Perspective Duggan, Vazvaei & Jenkins Executive summary
• The use of LC–MS/MS to quantify proteins in biological matrices using surrogate peptides derived from proteolytic digestion (PrD- LCMS) is being increasingly applied to regulated protein bioanalysis.
• No current regulatory guidances specifically apply to PrD-LCMS methods. • This paper discusses recommendations published in a consortium white paper on validation criteria for PrD-LCMS bioanalytical methods.
General consensus • The consortium white paper recommends using the applicable ligand-binding assay (LBA) validation criteria for PrD-LCMS methods. • Recommended QC accuracy and precision would use the 4–6–20 rule. Validation parameters & acceptance criteria for LC–MS protein methods • For standards and QCs, the 20% criteria apply, but they are expanded to 25% accuracy and precision for QCs and standards at the LLOQ.
• For each run two-thirds of the QCs must meet acceptance criteria of within 20% CV (for multiple QCs) and within +/- 20% of the nominal concentration, and 50% must meet criteria at each QC level.
• Calibration curve requirements generally agree with those for small molecule LC–MS methods. Selectivity/specificity • Hybrid PrD-LCMS methods apply both LBA and chromatographic procedures, necessitating re-examination of selectivity and specificity.
• The validation procedure for selectivity/specificity in PrD-LCMS is similar to that used for small molecule LC–MS methods. • Using a minimum of six lots of blank matrix spiked at the LLOQ, 80% of the LLOQ samples should quantify within 25% of the nominal with < 5% interference due to the IS.
Matrix effect • Matrix effect measurements for PrD-LCMS methods are similar to small molecule LC–MS/MS methods, using normally six individual lots.
• Matrix factor is defined as the ratio of the analyte response in the presence of matrix after extraction to that in absence of matrix. Recovery & digestion efficiency • A typical digestion efficiency procedure where a surrogate peptide is used without predigestion affinity capture set is outlined below (each set is run in triplicate): – Set A: the analyte protein therapeutic spiked in to matrix predigestion at L/M/H nominal levels, then digested and analyzed. – Set B: the analyte surrogate peptide spiked in to matrix predigestion at concentrations equimolar to the analyte protein (L/M/H), then digested and analyzed.
– Set C: extracted/digested/quenched blank matrix is spiked with the analyte peptide postdigestion at concentrations equimolar to the analyte protein (L/M/H), then analyzed.
• Parameters are calculated form the peak area from each sample set as follows: – Digestion efficiency: peak area Set A /peak area Set B. – Recovery: peak area Set B/peak area Set C.
Protein assay stability considerations • Protein therapeutic stability should be monitored under employed usage and storage conditions as directed in the current guidances.
• Since PrD-LCMS utilizes a surrogate peptide, the use of monitoring peptides from other portions of the analyte protein molecule can help to provide confidence in stability measurements.
• PrD-LCMS methods must be tested for any factor that could cause biases due to precipitation, aggregation or absorption . • The peptide (or intact protein) stable labeled IS must be periodically tested to determine that it sufficiently corrects for extraction and mass spectrometric variation.
Critical assay reagents • Critical assay reagents that are very specific for an LBA and are difficult to make and maintain may also be an integral part of a PrD-LCMS assay, primarily those that utilize immunoaffinity capture.
• Stability and maintenance procedures must be clearly established for these immunocapture reagents as they are key elements of the assay.
• Assay monitoring procedures with accompanying assessment/maintenance must be developed and maintained for critical assay reagents.
Discussion & conclusion • The application of PrD-LCMS to protein bioanalysis in regulated studies is a very important and growing field. • Here we expand upon some of the concepts developed in the industry consortium white paper published in AAPSJ, January 2015. • These discussions clarify some differences between the criteria for small molecules, LBA assays and those proposed for PrD-LCMS assays.
• Proposed PrD-LCMS validation criteria are only recommendations that will continue to evolve as industry experience grows.
1394
Bioanalysis (2015) 7(11)
future science group
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112 |
Page 113 |
Page 114 |
Page 115 |
Page 116 |
Page 117 |
Page 118 |
Page 119 |
Page 120 |
Page 121 |
Page 122 |
Page 123 |
Page 124 |
Page 125 |
Page 126 |
Page 127 |
Page 128 |
Page 129 |
Page 130 |
Page 131 |
Page 132 |
Page 133 |
Page 134 |
Page 135 |
Page 136 |
Page 137 |
Page 138 |
Page 139 |
Page 140 |
Page 141 |
Page 142 |
Page 143 |
Page 144 |
Page 145 |
Page 146 |
Page 147 |
Page 148 |
Page 149 |
Page 150 |
Page 151 |
Page 152 |
Page 153 |
Page 154