We use cookies to improve your experience. By continuing to browse this site, you accept our cookie policy.×
Research Article

An investigation of incurred human urine sample reanalysis failure

    Yunlin Fu

    Department of Drug Metabolism & Pharmacokinetics, Novartis Institutes for Biomedical Research, One Health Plaza, East Hanover, NJ 07936, USA

    , ,
    Harold T Smith

    Department of Drug Metabolism & Pharmacokinetics, Novartis Institutes for Biomedical Research, One Health Plaza, East Hanover, NJ 07936, USA

    &
    Francis LS Tse

    Department of Drug Metabolism & Pharmacokinetics, Novartis Institutes for Biomedical Research, One Health Plaza, East Hanover, NJ 07936, USA

    Published Online:https://doi.org/10.4155/bio.11.65

    Background: In this case study, urine samples were collected and transferred before the presence of a small degree of nonspecific binding was identified for the analyte of interest in human urine. The approach taken to address the issue was to use standards and quality controls to mimic the study samples and use Tween-80 (0.5%) to retrieve the adsorbed analyte. The method was validated, however, the incurred sample reanalysis (ISR) failed. Results: Investigation into the ISR failure unveiled ineffective mixing of the study samples, with almost no headspace left inside the sample tubes after the addition of the surfactant using a regular vortex mixer, as the cause of the ISR failure. All samples were reanalyzed using a modified sample mixing method, which resulted in two successful ISR runs. Conclusions: Thorough sample mixing after the addition of surfactant is one of the important steps in ensuring accurate and reproducible analyses of urine samples with a small degree of analyte nonspecific binding.

    Bibliography

    • Viswanathan CT, Bansal S, Booth B et al. Quantitative bioanalytical methods validation and implementation: best practices for chromatographic and ligand binding assays. AAPS J.9,E30–E42 (2007).
    • Rocci ML, Devanarayan V, Haughey DB et al. Confirmatory reanalysis of incurred bioanalytical samples. AAPS J.9(3),E336–E343 (2007).
    • Fast DM, Kelley M, Viswanathan C et al. AAPS workshop on current topics in GLP bioanalysis: assay reproducibility for incurred samples – implications of Crystal City recommendations. AAPS J.11(2),238–241 (2009).
    • Timmerman P, Luedtke S, Amsterdam PV et al. Incurred sample reproducibility, views and recommendations by the European Bioanalysis Forum. Bioanalysis1(6),1049–1056 (2009).
    • Li W, Luo S, Smith HT, Tse FL. Quantitative determination of BAF312, a S1P-R modulator, in human urine by LC–MS/MS: prevention and recovery of lost analyte due to container surface adsorption. J. Chromatogr. B Analyt. Technol. Biomed. Life Sci.878(5–6),583–589 (2010).
    • Meng M, Reuschel S, Bennett P. Identifying trends and developing solutions for incurred sample reanalysis failure investigations in a bioanalytical CRO. Bioanalysis3(4),449–465 (2011).