Screening of cardiovascular agents in plasma with LC-MS/MS: A valuable tool for objective drug adherence assessment

Development of a rapid-fire drug screening method by probe electrospray ionization tandem mass spectrometry for human urine (RaDPi-U)

Drug screening tests are mandatory in the search for drugs in forensic biological samples, and immunological methods and mass spectrometry (e.g., gas chromatography-mass spectrometry and liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry) are commonly used for that purpose. However, these methods have some drawbacks, and developing new screening methods is required. In this study, we develop a rapid-fire drug screening method by probe electrospray ionization tandem mass spectrometry (PESI-MS/MS), which is an ambient ionization mass spectrometry method, for human urine, named RaDPi-U. RaDPi-U is carried out in three steps: (1) mixing urine with internal standard (IS) solution and ethanol, followed by vortexing; (2) pipetting the mixture onto a sample plate for PESI; and (3) rapid-fire analysis by PESI-MS/MS. RaDPi-U targets 40 forensically important drugs, which include illegal drugs, hypnotics, and psychoactive substances. The analytical results were obtained within 3 min because of the above-mentioned simple workflow of RaDPi-U. The calibration curves of each analyte were constructed using the IS method, and they were quantitatively valid, resulting in good linearity (0.972-0.999) with a satisfactory lower limit of detection and lower limit of quantitation (0.01-7.1 ng/mL and 0.02-21 ng/mL, respectively). Further, both trueness and precisions were 28% or less, demonstrating the high reliability and repeatability of the method. Finally, we applied RaDPi-U to three postmortem urine specimens and successfully detected different drugs in each urine sample. The practicality of the method is proven, and RaDPi-U will be a strong tool as a rapid-fire drug screening method not only in forensic toxicology but also in clinical toxicology.

Sample Matrices for Mass Spectrometry-Based Adherence Monitoring: A Systematic Critical Review

BACKGROUND

Analytical monitoring of adherence using mass spectrometry (MS) plays an important role in clinical toxicology. Unambiguous detection of drugs (of abuse) and/or their metabolites in body fluids is needed to monitor intake of medication as prescribed or to monitor abstinence as a follow-up to detoxification procedures. This study focused on the advantages and disadvantages of different sample matrices used for MS-based adherence monitoring.

METHODS

Relevant articles were identified through a literature search in the PubMed database. English articles published between January 01, 2017, and December 31, 2022, were selected using the keywords "adherence assess*" or "adherence monit*" or "compliance assess*" or "compliance monit*" in combination with "mass spectrom*" in the title or abstract.

RESULTS

A total of 51 articles were identified, 37 of which were within the scope of this study. MS-based monitoring was shown to improve patient adherence to prescribed drugs. However, MS analysis may not be able to assess whether treatment was rigorously followed beyond the last few days before the sampling event, except when hair is the sample matrix. For medication adherence monitoring, blood-based analyses may be preferred because reference plasma concentrations are usually available, whereas for abstinence control, urine and hair samples have the advantage of extended detection windows compared with blood. Alternative sample matrices, such as dried blood samples, oral fluid, and exhaled breath, are suitable for at-home sampling; however, little information is available regarding the pharmacokinetics and reference ranges of drug (of abuse) concentrations.

CONCLUSIONS

Each sample matrix has strengths and weaknesses, and no single sample matrix can be considered the gold standard for monitoring adherence. It is important to have sufficient information regarding the pharmacokinetics of target substances to select a sample matrix in accordance with the desired purpose.

