with certified reference materials (mean bias less than 2.1% to SRM 971, BCR 576, 577, and 578) and a high order reference method (mean bias 1.25% for testosterone and -0.84% for estradiol). The high accuracy of the method was monitored and certified by CDC Hormone Standardization (HoSt) Program for 2 years with mean bias -0.7% (95% CI -1.6% to 0.2%) for testosterone and 0.1% (95% CI -2.2% to 2.3%) for estradiol. The method precision over a 2-year period for quality control pools at low, medium, and high concentrations was 2.7-2.9% for testosterone and 3.3-5.3% for estradiol. With the consistently excellent accuracy and precision, this method is readily applicable for high-throughput clinical and epidemiological studies.

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

4.7
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