Inter-laboratory analysis of Isavuconazole plasma concentration assays among European laboratories.

TitleInter-laboratory analysis of Isavuconazole plasma concentration assays among European laboratories.
Publication TypeJournal Article
Year of Publication2019
AuthorsPea, F, Krause, R, Müller, C, Hennart, B, Richardson, M, Meinitzer, A, Wiesen, MHJ, Wiktorowicz, T, Spickermann, J, Henriksen, ASanterre
JournalTher Drug Monit
Date Published2019 Mar 31
ISSN1536-3694
Abstract

BACKGROUND: Under certain circumstances, clinicians treating patients with isavuconazole for invasive aspergillosis or mucormycosis may use therapeutic drug monitoring. However, the accuracy and reproducibility of the various assays used by different laboratories for the quantification of isavuconazole plasma concentrations have yet to be determined.

METHODS: Human plasma samples spiked with known concentrations of isavuconazole were provided to 27 European laboratories that took part in a "round-robin" test (an inter-laboratory test performed independently at least two times; two rounds performed in the current study). Assay methods included liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS), LC with ultraviolet detection (LC-UV), LC with fluorescence detection (LC-FL), and bioassay. The accuracy and reproducibility compared with the known concentrations for each sample in each round were compared overall, between assays, and between laboratories.

RESULTS: Twenty-seven laboratories participated in the study (LC-MS/MS, n=15; LC-UV; n=9; LC-FL, n=1; bioassay, n=2). In Round 1, for nominal concentrations of 1000, 1700, 2500, and 4000 ng/mL, the mean (SD) determined concentrations were 1007 (183), 1710 (323), 2528 (540), and 3898 (842) ng/mL, respectively. In Round 2, for nominal concentrations of 1200, 1800, 2400, and 4000 ng/mL, the mean (SD) determined concentrations were 1411 (303), 2111 (409), 2789 (511), and 4723 (798) ng/mL, respectively. Over both rounds, determined concentrations were consistently within 15% of the nominal concentrations for 10 laboratories (LC-MS/MS, n=4; LC-UV, n=5; bioassay, n=1) and consistently exceeded the upper 15% margin for 7 laboratories (LC-MS/MS and LC-UV, n=3 each; LC-FL, n=1).

CONCLUSIONS: Alignment of methodologies among laboratories may be warranted to improve the accuracy and reproducibility of therapeutic drug measurements.This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-No Derivatives License 4.0 (CCBY-NC-ND), where it is permissible to download and share the work provided it is properly cited. The work cannot be changed in any way or used commercially without permission from the journal.

DOI10.1097/FTD.0000000000000632
Alternate JournalTher Drug Monit
PubMed ID30950933