Ion suppression, reduced long-term robustness and leakage current of the spray voltage during the ionization of trichloroacetic acid; a case study with a methylmalonic acid assay

Sample clean-up with the protein precipitation solvent trichloroacetic acid (TCA), combined with a stable isotope labeled internal standard, is widely used for the analysis of endogenous and exogenous compounds in serum and plasma with liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS). During the application of an assay for methylmalonic acid (MMA), used for routine analysis in patient care, negative long-term side effects of TCA on assay performance were observed. Step-by-step extensive troubleshooting disclosed the limitations of using TCA in MS. After running over 2000 samples with the MMA assay over a course of one year, a black coating formed between the probe and the heater that was traced to the use of TCA. The MMA assay used a C18 column with an isocratic eluent of 95% water (0.1% formic acid) as starting condition, on which TCA was more retained than MMA. Next, concentrations of 2.2% TCA in the prepared serum or plasma sample caused a drop in spray voltage during ionization into the MS. This was caused by the strong acid properties of TCA, resulting in current loss of the spray voltage between the heated electrospray ionization (HESI) needle and the union holder, which had also a grounding function. Replacing the original metal HESI needle with a custom made fussed silica HESI needle or detaching the union from the union holder, eliminated the effect of the drop in spray voltage. In conclusion, TCA can seriously affect the long-term robustness by affecting the source of the MS. We recommend the use of a very low sample injection volume, and/or shifting the mobile phase to waste when TCA is eluting, when using TCA in LC-MS/MS analysis.

Comparison of the Determination of Some Antihypertensive Drugs in Clinical Human Plasma Samples by Solvent Front Position Extraction and Precipitation Modes

The determination of the selected antihypertensive drugs in human plasma samples with the novel solvent front position extraction (SFPE) technique is presented. The SFPE procedure combined with LC-MS/MS analysis was used for the first time to prepare a clinical sample containing the drugs mentioned above from different therapeutic groups. The effectiveness of our approach was compared with the precipitation method. The latter technique is usually used to prepare biological samples in routine laboratories. During the experiments, the substances of interest and the internal standard were separated from other matrix components using a prototype horizontal chamber for thin-layer chromatography/high-performance thin-layer chromatography (TLC/HPTLC) with a moving pipette powered by a 3D mechanism, which distributed the solvent on the adsorbent layer. Detection of the six antihypertensive drugs was performed by liquid chromatography coupled to tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) in multiple reaction monitoring (MRM) mode. Results obtained by SFPE were very satisfactory (linearity R² ≥ 0.981; %RSD ≤ 6%; LOD and LOQ were in the range of 0.06-9.78 ng/mL and 0.17-29.64 ng/mL, respectively). The recovery was in the range of 79.88-120.36%. Intra-day and inter-day precision had a percentage coefficient of variation (CV) in the range of 1.10-9.74%. The procedure is simple and highly effective. It includes the automation of TLC chromatogram development, which significantly reduced the number of manual operations performed, the time of sample preparation and solvent consumption.

On the issue of low adherence of patients to antihypertensive therapy: the use of therapeutic drug monitoring of drugs: A review

Low adherence of patients to antihypertensive therapy remains an urgent problem and is recognized as the main cause of insufficient BP control at the population level. In this regard, to increase the motivation of patients in clinical practice, methods for assessing adherence (compliance) to drugs. Along with indirect assessment methods (questionnaires, self-reports, pill counts, etc.), which, however, do not always reflect the real patients adherence, more objective is the measurement of antihypertensive drug concentrations in physiological fluids therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM). For these purposes, methods of high-performance liquid chromatography with mass spectrometry were recently adapted, reference ranges of antihypertensive drug concentrations in blood serum and urine for standard doses of drugs were determined, as well as criteria for assessing complete or partial non-compliance. There have been a number of studies using TDM to assess adherence, which show a high rate of non-compliance (low compliance) of more than 50% of cases with a variability from 25 to 86.1%, with complete non-compliance 10.134.5% in patients with uncontrolled and/or resistant hypertension (3 antihypertensive drug). In a population of patients with a normal course of hypertension, taking 12 antihypertensive drug, the level of non-compliance according to the results of TDM did not exceed 10%. Comparison of the TDM method with indirect methods of assessing adherence did not reveal consistency; at the same time, the detection of antihypertensive drug better characterized the clinical problems of patients with arterial hypertension. In clinical practice, direct assessment methods (TDM) can be used to measure adherence in problem patients with uncontrolled hypertension and high cardiovascular risk despite optimal therapy.

