Abstract Background: Glomerular filtration rate (GFR) can be determined by measuring renal clearance of the radiocontrast agent iothalamate. Current analytic methods for quantifying iothalamate concentrations in plasma and urine using liquid chromatography or capillary electrophoresis have limitations such as long analysis times and susceptibility to interferences. We developed a liquid chromatography–tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) method to overcome these limitations. Methods: Urine and plasma samples were deproteinized using acetonitrile and centrifugation. The supernatant was diluted in water and analyzed by LC-MS/MS using a water:methanol gradient. We monitored 4 multiple reaction monitoring transitions: m/z 614.8–487.0, 614.8–456.0, 614.8–361.1, and 614.8–177.1. We compared the results to those obtained via our standard capillary electrophoresis (CE-UV) on samples from 53 patients undergoing clinical GFR testing. Results: Mean recovery was 90%–110% in both urine and plasma matrices. Imprecision was ≤15% for the m/z 614.8–487.0 and 614.8–456.0 transitions over a 10-day period at 1 mg/L. Method comparison for 159 patient samples (53 clearances) provided the following Passing–Bablok regressions: plasma iothalamate LC-MS/MS (y) vs CE-UV (x), y = 0.99x + 0.36; urine iothalamate LC-MS/MS vs CE-UV, y = 1.01x + 0.31; corrected GFR LC-MS/MS vs CE-UV, y = 1.00x + 0.00. Interfering substances prevented accurate iothalamate quantification by CE-UV in 2 patients, whereas these samples could be analyzed by LC-MS/MS. Conclusions: Iothalamate can be quantified by LC-MS/MS for GFR measurement. This method circumvents potential problems with interfering substances that occasionally confound accurate GFR determinations.
Quantification of Urinary Albumin by Using Protein Cleavage and LC-MS/MS
Abstract Background: Urinary albumin excretion is a sensitive diagnostic and prognostic marker for renal disease. Therefore, measurement of urinary albumin must be accurate and precise. We have developed a method to quantify intact urinary albumin with a low limit of quantification (LOQ). Methods: We constructed an external calibration curve using purified human serum albumin (HSA) added to a charcoal-stripped urine matrix. We then added an internal standard, 15N-labeled recombinant HSA (15NrHSA), to the calibrators, controls, and patient urine samples. The samples were reduced, alkylated, and digested with trypsin. The concentration of albumin in each sample was determined by liquid chromatography–tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) and linear regression analysis, in which the relative abundance area ratio of the tryptic peptides 42LVNEVTEFAK51 and 526QTALVELVK534 from albumin and 15NrHSA were referenced to the calibration curve. Results: The lower limit of quantification was 3.13 mg/L, and the linear dynamic range was 3.13–200 mg/L. Replicate digests from low, medium, and high controls (n = 5) gave intraassay imprecision CVs of 2.8%–11.0% for the peptide 42LVNEVTEFAK51, and 1.9%–12.3% for the 526QTALVELVK534 peptide. Interassay imprecision of the controls for a period of 10 consecutive days (n = 10) yielded CVs of 1.5%–14.8% for the 42LVNEVTEFAK51 peptide, and 6.4%–14.1% for the 526QTALVELVK534 peptide. For the 42LVNEVTEFAK51 peptide, a method comparison between LC-MS/MS and an immunoturbidometric method for 138 patient samples gave an R2 value of 0.97 and a regression line of y = 0.99x + 23.16. Conclusions: Urinary albumin can be quantified by a protein cleavage LC-MS/MS method using a 15NrHSA internal standard. This method provides improved analytical performance in the clinically relevant range compared to a commercially available immunoturbidometric assay.
Comparison between Immunoturbidimetry, Size-Exclusion Chromatography, and LC-MS to Quantify Urinary Albumin
Abstract Background: The accurate and precise measurement of urinary albumin is critical, since even minor increases are diagnostically sensitive indicators of renal disease, cardiovascular events, and risk for death. To gain insights into potential measurement biases, we systematically compared urine albumin measurements performed by LC-MS, a clinically available immunoturbidimetric assay, and size-exclusion HPLC. Methods: We obtained unused clinical urine samples from 150 patients who were stratified by degrees of albuminuria (<20 mg/L, 20–250 mg/L, >250 mg/L) as determined by the immunoturbidimetric assay used in our clinical laboratory (Roche Hitachi 912). Urine albumin was then remeasured via LC-MS and HPLC (Accumin™) assays. Results: The immunoturbidimetric assay, calibrated using manufacturer-supplied serum-derived calibrators (Diasorin), underestimated albumin compared with LC-MS. After calibration with purified HSA, this immunoturbidimetric assay correlated well with LC-MS. HPLC overestimated albumin compared with both LC-MS and immunoturbidimetry. The current LC-MS and HPLC assays both performed poorly at concentrations <20 mg/L. Conclusions: Efforts are needed to establish gold-standard traceable calibrators for clinical assays. LC-MS is a specific method to quantify albumin in native urine when concentrations exceed 20 mg/L, and therefore could be employed for standardization among assays.