Uncertainty Evaluation for the Quantification of Urinary Amphetamine and 4-Hydroxyamphetamine Using Liquid Chromatography-Tandem Mass Spectrometry: Comparison of the Guide to the Expression of Uncertainty in Measurement Approach and the Monte Carlo Method with R

被引:0
作者
Kim, Seon Yeong [1 ]
Shin, Dong Won [1 ]
Hyun, Jihye [2 ]
Kwon, Nam Hee [1 ]
Cheong, Jae Chul [1 ]
Paeng, Ki-Jung [3 ]
Lee, Jooyoung [2 ]
Kim, Jin Young [1 ]
机构
[1] Forens Genet & Chem Div, Supreme ProsecutorsOffice, Seoul 06590, South Korea
[2] Chung Ang Univ, Dept Appl Stat, Seoul 06590, South Korea
[3] Yonsei Univ, Dept Chem, Wonju 26493, South Korea
来源
MOLECULES | 2023年 / 28卷 / 19期
关键词
measurement uncertainty; Guide to the Expression of Uncertainty in Measurement; Monte Carlo method; amphetamine; LC-MS/MS; METHAMPHETAMINE; ATTENTION;
D O I
10.3390/molecules28196803
中图分类号
Q5 [生物化学]; Q7 [分子生物学];
学科分类号
071010 ; 081704 ;
摘要
Estimating the measurement uncertainty (MU) is becoming increasingly mandatory in analytical toxicology. This study evaluates the uncertainty in the quantitative determination of urinary amphetamine (AP) and 4-hydroxyamphetamine (4HA) using a liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) method based on the dilute-and-shoot approach. Urine sample dilution, preparation of calibrators, calibration curve, and method repeatability were identified as the sources of uncertainty. To evaluate the MU, the Guide to the Expression of Uncertainty in Measurement (GUM) approach and the Monte Carlo method (MCM) were compared using the R programming language. The MCM afforded a smaller coverage interval for both AP (94.83, 104.74) and 4HA (10.52, 12.14) than that produced by the GUM (AP (92.06, 107.41) and 4HA (10.21, 12.45)). The GUM approach offers an underestimated coverage interval for Type A evaluation, whereas the MCM provides an exact coverage interval under an abnormal probability distribution of the measurand. The MCM is useful in complex settings where the measurand is combined with numerous distributions because it is generated from the uncertainties of input quantities based on the propagation of the distribution. Therefore, the MCM is more practical than the GUM for evaluating the MU of urinary AP and 4HA concentrations using LC-MS/MS.
引用
收藏
页数:12
相关论文
共 29 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], 2017, General Requirements for the Competence of Testing and Calibration Laboratories
[2]  
Azpurua M., 2011, Progress In Electromagnetics Research B, V34, P125
[3]  
bipm, 1002008 JCGM
[4]  
Buonaccorsi JP, 2010, INTERD STAT, P1, DOI 10.1201/9781420066586
[5]   PATHWAYS OF METABOLISM OF AMPHETAMINE AND RELATED COMPOUNDS [J].
CHO, AK ;
WRIGHT, J .
LIFE SCIENCES, 1978, 22 (05) :363-371
[6]   METABOLIC FATE OF AMPHETAMINE IN MAN AND OTHER SPECIES [J].
DRING, LG ;
SMITH, RL ;
WILLIAMS, RT .
BIOCHEMICAL JOURNAL, 1970, 116 (03) :425-&
[7]   The Uncertainty of Reference Standards-A Guide to Understanding Factors Impacting Uncertainty, Uncertainty Calculations, and Vendor Certifications [J].
Gates, Kevin ;
Chang, Ning ;
Dilek, Isil ;
Jian, Huahua ;
Pogue, Sherri ;
Sreenivasan, Uma .
JOURNAL OF ANALYTICAL TOXICOLOGY, 2009, 33 (08) :532-539
[8]  
Gonzalez A., 2018, Quality Control in Laboratory, P109
[9]   An expression of uncertainty in calibration using stepwise or separate dilution of a stock solution [J].
Hayashi, Yuzuru ;
Matsuda, Rieko .
ANALYTICAL SCIENCES, 2006, 22 (06) :889-894
[10]   Quantitative determination of total methamphetamine and active metabolites in rat tissue by liquid chromatography with tandem mass spectrometric detection [J].
Hendrickson, Howard ;
Laurenzana, Elizabeth ;
Owens, S. Michael .
AAPS JOURNAL, 2006, 8 (04) :E709-E717