提取程序替代对自动他克莫司、西罗莫司和环孢素检测的影响

IF 1.8 Q3 MEDICAL LABORATORY TECHNOLOGY Journal of Applied Laboratory Medicine Pub Date : 2024-05-02 DOI:10.1093/jalm/jfad128
Athanasia Chandras, Damodara R Mendu, Daniel C Kirchhoff
{"title":"提取程序替代对自动他克莫司、西罗莫司和环孢素检测的影响","authors":"Athanasia Chandras, Damodara R Mendu, Daniel C Kirchhoff","doi":"10.1093/jalm/jfad128","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>An erroneously high tacrolimus level was reported to a clinician. A root cause analysis investigation failed to determine the cause of the error. It was suspected that the incorrect preanalytical extraction reagent and procedure was used during testing; however, how this would affect the assayed drug concentration was unclear. Here we investigated the effect of the substitution of sirolimus, tacrolimus, and cyclosporine extraction reagents on assayed drug concentration.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Tacrolimus, sirolimus, and cyclosporine concentration were measured on the Abbott Architect i2000 analyzer. Each assay requires a preanalytical extraction step, with a distinct reagent. We investigated the effect of the substitution of the extraction reagents and procedure between the 3 assays on the measured drug concentration. Two experiments were performed, one on samples of known drug concentration and one on samples with no drug present.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Substituting cyclosporine and sirolimus extraction procedures increased assayed tacrolimus concentrations from 5.6 to 8.47 (+51.25%) and 8.13 (+45.18%) ng/mL, respectively. Extraction procedure substitutions decreased assayed sirolimus from 13.63 to 4.60 (-66.25%) and 8.07 (-40.79%) ng/mL for cyclosporine and tacrolimus. Cyclosporine concentration increased from 274.60 to 391.30 (+42.50%) ng/mL using sirolimus extraction reagents and to 757.30 (+175.78%) ng/mL using tacrolimus extraction reagents. Cross-reactivity was observed between the tacrolimus assay and sirolimus and cyclosporine extraction reagents.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Significant changes, both positive and negative, are observed in assayed drug concentration when incorrect extraction procedures are used in the Abbott i2000 tacrolimus, sirolimus, and cyclosporine assays. Preanalytic extraction procedures should be investigated when performing root cause analysis for erroneous therapeutic drug values.</p>","PeriodicalId":46361,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Applied Laboratory Medicine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Effect of Extraction Procedure Substitution on Automated Tacrolimus, Sirolimus, and Cyclosporine Assays.\",\"authors\":\"Athanasia Chandras, Damodara R Mendu, Daniel C Kirchhoff\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/jalm/jfad128\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>An erroneously high tacrolimus level was reported to a clinician. A root cause analysis investigation failed to determine the cause of the error. It was suspected that the incorrect preanalytical extraction reagent and procedure was used during testing; however, how this would affect the assayed drug concentration was unclear. Here we investigated the effect of the substitution of sirolimus, tacrolimus, and cyclosporine extraction reagents on assayed drug concentration.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Tacrolimus, sirolimus, and cyclosporine concentration were measured on the Abbott Architect i2000 analyzer. Each assay requires a preanalytical extraction step, with a distinct reagent. We investigated the effect of the substitution of the extraction reagents and procedure between the 3 assays on the measured drug concentration. Two experiments were performed, one on samples of known drug concentration and one on samples with no drug present.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Substituting cyclosporine and sirolimus extraction procedures increased assayed tacrolimus concentrations from 5.6 to 8.47 (+51.25%) and 8.13 (+45.18%) ng/mL, respectively. Extraction procedure substitutions decreased assayed sirolimus from 13.63 to 4.60 (-66.25%) and 8.07 (-40.79%) ng/mL for cyclosporine and tacrolimus. Cyclosporine concentration increased from 274.60 to 391.30 (+42.50%) ng/mL using sirolimus extraction reagents and to 757.30 (+175.78%) ng/mL using tacrolimus extraction reagents. Cross-reactivity was observed between the tacrolimus assay and sirolimus and cyclosporine extraction reagents.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Significant changes, both positive and negative, are observed in assayed drug concentration when incorrect extraction procedures are used in the Abbott i2000 tacrolimus, sirolimus, and cyclosporine assays. Preanalytic extraction procedures should be investigated when performing root cause analysis for erroneous therapeutic drug values.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":46361,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Applied Laboratory Medicine\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-02\",\"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/jfad128\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICAL LABORATORY TECHNOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Applied Laboratory Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jalm/jfad128","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

摘要

背景:一名临床医生被错误地报告他克莫司水平过高。根本原因分析调查未能确定错误的原因。有人怀疑在检测过程中使用了不正确的分析前提取试剂和程序;然而,这将如何影响测定的药物浓度尚不清楚。在此,我们研究了替代西罗莫司、他克莫司和环孢素提取试剂对测定药物浓度的影响:方法:使用雅培 Architect i2000 分析仪测定他克莫司、西罗莫司和环孢素的浓度。每种检测方法都需要一个分析前提取步骤,并使用不同的试剂。我们研究了这 3 种检测方法之间更换提取试剂和步骤对所测药物浓度的影响。我们进行了两次实验,一次是已知药物浓度的样品,另一次是不含药物的样品:结果:替代环孢素和西罗莫司提取程序后,测定的他克莫司浓度分别从 5.6 毫微克/毫升提高到 8.47 毫微克/毫升(+51.25%)和 8.13 毫微克/毫升(+45.18%)。环孢素和他克莫司的提取程序替换后,测定的西罗莫司浓度分别从 13.63 纳克/毫升降至 4.60 纳克/毫升(-66.25%)和 8.07 纳克/毫升(-40.79%)。使用西罗莫司提取试剂,环孢素浓度从 274.60 纳克/毫升升至 391.30 纳克/毫升(+42.50%);使用他克莫司提取试剂,环孢素浓度从 274.60 纳克/毫升升至 757.30 纳克/毫升(+175.78%)。他克莫司检测法与西罗莫司和环孢素提取试剂之间存在交叉反应:结论:当雅培 i2000 他克莫司、西罗莫司和环孢素检测中使用不正确的提取程序时,检测的药物浓度会出现明显的正负变化。在对错误的治疗药物值进行根本原因分析时,应调查分析前提取程序。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Effect of Extraction Procedure Substitution on Automated Tacrolimus, Sirolimus, and Cyclosporine Assays.

Background: An erroneously high tacrolimus level was reported to a clinician. A root cause analysis investigation failed to determine the cause of the error. It was suspected that the incorrect preanalytical extraction reagent and procedure was used during testing; however, how this would affect the assayed drug concentration was unclear. Here we investigated the effect of the substitution of sirolimus, tacrolimus, and cyclosporine extraction reagents on assayed drug concentration.

Methods: Tacrolimus, sirolimus, and cyclosporine concentration were measured on the Abbott Architect i2000 analyzer. Each assay requires a preanalytical extraction step, with a distinct reagent. We investigated the effect of the substitution of the extraction reagents and procedure between the 3 assays on the measured drug concentration. Two experiments were performed, one on samples of known drug concentration and one on samples with no drug present.

Results: Substituting cyclosporine and sirolimus extraction procedures increased assayed tacrolimus concentrations from 5.6 to 8.47 (+51.25%) and 8.13 (+45.18%) ng/mL, respectively. Extraction procedure substitutions decreased assayed sirolimus from 13.63 to 4.60 (-66.25%) and 8.07 (-40.79%) ng/mL for cyclosporine and tacrolimus. Cyclosporine concentration increased from 274.60 to 391.30 (+42.50%) ng/mL using sirolimus extraction reagents and to 757.30 (+175.78%) ng/mL using tacrolimus extraction reagents. Cross-reactivity was observed between the tacrolimus assay and sirolimus and cyclosporine extraction reagents.

Conclusions: Significant changes, both positive and negative, are observed in assayed drug concentration when incorrect extraction procedures are used in the Abbott i2000 tacrolimus, sirolimus, and cyclosporine assays. Preanalytic extraction procedures should be investigated when performing root cause analysis for erroneous therapeutic drug values.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Applied Laboratory Medicine
Journal of Applied Laboratory Medicine MEDICAL LABORATORY TECHNOLOGY-
CiteScore
3.70
自引率
5.00%
发文量
137
期刊最新文献
SARS-CoV-2 Variants May Affect Saliva RT-PCR Assay Sensitivity. Quality Assurance for Multiplex Quantitative Clinical Chemistry Proteomics in Large Clinical Trials. Reference Values of Ceruloplasmin across the Adult Age Range in a Large Italian Healthy Population. Performance of Fentanyl Immunoassays in an ED Patient Population. A Pregnant Patient with a Positive Hepatitis C Antibody.
×
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