Abstract
Background
Invasive fungal disease is a life-threatening condition that can be challenging to treat due to pathogen resistance, drug toxicity, and therapeutic failure secondary to suboptimal drug concentrations. Frequent therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) is required for some anti-fungal agents to overcome these issues. Unfortunately, TDM at the institutional level is difficult, and samples are often sent to a commercial reference laboratory for analysis. To address this gap, the first paper spray-mass spectrometry assay for the simultaneous quantitation of five triazoles was developed.
Methods
Calibration curves for fluconazole, posaconazole, itraconazole, hydroxyitraconazole, and voriconazole were created utilizing plasma-based calibrants and four stable isotopic internal standards. No sample preparation was needed. Plasma samples were spotted on a paper substrate in pre-manufactured plastic cartridges, and the dried plasma spots were analyzed directly utilizing paper spray-mass spectrometry (paper spray MS/MS). All experiments were performed on a Thermo Scientific TSQ Vantage triple quadrupole mass spectrometer.
Results
The calibration curves for the five anti-fungal agents showed good linearity (R2 = 0.98–1.00). The measured assay ranges (lower limit of quantification [LLOQ]–upper limit of quantitation [ULOQ]) for fluconazole, posaconazole, itraconazole, hydroxyitraconazole, and voriconazole were 0.5–50 μg/mL, 0.1–10 μg/mL, 0.1–10 μg/mL, 0.1–10 μg/mL, and 0.1–10 μg/mL, respectively. The inter- and intra-day accuracy and precision were less than 25% over the respective ranges.
Conclusions
We developed the first rapid paper spray-MS/MS assay for simultaneous quantitation of five triazole anti-fungal agents in plasma. The method may be a powerful tool for near-point-of-care TDM aimed at improving patient care by reducing the turnaround time and for use in clinical research.
Author contributions: All the authors have accepted responsibility for the entire content of this submitted manuscript and approved submission.
Research funding: This research was supported by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) grants: R21DA043037 and T32HD069047, Funder Id: http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/100000002.
Employment or leadership: None declared.
Honorarium: None declared.
Competing interests: The funding organization(s) played no role in the study design; in the collection, analysis, and interpretation of data; in the writing of the report; or in the decision to submit the report for publication.
References
1. Pana ZD, Roilides E, Warris A, Groll AH, Zaoutis T. Epidemiology of invasive fungal disease in children. J Pediatr Infect Dis Soc 2017;6:S3–11.10.1093/jpids/pix046Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
2. Menzin J, Meyers JL, Friedman M, Perfect JR, Langston AA, Danna RP, et al. Mortality, length of hospitalization, and costs associated with invasive fungal infections in high-risk patients. Am J Health Syst Pharm 2009;66:1711–7.10.2146/ajhp080325Search in Google Scholar PubMed
3. Clark TA, Hajjeh RA. Recent trends in the epidemiology of invasive mycoses. Curr Opin Infect Dis 2002;15:569–74.10.1097/00001432-200212000-00003Search in Google Scholar PubMed
4. Drgona L, Khachatryan A, Stephens J, Charbonneau C, Kantecki M, Haider S, et al. Clinical and economic burden of invasive fungal diseases in Europe: focus on pre-emptive and empirical treatment of Aspergillus and Candida species. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis 2014;33:7–21.10.1007/s10096-013-1944-3Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
5. Scorzoni L, de Paula ES, Marcos CM, Assato PA, de Melo WC, de Oliveira HC, et al. Antifungal therapy: new advances in the understanding and treatment of mycosis. Front Microbiol 2017;8:36.10.3389/fmicb.2017.00036Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
6. Denning DW, Hope WW. Therapy for fungal diseases: opportunities and priorities. Trends Microbiol 2010;18:195–204.10.1016/j.tim.2010.02.004Search in Google Scholar PubMed
