Aim: Develop and validate a volumetric absorptive microsampling (VAMS)-based LC–MS/MS method to support the bioanalysis of amino acid and carboxylic acid biomarkers in mouse whole blood. Method: Mouse whole blood was collected using a 10 μl VAMS device. The analytes in VAMS were extracted and analyzed using an LC–MS/MS method. Results: The VAMS-based LC–MS/MS assay exhibited a linearity range of 10.0–10,000 ng/ml with acceptable precision and accuracy and consistent recovery. The analyte stability in mouse whole blood VAMS was shown for 7 days at ambient conditions and at -80°C, as well as with three freeze/thaw cycles. Conclusion: A simple and robust VAMS-based LC–MS/MS method was developed and further validated for simultaneous bioanalysis of nine biomarkers in mouse whole blood.

Keywords:

Papers of special note have been highlighted as: • of interest; •• of considerable interest

References

1. Dennif P, Spooner N. Volumetric absorptive microsampling: a dried sample collection technique for quantitative bioanalysis. Anal. Chem. 86, 8489–8495 (2014). • A quantitative bioanalytical approach using volumetric absorptive microsampling is highlighted.
MedlineGoogle Scholar
2. Lim MD. Dried blood spot for global health diagnostics and surveillance: opportunities and challenges. Am. J. Trop. Med. Hyg. 99(2), 256–265 (2018). • In quantitative bioanalysis, the advantages and challenges of dried blood spot microsampling are discussed.
MedlineGoogle Scholar
3. Xie I, Xu Y, Anderson M et al. Extractability-mediated stability bias and hematocrit impact: high extraction recovery is critical to feasibility of volumetric adsorptive microsampling (VAMS) in regulated bioanalysis. J. Pharm. Biomed. Anal. 156, 58–66 (2018). •• How to utilize volumetric absorptive microsampling for regulated bioanalysis and how to achieve high extraction recovery from samples collected using volumetric absorptive microsampling tips are discussed.
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
4. Cornel MC, Rigter T, Jansen ME et al. Neonatal and carrier screening for rare diseases: how innovation challenges screening criteria worldwide. J. Community Genet. 12(2), 257–265 (2021).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
5. Evans C, Arnold M, Bryan P et al. Implementing dried blood spot sampling for clinical pharmacokinetic determinations: considerations from the IQ consortium microsampling working group. AAPS J. 17, 292–300 (2015).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
6. Mulchandani R, Brown B, Brooks T et al. Use of dried blood spot samples for SARS-CoV-2 antibody detection using the Roche Elecsys^® high throughput immunoassay. J. Clin. Virol. 136, 1–7 (2021).
Google Scholar
7. Spooner N, Anderson KD, Siple J et al. Microsampling: considerations for its use in pharmaceutical drug discovery and development. Bioanalysis 11(10), 1015–1038 (2019).
CASGoogle Scholar
8. Raynauld FI, Roberts M, Wilson I et al. Capillary microsampling of mouse blood in early pre-clinical studies: a preferred alternative to dried blood spot sampling. J. Bioanal. Biomed. 2(8), 28–33 (2016). •• Drug discovery benefits from using volumetric absorptive microsampling over dried blood spot are discussed.
Google Scholar
9. Lei BUW, Prow TW. A review of microsampling techniques and their social impact. Biomed. Microdevices 21(81), 1–30 (2019).
Google Scholar
10. Van Den Broek I, Fu Q, Kushon S et al. Application of volumetric absorptive microsampling for robust, high-throughput mass spectrometric quantification of circulating protein biomarkers. Clin. Mass Spectrom. 4-5, 25–33 (2017).
Google Scholar
11. Verstraete J, Boffel L, Stove C. Dried blood microsample-assisted determination of vitamins: recent developments and challenges. TrAC 132, 1–9 (2020).
Google Scholar
12. Wang J, Li D, Wiltse A et al. Application of volumetric absorptive microsampling (VAMS) to measure multidimensional anti-influenza IgG antibodies by the mPlex-Flu assay. J. Clin. Transl. Sci. 3, 332–343 (2019).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
13. Diehl KH, Hull R, Morton D et al. A good practice guide to the administration of substances and removal of blood, including routes and volumes. J. Appl. Toxicol. 21, 15–23 (2001).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
14. Vaidyanathan K, Narayanan MP, Vasudevan DM. Organic acidurias: an updated review. Indian J. Clin. Biochem. 26, 319–325 (2011).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
15. Guidance for Industry Bioanalytical Method Validation. US FDA, Rockville, MD, USA (2018). •• Guidelines for validating bioanalytical method.
Google Scholar
16. Protti M, Mandrioli R, Mercolini L. Tutorial: volumetric absorptive microsampling (VAMS). Anal. Chim. Acta 1046, 32–47 (2019).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar

Vol. 15, No. 14

Supplemental Materials

Metrics

Downloaded 155 times

History

Received 29 March 2023

Accepted 23 May 2023

Published online 12 June 2023

Published in print July 2023

Information

Keywords

Supplementary data

To view the supplementary data that accompany this paper please visit the journal website at: www.future-science.com/doi/suppl/10.4155/bio-2023-0059

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank the current and former Agios personnel who supported our research in blood microsampling: Hector Cedre, Victor DeJesus, Ian Gliser, Christy Ingersoll, Shengfang Jin, Peter Morgan, Raj Nagaraja, Sheila Newhouse and Catherine Souza. They would also like to thank their research partners at WuXi AppTec, Shanghai.

Financial & competing interests disclosure

The authors have no relevant affiliations or financial involvement with any organization or entity with a financial interest in or financial conflict with the subject matter or materials discussed in the manuscript. This includes employment, consultancies, honoraria, stock ownership or options, expert testimony, grants or patents received or pending or royalties.

No writing assistance was utilized in the production of this manuscript.

Ethical conduct of research

The collection of mouse blood in this work was conducted under an IACUC-approved animal use protocol at the Agios research facility. Agios is an AAALAC-accredited institution.

PDF download