Clinical characteristics do not reliably identify non-adherence in patients with uncontrolled hypertension

PURPOSE

Chemical adherence testing is a reliable method to assess adherence to antihypertensive drugs. However, it is expensive and has limited availability in clinical practice. To reduce the number and costs of chemical adherence tests, we aimed to develop and validate a clinical screening tool to identify patients with a low probability of non-adherence in patients with uncontrolled hypertension.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In 495 patients with uncontrolled hypertension referred to the University Medical Centre Utrecht (UMCU), the Netherlands, a penalised logistic regression model including seven pre-specified easy-to-measure clinical variables was derived to estimate the probability of non-adherence. Non-adherence was defined as not detecting at least one of the prescribed antihypertensive drugs in plasma or urine. Model performance and test characteristics were evaluated in 240 patients with uncontrolled hypertension referred to the Heartlands Hospital, United Kingdom.

RESULTS

Prevalence of non-adherence to antihypertensive drugs was 19% in the UMCU and 44% in the Heartlands Hospital population. After recalibration of the model's intercept, predicted probabilities agreed well with observed frequencies. The c-statistic of the model was 0.63 (95%CI 0.53-0.72). Predicted probability cut-off values of 15%-22.5% prevented testing in 5%-15% of the patients, carrying sensitivities between 97% (64-100) and 90% (80-95), and negative predictive values between 74% (10-99) and 70% (50-85).

CONCLUSION

The combination of seven clinical variables is not sufficient to reliably discriminate adherent from non-adherent individuals to safely reduce the number of chemical adherence tests. This emphasises the complex nature of non-adherence behaviour and thus the need for objective chemical adherence tests in patients with uncontrolled hypertension.

Hair analysis for beta-blockers and calcium-channel blockers by using liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry as a tool for monitoring adherence to antihypertensive therapy

Adherence to therapy is the key to a successful therapeutic intervention, especially in cardiovascular diseases in which a lack of adherence may have serious consequences in terms morbidity and/or mortality. In this context, hair analysis can be an excellent tool to monitor adherence to therapy. Indeed, drugs present in blood are incorporated into the hair matrix, where drugs and metabolites can stay unaltered for a long time protected from metabolism and degradation. In the present study, a simple, specific, and sensitive ultra-high performance liquid-chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (UHPLC-MS/MS) method set up to determine in human hair seven beta-blockers (viz., metoprolol, sotalol, labetalol, atenolol, nebivolol, bisoprolol, and nadolol) and two calcium-channel blockers (lercanidipine and amlodipine), which are widely prescribed to treat medium-to-severe hypertensive conditions. The optimized method was successfully validated in terms of accuracy, repeatability, reproducibility, matrix effect and extraction recovery. Moreover, the applicability of the method was evaluated by analyzing 34 real samples of hair obtained from patients under long-term therapy with calcium channel blockers and beta-blockers.

Development and Validation of a Dried Blood Spot Assay Using UHPLC-MS/MS to Identify and Quantify 12 Antihypertensive Drugs and 4 Active Metabolites: Clinical Needs and Analytical Limitations

PURPOSE

As nonadherence to antihypertensive drugs (AHDs) can increase the risk of cardiovascular events, hospitalization, and higher costs, there is a need for a reliable, objective, and easy method to assess nonadherence in patients. The dried blood spot (DBS) sampling method used to measure drug concentrations meets these requirements. For detecting nonadherence, identification is more important than quantification. Owing to their use in clinical practice, it is important to measure multiple AHDs with a single method. Therefore, we developed and validated a single DBS method for 17 commonly used AHDs and 4 active metabolites using ultrahigh performance liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (UHPLC-MS/MS).

METHODS

Analytical validation of the DBS assay was performed in accordance with the guidelines on bioanalytical method validation of the European Medicines Agency and US Food and Drug Administration as well as the International Association of Therapeutic Drug Monitoring and Clinical Toxicology guidelines.

