Measurement of Whole Blood Tacrolimus Concentrations by LC-MS/MS and Immunoassay Methods: Influence of Immediate-Release vs Extended-Release Tacrolimus Formulations.
Adekunle Alabi, Mengyuan Ge, Jeremiah D Momper, Shirley M Tsunoda, Michael J Kelner, Robert L Fitzgerald, Raymond T Suhandynata
{"title":"Measurement of Whole Blood Tacrolimus Concentrations by LC-MS/MS and Immunoassay Methods: Influence of Immediate-Release vs Extended-Release Tacrolimus Formulations.","authors":"Adekunle Alabi, Mengyuan Ge, Jeremiah D Momper, Shirley M Tsunoda, Michael J Kelner, Robert L Fitzgerald, Raymond T Suhandynata","doi":"10.1093/jalm/jfae156","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Therapeutic drug monitoring of the immunosuppressant tacrolimus is commonly performed by immunoassay or LC-MS/MS. Measurement biases between these methodologies have been characterized for immediate-release tacrolimus (IR-tac; Prograf) but have not been performed for extended-release formulations such as Envarsus. These discrepancies can impact patient care, as appropriate dosing is required to maintain therapeutic concentrations and immunosuppression.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Validation of a whole-blood LC-MS/MS method for the simultaneous quantification of tacrolimus and its major metabolite, desmethyl tacrolimus, was performed using traceable calibrators (tacrolimus, ERM-DA110a) and quality control (QC) material for tacrolimus and standard material for desmethyl tacrolimus. Tacrolimus concentrations were determined by LC-MS/MS and the ARCHITECT immunoassay in patients receiving either IR-tac or Envarsus for clinical care.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>External calibration curves for both tacrolimus and desmethyl tacrolimus were linear (R2 > 0.995), and the analytical measurement range (AMR) for tacrolimus spanned from 1.1 to 31.6 ng/mL. Calibrator/QC biases were within 15% of their spiked concentrations throughout the AMR, and within-run imprecision was <10%, except at the lower limit of quantification (n = 25). Between-run imprecision for low, mid, and high QC levels was ≤11% over a 2-week period (n = 5 days). Comparative biases between immunoassay and LC-MS/MS were significantly lower (P = 0.0074) for patients receiving Envarsus (n = 20 specimens) relative to patients receiving IR-tac (n = 32 specimens).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Biases between immunoassay and LC-MS/MS tacrolimus measurements in patients receiving immediate-release vs extended-release formulations indicate that their distinct pharmacokinetic profiles impact measurement accuracy. These assay biases should be considered when interpreting tacrolimus concentration measurements.</p>","PeriodicalId":46361,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Applied Laboratory Medicine","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Applied Laboratory Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jalm/jfae156","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MEDICAL LABORATORY TECHNOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Therapeutic drug monitoring of the immunosuppressant tacrolimus is commonly performed by immunoassay or LC-MS/MS. Measurement biases between these methodologies have been characterized for immediate-release tacrolimus (IR-tac; Prograf) but have not been performed for extended-release formulations such as Envarsus. These discrepancies can impact patient care, as appropriate dosing is required to maintain therapeutic concentrations and immunosuppression.
Methods: Validation of a whole-blood LC-MS/MS method for the simultaneous quantification of tacrolimus and its major metabolite, desmethyl tacrolimus, was performed using traceable calibrators (tacrolimus, ERM-DA110a) and quality control (QC) material for tacrolimus and standard material for desmethyl tacrolimus. Tacrolimus concentrations were determined by LC-MS/MS and the ARCHITECT immunoassay in patients receiving either IR-tac or Envarsus for clinical care.
Results: External calibration curves for both tacrolimus and desmethyl tacrolimus were linear (R2 > 0.995), and the analytical measurement range (AMR) for tacrolimus spanned from 1.1 to 31.6 ng/mL. Calibrator/QC biases were within 15% of their spiked concentrations throughout the AMR, and within-run imprecision was <10%, except at the lower limit of quantification (n = 25). Between-run imprecision for low, mid, and high QC levels was ≤11% over a 2-week period (n = 5 days). Comparative biases between immunoassay and LC-MS/MS were significantly lower (P = 0.0074) for patients receiving Envarsus (n = 20 specimens) relative to patients receiving IR-tac (n = 32 specimens).
Conclusions: Biases between immunoassay and LC-MS/MS tacrolimus measurements in patients receiving immediate-release vs extended-release formulations indicate that their distinct pharmacokinetic profiles impact measurement accuracy. These assay biases should be considered when interpreting tacrolimus concentration measurements.