Premium
Evaluation of urinary ribonucleoside profiling for clinical biomarker discovery using constant neutral loss scanning liquid chromatography/tandem mass spectrometry
Author(s) -
Teichert Friederike,
Winkler Swantje,
Keun Hector C.,
Steward William P.,
Gescher Andreas J.,
Farmer Peter B.,
Singh Rajinder
Publication year - 2011
Publication title -
rapid communications in mass spectrometry
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.528
H-Index - 136
eISSN - 1097-0231
pISSN - 0951-4198
DOI - 10.1002/rcm.5086
Subject(s) - chemistry , ribonucleoside , chromatography , urine , mass spectrometry , biomarker discovery , liquid chromatography–mass spectrometry , tandem mass spectrometry , urinary system , analyte , biomarker , sample preparation , proteomics , rna , medicine , biochemistry , gene
The patterns and levels of urinary excreted ribonucleosides which reflect RNA turnover and metabolism in humans offer the potential for early detection of disease and monitoring of therapeutic intervention. A liquid chromatography/tandem mass spectrometry (LC/MS/MS) method employing constant neutral loss (CNL) scanning for the loss of the ribose moiety (132 u) was used to detect ribonucleosides in human urine and to evaluate this analytical platform for biomarker research in clinical trials. Ribonucleosides were stable and not influenced by the time spent at room temperature prior to freezing or long‐term storage at –80°C. Matrix effects caused variation in the mass spectrometer response which was dependent on the concentration of the analysed urine sample. For the use of urinary ribonucleoside profiling in clinical biomarker studies, adjustment of the urine samples to a common concentration prior to sample preparation is therefore advocated. Changes in the mass spectrometer response should be accounted for by the use of an internal standard added after sample preparation. Diurnal variation exceeded inter‐day variation of an individual's ribonucleoside profile, but inter‐person differences were predominant and allowed the separation of individuals against each other in a multivariate space. Due to considerable diurnal variation the use of spot urine samples would introduce unnecessary variation and should be replaced by the collection of multiple spot urine samples across the day, where possible. Should such a protocol not be feasible, biological intra‐day and inter‐day variation must be considered and accounted for in the data interpretation. Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.