RESULTS

We validated 12 of the 17 AHDs according to the European Medicines Agency and Food and Drug Administration requirements for bioanalytical method validation. Eleven AHDs were validated for both identification and quantification of drug concentrations, whereas nifedipine was only validated for identification. However, 5 of the 17 AHDs were excluded due to suboptimal validation results. Lercanidipine was excluded due to nonlinearity, and all 4 AHDs measured in the negative mode of UHPLC-MS/MS were not in accordance with one or more of the acceptance criteria and were therefore excluded.

CONCLUSIONS

The described method accurately measured AHDs in DBS and can be used to determine nonadherence in patients. However, method validation revealed a challenging balance between analytical limitations and clinical needs when analyzing multiple drugs using the same method.

Nonadherence in Hypertension: How to Develop and Implement Chemical Adherence Testing

Nonadherence to antihypertensive medication is common, especially in those with apparent treatment-resistant hypertension (true treatment-resistant hypertension requires exclusion of nonadherence), and its routine detection is supported by clinical guidelines. Chemical adherence testing is a reliable and valid method to detect adherence, yet methods are unstandardized and are not ubiquitous. This article describes the principles of chemical adherence testing for hypertensive patients and provides a set of recommendations for centers wishing to develop the test. We recommend testing should be done in either of two instances: (1) in those who have resistant hypertension or (2) in those on 2 antihypertensives who have a less than 10 mm Hg drop in systolic blood pressure on addition of the second antihypertensive medication. Furthermore, we recommend that verbal consent is secured before undertaking the test, and the results should be discussed with the patient. Based on medications prescribed in United Kingdom, European Union, and United States, we list top 20 to 24 drugs that cover >95% of hypertension prescriptions which may be included in the testing panel. Information required to identify these medications on mass spectrometry platforms is likewise provided. We discuss issues related to ethics, sample collection, transport, stability, urine versus blood samples, qualitative versus quantitative testing, pharmacokinetics, instrumentation, validation, quality assurance, and gaps in knowledge. We consider how to best present, interpret, and discuss chemical adherence test results with the patient. In summary, this guidance should help clinicians and their laboratories in the development of chemical adherence testing of prescribed antihypertensive drugs.

Clinical Validation of a Dried Blood Spot Assay for 8 Antihypertensive Drugs and 4 Active Metabolites

BACKGROUND

Drug nonadherence is one of the major challenges faced by resistant hypertension patients, and identification of this problem is needed for optimizing pharmacotherapy. Dried blood spot (DBS) sampling is a minimally invasive method designed to detect and determine the degree of nonadherence. In this study, a DBS method for qualifying 8 antihypertensive drugs (AHDs) and 4 active metabolites was developed and validated using ultra high-performance liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (UHPLC-MS/MS).

METHOD

The DBS assay was validated analytically and clinically, in accordance with FDA requirements. Analytical validation was accomplished using UHPLC-MS/MS. For clinical validation, paired peak and trough levels of DBS and plasma samples were simultaneously collected and comparatively analyzed using Deming regression and Bland-Altman analyses. All concentrations below the set lower limit were excluded. Deming regression analysis was used to predict comparison bias between the collected plasma and DBS samples, with DBS concentrations corrected accordingly.

RESULTS

The UHPLC-MS/MS method for simultaneously measuring 8 AHDs and their metabolites in DBS, was successfully validated. With Deming regression no bias was observed in N = 1; constant bias was seen in N = 6 and proportional bias in N = 11 of the AHDs and metabolites. After correction for bias, only one metabolite (canrenone) met the 20% acceptance limit for quantification, after Bland-Altman analyses. In addition, amlodipine, valsartan, and [enalaprilate] met the 25% acceptance limit.

CONCLUSIONS

A novel DBS assay for simultaneously qualifying and quantifying 8 AHDs and their metabolites, has been successfully developed and validated. The DBS assay is therefore a suitable method to detect drug nonadherence. However, with the exception of canrenone, the interchangeable use of plasma and DBS sampling to interpret drug quantities should be avoided.

