Published in

MDPI, International Journal of Molecular Sciences, 23(23), p. 14691, 2022

DOI: 10.3390/ijms232314691

Links

Tools

Export citation

Search in Google Scholar

Design and Validation of a Sensitive Multisteroid LC-MS/MS Assay for the Routine Clinical Use: One-Step Sample Preparation with Phospholipid Removal and Comparison to Immunoassays

Journal article published in 2022 by Valentin Braun ORCID, Hermann Stuppner ORCID, Lorenz Risch ORCID, Christoph Seger ORCID
This paper is made freely available by the publisher.
This paper is made freely available by the publisher.

Full text: Download

Green circle
Preprint: archiving allowed
Green circle
Postprint: archiving allowed
Green circle
Published version: archiving allowed
Data provided by SHERPA/RoMEO

Abstract

Steroid analysis in clinical laboratories is dominated by immunoassays (IAs) that have a high sample turnover but are inherently limited in trueness, precision, and sensitivity. Liquid chromatography coupled to mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) has proved to be a far more capable tool, delivering better sensitivity, specificity, and the possibility of parallel analysis of multiple steroids and metabolites, providing the endocrinologist with more reliable and comprehensive diagnostic information. An LC-MS/MS assay with gradient elution over less than eight minutes and a one-step sample preparation combining protein precipitation with phospholipid removal of off-line solid-phase extraction was developed and validated. It allowed the quantification of 11-deoxycorticosterone (11-DOC), 11-deoxycortisol (11-DF), 17-OH-progesterone (17P), 21-deoxycortisol (21-DF), androstenedione (ANDRO), aldosterone (ALDO), corticosterone (CC), cortisol (CL), cortisone (CN), dehydroepiandrosterone (DHEA), dehydroepiandrosterone sulfate (DHEAS), dihydrotestosterone (DHT), estradiol (E2), progesterone (PROG), and testosterone (TES) in human serum. Interday imprecision was generally better than 15%, trueness was proven by recovery experiments with ISO 17034-certified reference materials, proficiency testing (UK NEQAS), and measuring serum reference standards. In-house comparison against IVD-CE-certified immunoassays (IA) for 17P, ANDRO, CL, DHEAS, E2, PROG, and TES was conducted by assessing leftover routine patient samples and purpose-built patient serum pools. None of the compared routine IAs were meeting the standards of the LC-MS/MS. Insufficient overall comparability was found for ANDRO and 17P (mean bias >+65%). Accuracy limitations at lower concentrations were present in IAs for PROG, E2, and TES.