These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Long-term cross-validation of everolimus therapeutic drug monitoring assays: the Zortracker study.
    Author: Schniedewind B, Niederlechner S, Galinkin JL, Johnson-Davis KL, Christians U, Meyer EJ.
    Journal: Ther Drug Monit; 2015 Jun; 37(3):296-303. PubMed ID: 25970506.
    Abstract:
    BACKGROUND: This ongoing academic collaboration was initiated for providing support to set up, validate, and maintain everolimus therapeutic drug monitoring assays and to study long-term interlaboratory performance. METHODS: This study was based on EDTA whole blood samples collected from transplant patients treated with everolimus in a prospective clinical trial. Samples were handled under controlled conditions during collection, storage and were shipped on dry ice to minimize freeze-thaw cycles. For more than 1.5 years, participating laboratories received a set of 3 blinded samples on a monthly basis. Among others, these samples included individual patient samples, patient sample pools to assess long-term performance, and patient samples pools enriched with isolated everolimus metabolites. RESULTS: The results between liquid chromatography coupled with tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) and the everolimus Quantitative Microsphere System (QMS, Thermo Fisher) assay were comparable. The monthly interlaboratory variability (coefficient of variation %) for cross-validation samples ranged from 6.5% to 23.2% (average of 14.8%) for LC-MS/MS and 4.2% to 26.4% (average of 11.1%) for laboratories using the QMS assay. A blinded long-term pool sample was sent to the laboratories for 13 months. The result was 5.31 ± 0.86 ng/mL (range, 2.9-7.8 ng/mL) for the LC-MS/MS and 5.20 ± 0.54 ng/mL (range, 4.0-6.8 ng/mL) for QMS laboratories. Enrichment of patient sample pools with 5-25 ng/mL of purified everolimus metabolites (46-hydroxy everolimus and 39-O-desmethyl everolimus) did not affect the results of either LC-MS/MS or QMS assays. CONCLUSIONS: Both LC-MS/MS and QMS assays gave similar results and showed similar performance, albeit with a trend toward higher interlaboratory variability among laboratories using LC-MS/MS than the QMS assay.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]