Ion mobility-high resolution mass spectrometry in doping control analysis. Part II: Comparison of acquisition modes with and without ion mobility.

Anti-Doping analysis Collision cross section High resolution mass spectrometry Ion mobility spectrometry Ultra-high performance liquid chromatography

Journal

Analytica chimica acta
ISSN: 1873-4324
Titre abrégé: Anal Chim Acta
Pays: Netherlands
ID NLM: 0370534

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
29 Aug 2021
Historique:
received: 12 02 2021
revised: 03 05 2021
accepted: 19 05 2021
entrez: 31 7 2021
pubmed: 1 8 2021
medline: 4 8 2021
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

In the second part of this study, a systematic comparison was made between two ion fragmentation acquisition modes, namely data-independent acquisition (DIA) and DIA with ion mobility spectrometry (IMS) technology. These two approaches were applied to the analysis of 192 doping agents in urine. Group I included 102 compounds such as stimulants, diuretics, narcotics, and β2-agonists, while Group II contained 90 compounds included steroids, glucocorticoids, and hormone and metabolic modulators. Important method parameters were examined and compared, including the fragmentation, sensitivity, and assignment capability with the minimum occurrence of false positive hits. The results differed between Group I and II in number of detected fragments when exploring the MS/MS spectra. In Group I only 13%, while in the Group II 64% of the substances had a higher number of fragments in DIA-IMS mode vs. DIA. In terms of sensitivity, the performance of the two modes with and without activated IMS dimension was identical for about 50% of the doping agents. The sensitivity was higher without IMS, i.e. in simple DIA mode, for 20-40% of remaining doping agents. Despite this sensitivity reduction with IMS, 82% of compounds from both Groups met the minimum required performance level (MRPL) criteria of the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) when the DIA-IMS mode was applied. Automated data processing is important in routine doping analysis. Therefore, processing methods were optimized and evaluated for the prevalence of false peak assignments by analysing the target substances at different concentrations in urine samples. Overall, a significantly higher number of misidentified compounds was observed in Group II, with an almost 2-fold higher number of misidentifications in DIA compared to DIA-IMS. This result highlights the benefit of the IMS dimension to reduce the rate of false positive in screening analysis. The optimized UHPLC-IM-HRMS method was finally applied to the analysis of urine samples from administration studies including nine doping agents from both Groups. However, to limit the number of interferences from the biological matrix, an emphasis is needed on the adequate settings of the data processing method.

Identifiants

pubmed: 34330438
pii: S0003-2670(21)00565-1
doi: 10.1016/j.aca.2021.338739
pii:
doi:

Substances chimiques

Glucocorticoids 0
Narcotics 0
Steroids 0

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

338739

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2021 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

Auteurs

Kateřina Plachká (K)

Department of Analytical Chemistry, Faculty of Pharmacy in Hradec Králové, Charles University, Heyrovského 1203, 500 05, Hradec Králové, Czech Republic.

Julian Pezzatti (J)

School of Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of Geneva, CMU-Rue Michel Servet 1, 1211, Geneva 4, Switzerland; Institute of Pharmaceutical Sciences of Western Switzerland (ISPSO), University of Geneva, CMU-Rue Michel Servet 1, 1211, Geneva 4, Switzerland.

Alessandro Musenga (A)

Swiss Laboratory for Doping Analyses, University Center of Legal Medicine Lausanne and Geneva, Lausanne University Hospital and University of Lausanne, Switzerland.

Raul Nicoli (R)

Swiss Laboratory for Doping Analyses, University Center of Legal Medicine Lausanne and Geneva, Lausanne University Hospital and University of Lausanne, Switzerland.

Tiia Kuuranne (T)

Swiss Laboratory for Doping Analyses, University Center of Legal Medicine Lausanne and Geneva, Lausanne University Hospital and University of Lausanne, Switzerland.

Serge Rudaz (S)

School of Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of Geneva, CMU-Rue Michel Servet 1, 1211, Geneva 4, Switzerland; Institute of Pharmaceutical Sciences of Western Switzerland (ISPSO), University of Geneva, CMU-Rue Michel Servet 1, 1211, Geneva 4, Switzerland.

Lucie Nováková (L)

Department of Analytical Chemistry, Faculty of Pharmacy in Hradec Králové, Charles University, Heyrovského 1203, 500 05, Hradec Králové, Czech Republic.

Davy Guillarme (D)

School of Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of Geneva, CMU-Rue Michel Servet 1, 1211, Geneva 4, Switzerland; Institute of Pharmaceutical Sciences of Western Switzerland (ISPSO), University of Geneva, CMU-Rue Michel Servet 1, 1211, Geneva 4, Switzerland. Electronic address: Davy.Guillarme@unige.ch.

Articles similaires

Cicer Germination Proteolysis Seeds Plant Proteins
Humans Pisum sativum Breast Neoplasms Tandem Mass Spectrometry Plant Extracts
Animals Feces Herbivory Biomarkers Parks, Recreational
Klebsiella pneumoniae Volatile Organic Compounds Metabolomics Ion Mobility Spectrometry Bacterial Proteins

Classifications MeSH