Urine Concentration Does Not Affect Biochemical Testing for Non-adherence

Hypertension is one of the most important modifiable risk factor causing cardiovascular disease. Unfortunately, non-adherence to antihypertensive medications is frequently observed in hypertensive patients and can lead to an increase in morbidity and mortality. Until recently, there was no robust clinical method to objectively diagnose non-adherence. Recently, the detection of medications in urine or blood by mass spectrometry techniques such as liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC–MS-MS) has been accepted as the diagnostic method of choice for the detection of non-adherence. Despite this, it is unclear whether the concentration of urine can affect the detection of medications in urine. Therefore, this study aimed to assess the effect of urine concentration on detection of antihypertensive medications by LC–MS-MS in which urine creatinine is used as an independent marker of urine concentration. Biochemical adherence results for 22 different medications (1,709 prescriptions) in 463 different subjects were converted to an adherence score. The adherence score was defined as the ratio of the total number of subjects in which the drug was detected to the total number of subjects to whom the drug was prescribed. The adherence scores for each medication were correlated with urine creatinine concentration for each medication. Non-adherence was observed in 47.1% of samples with a mean urine creatinine concentration of these samples of 9.4 ± 7.1 mmol/L. There was no significant difference between the urine creatinine concentrations in the detected vs non-detected groups for each of the 22 medications. Furthermore, there are no differences in adherence scores across the urine creatinine concentration. This is the first study to demonstrate that urine creatinine concentration does not affect the results of the adherence screening by LC–MS-MS.

Assessing Adherence to Antihypertensive Medication by Means of Dose-Dependent Reference Plasma Concentration Ranges and Ultra-High Performance Liquid Chromatography-Ion Trap Mass Spectrometry Analysis

Poor adherence to antihypertensive drug therapy is a well-recognized problem and can be assessed by mass spectrometry-based analyses of body fluids. However, contrary statements exist whether drug quantification in blood or qualitative screening in urine is more suitable. The present pilot study aimed to further elucidate the power of blood plasma drug concentrations for adherence monitoring by developing and validating a quantification procedure for nine antihypertensive drugs (amlodipine, bisoprolol, candesartan, canrenone, carvedilol, metoprolol, olmesartan, torasemide, and valsartan) in blood plasma using liquid–liquid extraction and an ultra-high-performance liquid chromatography-ion trap mass spectrometry analysis. The procedure should then be used for an adherence assessment and compared with the results of an established qualitative urine screening. Selectivity, carryover, matrix effect, accuracy, precision, dilution integrity, and stability were successfully validated, except for amlodipine. The applicability was demonstrated by analyzing 19 plasma samples containing 28 antihypertensive drugs and comparing the measured concentrations with calculated dose-dependent reference plasma concentration ranges. The interpretation of plasma concentrations was found to be more sophisticated and time-consuming than that of urine screening results, and adherence could not be assessed in two cases (10%) due to measured plasma concentrations below the lower limit of quantification. However, 14 out of 19 subjects were classified as adherent (75%) and three as nonadherent (15%), in contrast to 19 (100%) that were claimed to be adherent based on the results of the qualitative urine screening. Nevertheless, further data is needed to estimate whether plasma quantification is superior in terms of assessing adherence to antihypertensive medication.

Establishing Serum Reference Ranges for Antihypertensive Drugs

BACKGROUND

Therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) involves the measurement of serum drug concentrations to optimize pharmacotherapy. Traditionally, blood pressure measurements alone, and not TDM, have been used to evaluate the antihypertensive drug response. However, approximately 50% of hypertensive patients treated with lifestyle changes and antihypertensive drugs fail to achieve blood pressure control. Serum drug concentration measurements could be useful to select the optimal drugs in adjusted doses and to identify nonadherence. Implementation of TDM in clinical routine for antihypertensive drugs depends on established serum reference ranges.

METHODS

Commonly used antihypertensive drugs were identified based on prescription data. The authors performed a review of authoritative literature on reported serum drug concentrations and calculated expected concentrations from previously reported pharmacokinetic parameters with commonly prescribed daily doses. Finally, serum drug concentrations in samples from patients undergoing antihypertensive treatment were measured.

RESULTS

Serum reference ranges for 24 frequently used antihypertensive drugs were established based on results from 3 approaches.

CONCLUSIONS

Serum drug concentration measurements, interpreted in light of the established reference ranges, together with blood pressure measurements and other clinical data, may help identify nonadherent patients and tailor individual antihypertensive treatment when deviant drug responses appear in line with the concept of personalized medicine.

Plasma Trough Concentrations of Antihypertensive Drugs for the Assessment of Treatment Adherence: A Meta-Analysis

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text.

Biochemical drug screening by liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry in plasma is an accurate method for the quantification of plasma concentrations of antihypertensive medications in patients with hypertension. Trough concentrations could possibly be used as drug-specific cutoff values in the biochemical assessment of (non-)adherence. We performed a literature review and meta-analysis of pharmacokinetic studies to determine plasma trough concentrations of amlodipine, hydrochlorothiazide, and valsartan. PubMed was searched for pharmacokinetic studies up to September 2020. Eligible studies reported steady-state mean trough concentration and their variance. Pooled trough concentrations were estimated using a three-level random effects meta-analytic model. Moderator analyses were performed to explore sources of heterogeneity. One thousand three hundred eighteen potentially relevant articles were identified of which 45 were eligible for inclusion. The pooled mean trough concentration was 9.2 ng/mL (95% CI, 7.5–10.8) for amlodipine, 41.0 ng/mL (95% CI, 17.4–64.7) for hydrochlorothiazide, and 352.9 ng/mL (95% CI, 243.5–462.3) for valsartan. Substantial heterogeneity was present for all 3 pooled estimates. Moderator analyses identified dosage as a significant moderator for the pooled trough concentration of amlodipine (β₁=0.9; P<0.05), mean age, and mean body weight for the mean trough concentration of hydrochlorothiazide (β₁=2.2, P<0.05, respectively, β₁=−4.0, P<0.05) and no significant moderators for valsartan. Plasma trough concentrations of amlodipine, hydrochlorothiazide, and valsartan, measured with liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry, are highly heterogeneous over the different studies. Use of the pooled trough concentration as a cutoff in the biochemical assessment of adherence can result in inaccurate diagnosis of (non-)adherence, which may seriously harm the patient-physician relationship, and is therefore not recommended.

A simple and sensitive HPLC-FL method for simultaneous determination of angiotensin II receptor antagonists in human plasma

Angiotensin II receptor antagonists are one of the most widely used classes of antihypertensive drugs. In this study, an HPLC fluorescence method after protein precipitation (PPT) extraction was developed and validated for determination of olmesartan, losartan, irbesartan, and valsartan in human plasma. The separation was carried out on a Luna cyano (250 × 4.6 mm i.d.; 5 μm particle size) column and the mobile phase was composed of acetonitrile and 0.1 % phosphoric acid in gradient elution, at a flow rate of 1.2 mL min^-1. A PPT method was optimized by a two-level factorial design with triplicate at the central point. The parameters that could affect the extraction (sample volume and acetonitrile/plasma volume ratio) were evaluated and the method was compared to microextraction by packed sorbent (MEPS) and liquid-liquid extraction (LLE). The developed method allowed the simultaneous quantification of the analytes employing a simple and cheap sample preparation method and a short chromatographic run (13 min). This method was fully validated showing selectivity, precision, accuracy, and linearity over the range of 25.0-1500.0 ng mL^-1 for olmesartan and valsartan, 25.0-2500.0 ng mL^-1 for irbesartan, and 35.0-2500.0 ng mL^-1 for losartan. Finally, the method was successfully applied in the analysis of human plasma from volunteers.

