4.5 Article

Development and validation of a liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry assay for the quantitation of a protein therapeutic in cynomolgus monkey serum

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.jchromb.2015.02.007

关键词

LC-MS/MS; Protein therapeutics; Bioanalysis; Albumin removal; Validation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We have developed and fully validated a fast and simple LC-MS/MS assay to quantitate a therapeutic protein BMS-A in cynomolgus monkey serum. Prior to trypsin digestion, a recently reported sample pretreatment method was applied to remove more than 95% of the total serum albumin and denature the proteins in the serum sample. The pretreatment procedure simplified the biological sample prior to digestion, improved digestion efficiency and reproducibility, and did not require reduction and alkylation. The denatured proteins were then digested with trypsin at 60 degrees C for 30 min and the tryptic peptides were chromatographically separated on an Acquity CSH column (2.1 mm x 50 mm, 1.7 pm) using gradient elution. One surrogate peptide was used for quantitation and another surrogate peptide was selected for confirmation. Two corresponding stable isotope labeled peptides were used to compensate variations during LC-MS detection. The linear analytical range of the assay was 0.50-500 mu g/mL. The accuracy (%Dev) was within +/- 5.4% and the total assay variation (%CV) was less than 12.0% for sample analysis. The validated method demonstrated good accuracy and precision and the application of the innovative albumin removal sample pretreatment method improved both assay sensitivity and robustness. The assay has been applied to a cynomolgus monkey toxicology study and the serum sample concentration data were in good agreement with data generated using a quantitative ligand-binding assay (LBA). The use of a confirmatory peptide, in addition to the quantitation peptide, ensured the integrity of the drug concentrations measured by the method. (C) 2015 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

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