7. Andes D, Pascual A, Marchetti O. Antifungal therapeutic drug monitoring: established and emerging indications. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2009;53:24–34.10.1128/AAC.00705-08Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
8. Ashbee HR, Barnes RA, Johnson EM, Richardson MD, Gorton R, Hope WW. Therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) of antifungal agents: guidelines from the British Society for Medical Mycology. J Antimicrob Chemother 2014;69:1162–76.10.1093/jac/dkt508Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
9. Pfaller MA. Antifungal drug resistance: mechanisms, epidemiology, and consequences for treatment. Am J Med 2012;125:S3–13.10.1016/j.amjmed.2011.11.001Search in Google Scholar PubMed
10. Boast A, Curtis N, Cranswick N, Gwee A. Voriconazole dosing and therapeutic drug monitoring in children: experience from a paediatric tertiary care centre. J Antimicrob Chemother 2016;71:2031–6.10.1093/jac/dkw056Search in Google Scholar PubMed
11. Park WB, Kim NH, Kim KH, Lee SH, Nam WS, Yoon SH, et al. The effect of therapeutic drug monitoring on safety and efficacy of voriconazole in invasive fungal infections: a randomized controlled trial. Clin Infect Dis 2012;55:1080–7.10.1093/cid/cis599Search in Google Scholar PubMed
12. Pascual A, Calandra T, Bolay S, Buclin T, Bille J, Marchetti O. Voriconazole therapeutic drug monitoring in patients with invasive mycosis improves efficacy and safety outcomes. Clin Infect Dis 2008;46:201–11.10.1086/524669Search in Google Scholar PubMed
13. Mellinghoff SC, Panse J, Alakel N, Behre G, Buchheidt D, Christopeit M, et al. Primary prophylaxis of invasive fungal infections in patients with haematological malignancies: 2017 update of the recommendations of the Infectious Diseases Working Party (AGIHO) of the German Society for Haematology and Medical Oncology (DGHO). Ann Hematol 2018;97:197–207.10.1007/s00277-017-3196-2Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
14. Smith J, Safdar N, Knasinski V, Simmons W, Bhavnani SM, Ambrose PG, et al. Voriconazole therapeutic drug monitoring. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2006;50:1570–2.10.1128/AAC.50.4.1570-1572.2006Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
15. Denning DW, Tucker RM, Hanson LH, Hamilton JR, Stevens DA. Itraconazole therapy for cryptococcal meningitis and cryptococcosis. Arch Intern Med 1989;149:2301–8.10.1001/archinte.1989.00390100107024Search in Google Scholar
16. Decosterd LA, Rochat B, Pesse B, Mercier T, Tissot F, Widmer N, et al. Multiplex ultra-performance liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry method for simultaneous quantification in human plasma of fluconazole, itraconazole, hydroxyitraconazole, posaconazole, voriconazole, voriconazole-N-oxide, anidulafungin, and caspofungin. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2010;54:5303–15.10.1128/AAC.00404-10Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
17. Rochat B, Pascual A, Pesse B, Lamoth F, Sanglard D, Decosterd LA, et al. Ultra-performance liquid chromatography mass spectrometry and sensitive bioassay methods for quantification of posaconazole plasma concentrations after oral dosing. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2010;54:5074–81.10.1128/AAC.00022-10Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
18. Farowski F, Cornely OA, Vehreschild JJ, Hartmann P, Bauer T, Steinbach A, et al. Quantitation of azoles and echinocandins in compartments of peripheral blood by liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2010;54:1815–9.10.1128/AAC.01276-09Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
19. Kousoulos C, Tsatsou G, Apostolou C, Dotsikas Y, Loukas YL. Development of a high-throughput method for the determination of itraconazole and its hydroxy metabolite in human plasma, employing automated liquid–liquid extraction based on 96-well format plates and LC/MS/MS. Anal Bioanal Chem 2006;384:199–207.10.1007/s00216-005-0159-6Search in Google Scholar PubMed
20. Muller C, Gehlen D, Blaich C, Prozeller D, Liss B, Streichert T, et al. Reliable and easy-to-use liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry method for simultaneous analysis of fluconazole, isavuconazole, itraconazole, hydroxy-itraconazole, posaconazole, and voriconazole in human plasma and serum. Ther Drug Monit 2017;39:505–13.10.1097/FTD.0000000000000438Search in Google Scholar PubMed
21. Jannetto PJ, Fitzgerald RL. Effective use of mass spectrometry in the clinical laboratory. Clin Chem 2016;62:92–8.10.1373/clinchem.2015.248146Search in Google Scholar PubMed
22. Nair H, Clarke W, editors. Mass spectrometry for the clinical laboratory. 1st ed. Amsterdam, Boston: Elsevier Ltd: Academic Press; 2017.10.1016/B978-0-12-800871-3.00001-8Search in Google Scholar
23. Clarke W, Rhea JM, Molinaro R. Challenges in implementing clinical liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry methods – seeing the light at the end of the tunnel. J Mass Spectrom 2013;48:755–67.10.1002/jms.3214Search in Google Scholar PubMed
24. Liu J, Wang H, Manicke NE, Lin JM, Cooks RG, Ouyang Z. Development, characterization, and application of paper spray ionization. Anal Chem 2010;82:2463–71.10.1021/ac902854gSearch in Google Scholar PubMed
25. Manicke NE, Bills BJ, Zhang C. Analysis of biofluids by paper spray MS: advances and challenges. Bioanalysis 2016;8: 589–606.10.4155/bio-2015-0018Search in Google Scholar PubMed
26. Wang H, Liu J, Cooks RG, Ouyang Z. Paper spray for direct analysis of complex mixtures using mass spectrometry. Angew Chem Int Ed Engl 2010;49:877–80.10.1002/anie.200906314Search in Google Scholar PubMed
27. Yang Q, Wang H, Maas JD, Chappell WJ, Manicke NE, Cooks RG, et al. Paper spray ionization devices for direct, biomedical analysis using mass spectrometry. Int J Mass Spectrom 2012;312:201–7.10.1016/j.ijms.2011.05.013Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
28. Espy RD, Muliadi AR, Ouyang Z, Cooks RG. Spray mechanism in paper spray ionization. Int J Mass Spectrom 2012;325:167–71.10.1016/j.ijms.2012.06.017Search in Google Scholar
29. Espy RD, Manicke NE, Ouyang Z, Cooks RG. Rapid analysis of whole blood by paper spray mass spectrometry for point-of-care therapeutic drug monitoring. Analyst 2012;137:2344–9.10.1039/c2an35082cSearch in Google Scholar PubMed
30. Manicke NE, Abu-Rabie P, Spooner N, Ouyang Z, Cooks RG. Quantitative analysis of therapeutic drugs in dried blood spot samples by paper spray mass spectrometry: an avenue to therapeutic drug monitoring. J Am Soc Mass Spectrom 2011;22:1501–7.10.1007/s13361-011-0177-xSearch in Google Scholar PubMed
31. Shi RZ, El Gierari el TM, Faix JD, Manicke NE. Rapid measurement of cyclosporine and sirolimus in whole blood by paper spray-tandem mass spectrometry. Clin Chem 2016;62:295–7.10.1373/clinchem.2015.245191Search in Google Scholar PubMed
32. Shi RZ, El Gierari el TM, Manicke NE, Faix JD. Rapid measurement of tacrolimus in whole blood by paper spray-tandem mass spectrometry (PS-MS/MS). Clin Chim Acta 2015;441:99–104.10.1016/j.cca.2014.12.022Search in Google Scholar
33. Yang Q, Manicke NE, Wang H, Petucci C, Cooks RG, Ouyang Z. Direct and quantitative analysis of underivatized acylcarnitines in serum and whole blood using paper spray mass spectrometry. Anal Bioanal Chem 2012;404:1389–97.10.1007/s00216-012-6211-4Search in Google Scholar
34. FDA. Bioanalytical method validation guidance for industry. White Oaks, MD: Food and Drug Administration; 2018.Search in Google Scholar
35. Meng M, Carter S, Bennet P. LC-MS bioanalysis of drugs in hemolyzed and lipemic samples. In: Li W, Zhang J, Tse F, editors. Handbook of LC-MS bioanalysis: best practices, experimental protocols, and regulations. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc; 2013. p. 369–79.10.1002/9781118671276.ch29Search in Google Scholar
36. Almeida AM, Castel-Branco MM, Falcão AC. Linear regression for calibration lines revisited: weighting schemes for bioanalytical methods. J Chromatogr B Analyt Technol Biomed Life Sci 2002;774:215–22.10.1016/S1570-0232(02)00244-1Search in Google Scholar
37. Giavarina D. Understanding Bland Altman analysis. Biochem Med (Zagreb) 2015;25:141–51.10.11613/BM.2015.015Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