A vinylpyrrolidone-based thin film microextraction in combination with direct solid-state spectrofluorimetry for determination of sartans in human plasma

A vinylpyrrolidone-ethylene glycol dimethacrylate-acrylic acid thin film was prepared on a polypropylene guard and its formulation was optimized for application in thin film microextraction followed by direct solid-state spectrofluorimetry method. The surface morphology, fluorescence property and extraction performance of the thin film were investigated systematically. The intra- and inter-batch reproducibilities of thin film fabrication were obtained 2.3 and 4.2%, respectively. The lifetime of each prepared thin film was 30 times with a relative standard deviation of less than 1.4%. The developed method was optimized for extraction of some sartans as angiotensin II receptors antagonist (including losartan, valsartan, and olmesartan) which have been used to control hypertension as the main causes of cardiovascular disease. The optimum extraction conditions achieved at 2- (for losartan) and 4- (for valsartan and olmesartan) sample pH, 500-rpm rotation rate and 30-min extraction time for all three analytes. At the optimum conditions, analyses of losartan, valsartan, and olmesartan were validated in the human plasma matrix. Broad linearity ranges with determination coefficients of more than 0.999 were achieved for each calibration curve. Limit of detection of the method was 0.5 ng mL^-1 for all three analytes. The intra- and inter-day accuracies and precisions of the developed method were evaluated in spiked plasma samples at three concentration levels of each analyte with high recoveries of 95-101% and relative standard deviations less than 6%. This method provides a simple, sensitive, fast, and high-throughput analysis method with the possibility of effective extraction of at least 40 samples simultaneously without the necessity of protein precipitating, desorption, and solvent evaporation steps.

Clinical Applicability of Monitoring Antihypertensive Drug Levels in Blood

Dried blood spot (DBS) analysis is a novel analytical method for therapeutic drug monitoring to identify nonadherence to antihypertensive drugs. This study was conducted to evaluate the clinical applicability of measuring drug concentrations of 8 antihypertensive drugs, using DBS and venipuncture. Furthermore, this study aimed to provide more insight into the between-patient variability in drug concentrations. False-negative values from DBS compared with a venipuncture were determined to assess drug adherence. A generalized estimating equation was used to estimate the model parameters, including sex, dose, age, weight, and the time interval, between drug intake and sampling, on the C_plasma (drug concentration in plasma). No false-negative values were found when measuring nonadherence using DBS compared with venipuncture. A high variability in C_plasma between patients was observed, especially at peak concentrations with a fold change reaching from 2.3 to 35.2. The time of intake was significantly related to the height of the C_plasma in 7 of the 8 measured drugs with a P<0.05, but the influence of dose, weight, age, and sex on drug levels differed largely between the measured drugs. DBS is a reliable and convenient method to assess nonadherence to antihypertensive drugs in clinical practice. The C_plasma of the 8 antihypertensive drugs in this study show a large interindividual difference, and therefore, low plasma concentrations do not necessarily mean nonadherence. Nonadherence can only be confirmed if drug levels are undetectable, that is, values below the lower limit of detection.

Assessment of adherence to diuretics and β-blockers by serum drug monitoring in comparison to urine analysis

Purpose: Toxicological screenings for identifying antihypertensive drugs proved to be a useful tool for assessing adherence. However, misinterpretation may occur in case of highly metabolised drugs with low renal excretion, as well as for drugs with a prolonged detectability. The aim of the present study was to compare a recently developed therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) method based on serum concentrations to an urine drug detection method for assessing adherence in outpatients.Materials and methods: Corresponding urine and blood samples were obtained at the same time from 26 outpatients without supervised medication. Urine and serum analyses were performed using established high-performance liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) methodologies. Adherence was assumed if drugs were detectable in urine or if serum concentrations were above individually calculated lower dose-related concentrations (DRC) or literature-based therapeutic reference ranges (TRR) used as cut-off, respectively.Results: The identification of analytes in urine as well as the quantitative serum assay were performed for atenolol (n = 6 patients), bisoprolol (n = 8), nebivolol (n = 6), canrenone (n = 6, metabolite of spironolactone), hydrochlorothiazide (n = 12) and furosemide (n = 2). On the basis of drug detectability in urine, adherence was assumed in 88% of prescriptions. In 81% (DRC) and 50% (TRR) of the serum analyses the cut-off value was exceeded, which confirms patients' adherence in a lower number. Differences in adherence rates were found in five patients, mainly for β-blockers.Conclusion: This study suggests that assessment of adherence can be performed more precisely on the basis of serum drug concentrations with individually calculated lower DRC than by using the TRR or qualitative urinalysis.