Therapeutic drug monitoring of levetiracetam - Is dried blood spot sampling suitable?

IF 2.5 3区 医学 Q2 MEDICAL LABORATORY TECHNOLOGY Clinical biochemistry Pub Date : 2025-03-14 DOI:10.1016/j.clinbiochem.2025.110913
Camilla Linder, Victoria Barclay, Mihaela Oana Romanitan, Stanislav Beniaminov, Isabella Ekheden
{"title":"Therapeutic drug monitoring of levetiracetam - Is dried blood spot sampling suitable?","authors":"Camilla Linder, Victoria Barclay, Mihaela Oana Romanitan, Stanislav Beniaminov, Isabella Ekheden","doi":"10.1016/j.clinbiochem.2025.110913","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Therapeutic drug monitoring helps prevent seizures and minimize side effects in epilepsy patients. Phlebotomy is the gold standard for blood collection but can be difficult for children, pregnant women, and patients in remote areas. We previously validated dried blood spot (DBS) sampling for carbamazepine, lamotrigine, levetiracetam (LEV), and valproic acid. Uncertainties in LEV comparisons from the previous validation were further investigated in this study by increasing sample numbers and comparing results using both immunochemistry and LC-MS/MS methods. Additionally, capillary and venous DBS were compared, and the stability of samples during mail transport was assessed.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>To compare LEV concentrations in capillary DBS and plasma, and to assess the stability of capillary DBS during transportation.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>Capillary and venous blood samples were collected from 40 LEV-treated patients. Concentrations were measured using immunochemistry and liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry methods. Comparisons between matrices and methods were analyzed with Passing-Bablok regression and Bland-Altman plots.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>No proportional bias was found in regression analysis and Bland-Altman plots showed no bias between methods. For capillary DBS versus plasma concentrations, 92.1 % of values were within 20 % of the mean. No bias was detected between capillary and venous DBS, with deviations within acceptable limits. Sample stability was maintained during mail transport.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The concentrations obtained for LEV in capillary DBS versus plasma showed that therapeutic drug monitoring of LEV can be performed as at-home self-sampling with DBS mailed to the laboratory for analysis.</p>","PeriodicalId":10172,"journal":{"name":"Clinical biochemistry","volume":" ","pages":"110913"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical biochemistry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clinbiochem.2025.110913","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICAL LABORATORY TECHNOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Therapeutic drug monitoring helps prevent seizures and minimize side effects in epilepsy patients. Phlebotomy is the gold standard for blood collection but can be difficult for children, pregnant women, and patients in remote areas. We previously validated dried blood spot (DBS) sampling for carbamazepine, lamotrigine, levetiracetam (LEV), and valproic acid. Uncertainties in LEV comparisons from the previous validation were further investigated in this study by increasing sample numbers and comparing results using both immunochemistry and LC-MS/MS methods. Additionally, capillary and venous DBS were compared, and the stability of samples during mail transport was assessed.

Aim: To compare LEV concentrations in capillary DBS and plasma, and to assess the stability of capillary DBS during transportation.

Method: Capillary and venous blood samples were collected from 40 LEV-treated patients. Concentrations were measured using immunochemistry and liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry methods. Comparisons between matrices and methods were analyzed with Passing-Bablok regression and Bland-Altman plots.

Results: No proportional bias was found in regression analysis and Bland-Altman plots showed no bias between methods. For capillary DBS versus plasma concentrations, 92.1 % of values were within 20 % of the mean. No bias was detected between capillary and venous DBS, with deviations within acceptable limits. Sample stability was maintained during mail transport.

Conclusion: The concentrations obtained for LEV in capillary DBS versus plasma showed that therapeutic drug monitoring of LEV can be performed as at-home self-sampling with DBS mailed to the laboratory for analysis.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Clinical biochemistry
Clinical biochemistry 医学-医学实验技术
CiteScore
5.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
151
审稿时长
25 days
期刊介绍: Clinical Biochemistry publishes articles relating to clinical chemistry, molecular biology and genetics, therapeutic drug monitoring and toxicology, laboratory immunology and laboratory medicine in general, with the focus on analytical and clinical investigation of laboratory tests in humans used for diagnosis, prognosis, treatment and therapy, and monitoring of disease.
期刊最新文献
Establishing sustainable quality improvement in the clinical laboratory: Redesign of the total testing process and digital transformation of routine quality assurance activities. Therapeutic drug monitoring of levetiracetam - Is dried blood spot sampling suitable? The case of a bloody mess - Bictegravir/emtricitabine/tenofovir alafenamide induced colitis. The pitfalls and significance of using ratios and calculated parameters in laboratory medicine. Assessment of accuracy, clinical validity, and analytical linearity in point-of-care glucose monitoring devices for diabetes mellitus: A systematic review and meta-analysis
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1