Application of screening experimental designs to assess chromatographic isotope effect upon isotope-coded derivatization for quantitative liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

13 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Isotope effect may cause partial chromatographic separation of labeled (heavy) and unlabeled (light) isotopologue pairs. Together with a simultaneous matrix effect, this could lead to unacceptable accuracy in quantitative liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry assays, especially when electrospray ionization is used. Four biologically relevant reactive aldehydes (acrolein, malondialdehyde, 4-hydroxy-2-nonenal, and 4-oxo-2-nonenal) were derivatized with light or heavy (d3-, 13C6-, 15N2-, or 15N4-labeled) 2,4-dinitrophenylhydrazine and used as model compounds to evaluate chromatographic isotope effects. For comprehensive assessment of retention time differences between light/heavy pairs under various gradient reversed-phase liquid chromatography conditions, major chromatographic parameters (stationary phase, mobile phase pH, temperature, organic solvent, and gradient slope) and different isotope labelings were addressed by multiple-factor screening using experimental designs that included both asymmetrical (Addelman) and Plackett-Burman schemes followed by statistical evaluations. Results confirmed that the most effective approach to avoid chromatographic isotope effect is the use of 15N or 13C labeling instead of deuterium labeling, while chromatographic parameters had no general influence. Comparison of the alternate isotope-coded derivatization assay (AIDA) using deuterium versus 15N labeling gave unacceptable differences (>15%) upon quantifying some of the model aldehydes from biological matrixes. On the basis of our results, we recommend the modification of the AIDA protocol by replacing d 3-2,4-dinitrophenylhydrazine with 15N- or 13C-labeled derivatizing reagent to avoid possible unfavorable consequences of chromatographic isotope effects.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)7033-7040
Number of pages8
JournalAnalytical Chemistry
Volume86
Issue number14
DOIs
StatePublished - 15 Jul 2014

Fingerprint

Liquid chromatography
Liquid Chromatography
Isotopes
Design of experiments
Mass spectrometry
Mass Spectrometry
Screening
Research Design
Labeling
Deuterium
Assays
Light
Aldehydes
Isotope Labeling
Acrolein
Biological Models
Electrospray ionization
Reverse-Phase Chromatography
Malondialdehyde
Organic solvents

Cite this

@article{6553b6d768d64335887fb2acf18e33a9,
title = "Application of screening experimental designs to assess chromatographic isotope effect upon isotope-coded derivatization for quantitative liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry",
abstract = "Isotope effect may cause partial chromatographic separation of labeled (heavy) and unlabeled (light) isotopologue pairs. Together with a simultaneous matrix effect, this could lead to unacceptable accuracy in quantitative liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry assays, especially when electrospray ionization is used. Four biologically relevant reactive aldehydes (acrolein, malondialdehyde, 4-hydroxy-2-nonenal, and 4-oxo-2-nonenal) were derivatized with light or heavy (d3-, 13C6-, 15N2-, or 15N4-labeled) 2,4-dinitrophenylhydrazine and used as model compounds to evaluate chromatographic isotope effects. For comprehensive assessment of retention time differences between light/heavy pairs under various gradient reversed-phase liquid chromatography conditions, major chromatographic parameters (stationary phase, mobile phase pH, temperature, organic solvent, and gradient slope) and different isotope labelings were addressed by multiple-factor screening using experimental designs that included both asymmetrical (Addelman) and Plackett-Burman schemes followed by statistical evaluations. Results confirmed that the most effective approach to avoid chromatographic isotope effect is the use of 15N or 13C labeling instead of deuterium labeling, while chromatographic parameters had no general influence. Comparison of the alternate isotope-coded derivatization assay (AIDA) using deuterium versus 15N labeling gave unacceptable differences (>15{\%}) upon quantifying some of the model aldehydes from biological matrixes. On the basis of our results, we recommend the modification of the AIDA protocol by replacing d 3-2,4-dinitrophenylhydrazine with 15N- or 13C-labeled derivatizing reagent to avoid possible unfavorable consequences of chromatographic isotope effects.",
author = "Szabolcs Szarka and Katalin Prokai-Tatrai and Laszlo Prokai",
year = "2014",
month = "7",
day = "15",
doi = "10.1021/ac501309s",
language = "English",
volume = "86",
pages = "7033--7040",
journal = "Analytical Chemistry",
issn = "0003-2700",
publisher = "American Chemical Society",
number = "14",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Application of screening experimental designs to assess chromatographic isotope effect upon isotope-coded derivatization for quantitative liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry

