Journal of Pharmaceutical Health Care and Sciences (Jan 2024)
Validation of an automated sample preparation module directly connected to LC-MS/MS (CLAM-LC-MS/MS system) and comparison with conventional immunoassays for quantitation of tacrolimus and cyclosporin A in a clinical setting
Abstract
Abstract Background Therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) systems generally use either liquid chromatography/tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) or immunoassay, though both methodologies have disadvantages. In this study, we aimed to evaluate whether a CLAM-LC-MS/MS system, which consists of a sample preparation module directly connected to LC-MS/MS, could be used for clinical TDM work for immunosuppressive drugs in whole blood, which requires a hemolytic process. For this purpose, we prospectively validated this system for clinical measurement of tacrolimus and cyclosporin A in patients’ whole blood. The results were also compared with those of commercial immunoassays. Methods Whole blood from patients treated with tacrolimus or cyclosporin A at the Department of Nephrology and Departments of Rheumatology, Kanazawa University Hospital, from May 2018 to July 2019 was collected with informed consent, and drug concentrations were measured by CLAM-LC-MS/MS and by chemiluminescence immunoassay (CLIA) for tacrolimus and affinity column-mediated immunoassay (ACMIA) for cyclosporin A. Correlations between the CLAM-LC-MS/MS and immunoassay results were analyzed. Results Two hundred and twenty-four blood samples from 80 patients were used for tacrolimus measurement, and 76 samples from 21 patients were used for cyclosporin A. Intra- and inter-assay precision values of quality controls were less than 7%. There were significant correlations between CLAM-LC-MS/MS and the immunoassays for tacrolimus and cyclosporin A (Spearman rank correlation coefficients: 0.861, 0.941, P < 0.00001 in each case). The drug concentrations measured by CLAM-LC-MS/MS were about 20% lower than those obtained using the immunoassays. CLAM-LC-MS/MS maintenance requirements did not interfere with clinical operations. Compared to manual pretreatment, automated pretreatment by CLAM showed lower inter-assay precision values and greatly reduced the pretreatment time. Conclusions The results obtained by CLAM-LC-MS/MS were highly correlated with those of commercial immunoassay methods. CLAM-LC-MS/MS offers advantages in clinical TDM practice, including simple, automatic pretreatment, low maintenance requirement, and avoidance of interference.
Keywords