Comparison of 3 methods of quantification of phenobarbital in canine plasma: high-performance liquid chromatography, a point-of-care immunoassay, and the FDA-approved immunoassay analyzer.

IF 1.2 3区 农林科学 Q3 VETERINARY SCIENCES
Kamoltip Thungrat, Ryan Gibson, Tom Jukier, Alex Jenkins, Crisanta Cruz-Espindola
{"title":"Comparison of 3 methods of quantification of phenobarbital in canine plasma: high-performance liquid chromatography, a point-of-care immunoassay, and the FDA-approved immunoassay analyzer.","authors":"Kamoltip Thungrat, Ryan Gibson, Tom Jukier, Alex Jenkins, Crisanta Cruz-Espindola","doi":"10.1177/10406387241312891","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Phenobarbital is a common antiseizure medication that has a relatively narrow therapeutic window. Therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) is a helpful tool to guide dose adjustments for phenobarbital and avoid its toxicity. We investigated the agreement among 3 methods of quantifying phenobarbital in canine plasma: high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC), point-of-care (POC) testing, and the FDA-approved immunoassay analyzer. We randomly selected 45 plasma samples obtained by the TDM service (College of Veterinary Medicine, Auburn University, Auburn, AL, USA). Passing-Bablok regression and Lin concordance correlation coefficients (CCCs) were used to determine the agreement of the results obtained for the 3 methods; Bland-Altman plots were used for bias analysis using the results from the HPLC method as a reference. The FDA-approved immunoassay analyzer and POC immunoassay method results agreed with the HPLC. The results from the FDA-approved immunoassay analyzer were better correlated than those from the POC method, with Lin CCCs of 0.96 (95% CI: 0.93-0.98) and 0.94 (95% CI: 0.90-0.97), respectively. The average biases of the FDA-approved and the POC immunoassay analyzers were 0.80 and -0.64 µg/mL, respectively. Based on the CIs of Lin CCCs, the commercial POC phenobarbital test is a good screening tool and agrees with the HPLC method. However, the FDA-approved immunoassay analyzer method allows for more accurate quantification of phenobarbital concentrations, which is required for appropriate dose adjustment of phenobarbital.</p>","PeriodicalId":17579,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Veterinary Diagnostic Investigation","volume":" ","pages":"272-277"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11773498/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Veterinary Diagnostic Investigation","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10406387241312891","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/27 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"VETERINARY SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Phenobarbital is a common antiseizure medication that has a relatively narrow therapeutic window. Therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) is a helpful tool to guide dose adjustments for phenobarbital and avoid its toxicity. We investigated the agreement among 3 methods of quantifying phenobarbital in canine plasma: high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC), point-of-care (POC) testing, and the FDA-approved immunoassay analyzer. We randomly selected 45 plasma samples obtained by the TDM service (College of Veterinary Medicine, Auburn University, Auburn, AL, USA). Passing-Bablok regression and Lin concordance correlation coefficients (CCCs) were used to determine the agreement of the results obtained for the 3 methods; Bland-Altman plots were used for bias analysis using the results from the HPLC method as a reference. The FDA-approved immunoassay analyzer and POC immunoassay method results agreed with the HPLC. The results from the FDA-approved immunoassay analyzer were better correlated than those from the POC method, with Lin CCCs of 0.96 (95% CI: 0.93-0.98) and 0.94 (95% CI: 0.90-0.97), respectively. The average biases of the FDA-approved and the POC immunoassay analyzers were 0.80 and -0.64 µg/mL, respectively. Based on the CIs of Lin CCCs, the commercial POC phenobarbital test is a good screening tool and agrees with the HPLC method. However, the FDA-approved immunoassay analyzer method allows for more accurate quantification of phenobarbital concentrations, which is required for appropriate dose adjustment of phenobarbital.

犬血浆中苯巴比妥3种定量方法的比较:高效液相色谱法、即时免疫分析法和fda批准的免疫分析法。
苯巴比妥是一种常见的抗癫痫药物,治疗窗口相对较窄。治疗药物监测(TDM)是指导苯巴比妥剂量调整和避免其毒性的有效工具。我们研究了三种定量犬血浆中苯巴比妥的方法:高效液相色谱法(HPLC)、即时检测法(POC)和fda批准的免疫分析仪之间的一致性。我们随机选择了TDM服务(奥本大学兽医学院,奥本,AL, USA)获得的45份血浆样本。采用pass - bablok回归和Lin一致性相关系数(CCCs)来确定3种方法所得结果的一致性;以HPLC法结果为参照,采用Bland-Altman图进行偏倚分析。fda批准的免疫分析分析仪和POC免疫分析方法的结果与HPLC一致。fda批准的免疫分析分析仪的结果比POC方法的结果相关性更好,Lin CCCs分别为0.96 (95% CI: 0.93-0.98)和0.94 (95% CI: 0.90-0.97)。fda批准的和POC免疫分析分析仪的平均偏差分别为0.80和-0.64µg/mL。基于Lin CCCs的CIs,市售POC苯巴比妥试验是一个很好的筛选工具,与HPLC方法一致。然而,fda批准的免疫分析分析仪方法允许更准确地定量苯巴比妥浓度,这是适当调整苯巴比妥剂量所必需的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.00
自引率
6.70%
发文量
127
审稿时长
6-16 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Veterinary Diagnostic Investigation (J Vet Diagn Invest) is an international peer-reviewed journal published bimonthly in English by the American Association of Veterinary Laboratory Diagnosticians (AAVLD). JVDI is devoted to all aspects of veterinary laboratory diagnostic science including the major disciplines of anatomic pathology, bacteriology/mycology, clinical pathology, epidemiology, immunology, laboratory information management, molecular biology, parasitology, public health, toxicology, and virology.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信