38. Matuszewski BK. Standard line slopes as a measure of a relative matrix effect in quantitative HPLC-MS bioanalysis. J Chromatogr B Analyt Technol Biomed Life Sci 2006;830:293–300.10.1016/j.jchromb.2005.11.009Search in Google Scholar PubMed
39. Hussaini T, Ruping MJ, Farowski F, Vehreschild JJ, Cornely OA. Therapeutic drug monitoring of voriconazole and posaconazole. Pharmacotherapy 2011;31:214–25.10.1592/phco.31.2.214Search in Google Scholar PubMed
40. Yi WM, Schoeppler KE, Jaeger J, Mueller SW, MacLaren R, Fish DN, et al. Voriconazole and posaconazole therapeutic drug monitoring: a retrospective study. Ann Clin Microbiol Antimicrob 2017;16:60.10.1186/s12941-017-0235-8Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
41. CLSI. Performance standards for antifungal testing of yeasts. CLSI document M60. Wayne, PA: Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute; 2017.Search in Google Scholar
42. CLSI. Performance standards for antifungal susceptibility testing of filamentous fungi. CLSI document M61. Wayne, PA: Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute; 2017.Search in Google Scholar
43. Bland J, Altman D. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 1986;327:307–10.10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2009.10.001Search in Google Scholar
44. Mak J, Sujishi KK, French D. Development and validation of a liquid chromatography–tandem mass spectrometry (LC–MS/MS) assay to quantify serum voriconazole. J Chromatogr B Analyt Technol Biomed Life Sci 2015;986987:94–9.10.1016/j.jchromb.2015.02.011Search in Google Scholar PubMed
45. Hostetler JS, Heykants J, Clemons KV, Woestenborghs R, Hanson LH, Stevens DA. Discrepancies in bioassay and chromatography determinations explained by metabolism of itraconazole to hydroxyitraconazole: studies of interpatient variations in concentrations. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1993;37:2224–7.10.1128/AAC.37.10.2224Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
46. Perea S, Pennick GJ, Modak A, Fothergill AW, Sutton DA, Sheehan DJ, et al. Comparison of high-performance liquid chromatographic and microbiological methods for determination of voriconazole levels in plasma. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2000;44:1209–13.10.1128/AAC.44.5.1209-1213.2000Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
47. Warnock DW, Turner A, Burke J. Comparison of high performance liquid chromatographic and microbiological methods for determination of itraconazole. J Antimicrob Chemother 1988;21:93–100.10.1093/jac/21.1.93Search in Google Scholar PubMed
48. Bruggemann RJ, Touw DJ, Aarnoutse RE, Verweij PE, Burger DM. International interlaboratory proficiency testing program for measurement of azole antifungal plasma concentrations. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2009;53:303–5.10.1128/AAC.00901-08Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
49. Law D, Moore CB, Denning DW. Bioassay for serum itraconazole concentrations using hydroxyitraconazole standards. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1994;38:1561–6.10.1128/AAC.38.7.1561Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
50. Miyakis S, van Hal SJ, Ray J, Marriott D. Voriconazole concentrations and outcome of invasive fungal infections. Clin Microbiol Infect 2010;16:927–33.10.1111/j.1469-0691.2009.02990.xSearch in Google Scholar PubMed
51. Krueger R, Vogeser M, Burghardt S, Vogelsberger R, Lackner KJ. Impact of glucuronide interferences on therapeutic drug monitoring of posaconazole by tandem mass spectrometry. Clin Chem Lab Med 2010;48:1723–31.10.1515/CCLM.2010.333Search in Google Scholar PubMed
52. Krieter P, Flannery B, Musick T, Gohdes M, Martinho M, Courtney R. Disposition of posaconazole following single-dose oral administration in healthy subjects. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2004;48:3543–51.10.1128/AAC.48.9.3543-3551.2004Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
©2020 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
