Quantification of nivolumab in human plasma by LC-MS/HRMS and LC-MS/MS, comparison with ELISA

Autor: François Goldwasser, Dorothée Lebert, Nihel Khoudour, Aurélien Millet, Benoit Blanchet, Pauline Bros, Guillaume Picard, Christelle Machon, Jérôme Guitton
Přispěvatelé: Université Claude Bernard Lyon 1 (UCBL), Université de Lyon, Institut Parisien de Chimie Physique et Théorique (IP2CT), Sorbonne Université (SU)-Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS)
Jazyk: angličtina
Rok vydání: 2021
Předmět:
Zdroj: Talanta
Talanta, Elsevier, 2021, 224, pp.121889-. ⟨10.1016/j.talanta.2020.121889⟩
ISSN: 0039-9140
DOI: 10.1016/j.talanta.2020.121889⟩
Popis: Nivolumab is a fully human immunoglobulin G4 used for the treatment of several advanced solid cancers as immune checkpoint inhibitors. There are some challenges for the quantification of mAb in plasma because IgG are present intrinsically in complex biologic matrices and this determination must be based on reliable, selective, and accurate analytical methods. This study described two validated methods carried out in two separate laboratories, one developed with a triple quadrupole tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) and the other with high resolution mass spectrometry with an orbitrap system (LC-MS/HRMS). Both methods used full-length stable isotope-labeled nivolumab-like (Arginine 13C6–15N4 and Lysine 13C6–15N2) as internal standard. The sample preparation was based on IgG immunocapture, then trypsin digestion was performed and one surrogate peptide was quantified in positive mode. Assays showed good linearity over the range of 5–100 μg/mL and 5–150 μg/mL for LC-MS/HRMS and LC-MS/MS, respectively. The limit of quantification was set at 2 and 5 μg/mL for LC-MS/HRMS and LC-MS/MS, respectively. Acceptable accuracy (from - 13.6% to 3.0%) and precision (within 20%) values were also obtained with both methods. The two LC-MS methods showed a very different matrix effect linked to the use of different analytical columns and elution gradients. Nivolumab plasma concentrations from 60 cancer outpatients were compared with the two mass spectrometry methods and also with a home-made ELISA method. The Bland–Altman analysis did not show any significant bias between the three methods. The Passing–Bablock linear regression analysis showed a good agreement between the three methods with a better correlation between the two mass spectrometry methods.
Databáze: OpenAIRE
Externí odkaz: