测定生物制品干燥损失的测量不确定度的估计

O. V. Fadeikina, A. A. Voropaev, D. S. Davydov, R. A. Volkova
{"title":"测定生物制品干燥损失的测量不确定度的估计","authors":"O. V. Fadeikina, A. A. Voropaev, D. S. Davydov, R. A. Volkova","doi":"10.30895/2221-996x-2023-23-3-1-452-462","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Scientific relevance . GOST ISO/IEC 17025-2019 requires testing laboratories to evaluate the measurement uncertainty of their results. Estimating the uncertainty of analytical methods intended for biologicals is a challenging task that requires time, effort, and a special approach. Measurement uncertainty estimation is of particular interest in the case of measuring loss on drying (LOD) for biologicals, since LOD testing procedures involve analysing measurements of a physical value, i.e. mass. Aim . This study aimed to estimate the measurement uncertainty of LOD determination in biological medicinal products. Materials and methods . The study examined a powdered active substance intended for a Bifidobacterium product (test sample). The authors conducted the LOD test in accordance with the State Pharmacopoeia of the Russian Federation (OFS.1.2.1.0010.15). Statistical processing of the results was performed using Microsoft Excel. To estimate the measurement uncertainty, the authors employed the bottom-up approach or used the standard deviation from testing results. Results . The authors identified the uncertainty components that affected the LOD determination results. When calculated using the bottom-up approach, the expanded uncertainty was 0.34% (coverage factor, k =2; approximate confidence level, 95%). In particular, the largest contributor to the expanded uncertainty was the uncertainty of measuring the mass of weighing bottles containing dried test samples (0.147%), whereas the smallest contributor was the uncertainty of weighing empty bottles (0.003%). When calculated using the standard deviation, the uncertainty of two parallel measurements amounted to 0.32%. Conclusions . Both approaches to calculating LOD measurement uncertainty yield comparable results. According to the uncertainty budget analysis, the uncertainty of measuring the mass of weighing bottles with dried test samples is the major contributor to the test result. For this reason, the conditions of sample preparation should be carefully controlled. The study results confirm that the LOD measurement uncertainty can be calculated using the standard deviation. Testing laboratory teams may benefit from the methods for identifying the factors influencing LOD test results and the methods for calculating the uncertainty of measurement described in this study.","PeriodicalId":32767,"journal":{"name":"Biopreparaty Profilaktika diagnostika lechenie","volume":"242 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Estimation of measurement uncertainty for the determination of loss on drying of biologicals\",\"authors\":\"O. V. Fadeikina, A. A. Voropaev, D. S. Davydov, R. A. Volkova\",\"doi\":\"10.30895/2221-996x-2023-23-3-1-452-462\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Scientific relevance . GOST ISO/IEC 17025-2019 requires testing laboratories to evaluate the measurement uncertainty of their results. Estimating the uncertainty of analytical methods intended for biologicals is a challenging task that requires time, effort, and a special approach. Measurement uncertainty estimation is of particular interest in the case of measuring loss on drying (LOD) for biologicals, since LOD testing procedures involve analysing measurements of a physical value, i.e. mass. Aim . This study aimed to estimate the measurement uncertainty of LOD determination in biological medicinal products. Materials and methods . The study examined a powdered active substance intended for a Bifidobacterium product (test sample). The authors conducted the LOD test in accordance with the State Pharmacopoeia of the Russian Federation (OFS.1.2.1.0010.15). Statistical processing of the results was performed using Microsoft Excel. To estimate the measurement uncertainty, the authors employed the bottom-up approach or used the standard deviation from testing results. Results . The authors identified the uncertainty components that affected the LOD determination results. When calculated using the bottom-up approach, the expanded uncertainty was 0.34% (coverage factor, k =2; approximate confidence level, 95%). In particular, the largest contributor to the expanded uncertainty was the uncertainty of measuring the mass of weighing bottles containing dried test samples (0.147%), whereas the smallest contributor was the uncertainty of weighing empty bottles (0.003%). When calculated using the standard deviation, the uncertainty of two parallel measurements amounted to 0.32%. Conclusions . Both approaches to calculating LOD measurement uncertainty yield comparable results. According to the uncertainty budget analysis, the uncertainty of measuring the mass of weighing bottles with dried test samples is the major contributor to the test result. For this reason, the conditions of sample preparation should be carefully controlled. The study results confirm that the LOD measurement uncertainty can be calculated using the standard deviation. Testing laboratory teams may benefit from the methods for identifying the factors influencing LOD test results and the methods for calculating the uncertainty of measurement described in this study.\",\"PeriodicalId\":32767,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Biopreparaty Profilaktika diagnostika lechenie\",\"volume\":\"242 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Biopreparaty Profilaktika diagnostika lechenie\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.30895/2221-996x-2023-23-3-1-452-462\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Biopreparaty Profilaktika diagnostika lechenie","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.30895/2221-996x-2023-23-3-1-452-462","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

科学相关性。GOST ISO/IEC 17025-2019要求测试实验室评估其结果的测量不确定度。估计用于生物制剂的分析方法的不确定度是一项具有挑战性的任务,需要时间、精力和特殊的方法。测量不确定度估计在测量生物制品干燥损失(LOD)的情况下特别有趣,因为LOD测试程序涉及分析物理值(即质量)的测量。的目标。本研究旨在对生物药品中LOD测定的测量不确定度进行估计。材料和方法。该研究检测了用于双歧杆菌产品(测试样品)的粉末状活性物质。作者按照俄罗斯联邦国家药典(OFS.1.2.1.0010.15)进行LOD试验。使用Microsoft Excel对结果进行统计处理。为了估计测量不确定度,作者采用了自底向上的方法或使用测试结果的标准偏差。结果。确定了影响LOD测定结果的不确定度成分。采用自底向上方法计算时,扩展不确定度为0.34%(覆盖因子,k =2;近似置信水平,95%)。特别是,扩展不确定度的最大贡献者是测量含有干燥测试样品的称重瓶的质量的不确定度(0.147%),而最小的贡献者是称重空瓶的不确定度(0.003%)。用标准偏差计算时,两次平行测量的不确定度为0.32%。结论。两种计算LOD测量不确定度的方法产生了可比较的结果。根据不确定度预算分析,用干燥试样测量称重瓶质量的不确定度是影响测试结果的主要因素。因此,应仔细控制样品制备的条件。研究结果证实了LOD测量不确定度可以用标准偏差来计算。测试实验室团队可以从本研究中描述的确定影响LOD测试结果的因素的方法和计算测量不确定度的方法中受益。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Estimation of measurement uncertainty for the determination of loss on drying of biologicals
Scientific relevance . GOST ISO/IEC 17025-2019 requires testing laboratories to evaluate the measurement uncertainty of their results. Estimating the uncertainty of analytical methods intended for biologicals is a challenging task that requires time, effort, and a special approach. Measurement uncertainty estimation is of particular interest in the case of measuring loss on drying (LOD) for biologicals, since LOD testing procedures involve analysing measurements of a physical value, i.e. mass. Aim . This study aimed to estimate the measurement uncertainty of LOD determination in biological medicinal products. Materials and methods . The study examined a powdered active substance intended for a Bifidobacterium product (test sample). The authors conducted the LOD test in accordance with the State Pharmacopoeia of the Russian Federation (OFS.1.2.1.0010.15). Statistical processing of the results was performed using Microsoft Excel. To estimate the measurement uncertainty, the authors employed the bottom-up approach or used the standard deviation from testing results. Results . The authors identified the uncertainty components that affected the LOD determination results. When calculated using the bottom-up approach, the expanded uncertainty was 0.34% (coverage factor, k =2; approximate confidence level, 95%). In particular, the largest contributor to the expanded uncertainty was the uncertainty of measuring the mass of weighing bottles containing dried test samples (0.147%), whereas the smallest contributor was the uncertainty of weighing empty bottles (0.003%). When calculated using the standard deviation, the uncertainty of two parallel measurements amounted to 0.32%. Conclusions . Both approaches to calculating LOD measurement uncertainty yield comparable results. According to the uncertainty budget analysis, the uncertainty of measuring the mass of weighing bottles with dried test samples is the major contributor to the test result. For this reason, the conditions of sample preparation should be carefully controlled. The study results confirm that the LOD measurement uncertainty can be calculated using the standard deviation. Testing laboratory teams may benefit from the methods for identifying the factors influencing LOD test results and the methods for calculating the uncertainty of measurement described in this study.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
24
审稿时长
8 weeks
×
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