AU - Szarka, Szabolcs

AU - Prokai-Tatrai, Katalin

AU - Prokai, Laszlo

PY - 2014/7/15

Y1 - 2014/7/15

N2 - Isotope effect may cause partial chromatographic separation of labeled (heavy) and unlabeled (light) isotopologue pairs. Together with a simultaneous matrix effect, this could lead to unacceptable accuracy in quantitative liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry assays, especially when electrospray ionization is used. Four biologically relevant reactive aldehydes (acrolein, malondialdehyde, 4-hydroxy-2-nonenal, and 4-oxo-2-nonenal) were derivatized with light or heavy (d3-, 13C6-, 15N2-, or 15N4-labeled) 2,4-dinitrophenylhydrazine and used as model compounds to evaluate chromatographic isotope effects. For comprehensive assessment of retention time differences between light/heavy pairs under various gradient reversed-phase liquid chromatography conditions, major chromatographic parameters (stationary phase, mobile phase pH, temperature, organic solvent, and gradient slope) and different isotope labelings were addressed by multiple-factor screening using experimental designs that included both asymmetrical (Addelman) and Plackett-Burman schemes followed by statistical evaluations. Results confirmed that the most effective approach to avoid chromatographic isotope effect is the use of 15N or 13C labeling instead of deuterium labeling, while chromatographic parameters had no general influence. Comparison of the alternate isotope-coded derivatization assay (AIDA) using deuterium versus 15N labeling gave unacceptable differences (>15%) upon quantifying some of the model aldehydes from biological matrixes. On the basis of our results, we recommend the modification of the AIDA protocol by replacing d 3-2,4-dinitrophenylhydrazine with 15N- or 13C-labeled derivatizing reagent to avoid possible unfavorable consequences of chromatographic isotope effects.

AB - Isotope effect may cause partial chromatographic separation of labeled (heavy) and unlabeled (light) isotopologue pairs. Together with a simultaneous matrix effect, this could lead to unacceptable accuracy in quantitative liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry assays, especially when electrospray ionization is used. Four biologically relevant reactive aldehydes (acrolein, malondialdehyde, 4-hydroxy-2-nonenal, and 4-oxo-2-nonenal) were derivatized with light or heavy (d3-, 13C6-, 15N2-, or 15N4-labeled) 2,4-dinitrophenylhydrazine and used as model compounds to evaluate chromatographic isotope effects. For comprehensive assessment of retention time differences between light/heavy pairs under various gradient reversed-phase liquid chromatography conditions, major chromatographic parameters (stationary phase, mobile phase pH, temperature, organic solvent, and gradient slope) and different isotope labelings were addressed by multiple-factor screening using experimental designs that included both asymmetrical (Addelman) and Plackett-Burman schemes followed by statistical evaluations. Results confirmed that the most effective approach to avoid chromatographic isotope effect is the use of 15N or 13C labeling instead of deuterium labeling, while chromatographic parameters had no general influence. Comparison of the alternate isotope-coded derivatization assay (AIDA) using deuterium versus 15N labeling gave unacceptable differences (>15%) upon quantifying some of the model aldehydes from biological matrixes. On the basis of our results, we recommend the modification of the AIDA protocol by replacing d 3-2,4-dinitrophenylhydrazine with 15N- or 13C-labeled derivatizing reagent to avoid possible unfavorable consequences of chromatographic isotope effects.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84904317086&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1021/ac501309s

DO - 10.1021/ac501309s

M3 - Article

C2 - 24922593

AN - SCOPUS:84904317086

VL - 86

SP - 7033

EP - 7040

JO - Analytical Chemistry

JF - Analytical Chemistry

SN - 0003-2700

IS - 14

ER -