Roland B van den Berg, Ewelina Korczowska, Mónica S F Santos, Maria Francisca Portilha-Cunha, Ana R L Ribeiro, Lucie Bláhová, Luděk Bláha, Claudia Vom Eyser, Jochen Tuerk, Richard C J M van Rossen, Erik B Wilms, Mirjam Crul
{"title":"危险药品表面擦拭取样:欧洲实验室间比较研究。","authors":"Roland B van den Berg, Ewelina Korczowska, Mónica S F Santos, Maria Francisca Portilha-Cunha, Ana R L Ribeiro, Lucie Bláhová, Luděk Bláha, Claudia Vom Eyser, Jochen Tuerk, Richard C J M van Rossen, Erik B Wilms, Mirjam Crul","doi":"10.1002/dta.3902","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Workplace monitoring of hazardous medicinal products (HMPs) using surface wipe sampling is becoming common practice in many European hospitals and pharmacies. However, no independent quality control is available to validate wiping procedures and analytical methods. This study aimed to conduct a Europe-wide interlaboratory comparison (ILC) program to independently and blindly assess laboratory performance and variability in HMP detection. Four European laboratories participated in the study. Six HMPs-cyclophosphamide, etoposide, gemcitabine, ifosfamide, methotrexate, and paclitaxel-were prepared at four concentrations (5000, 2000, 200, and 20 ng/mL) and applied to a 400-cm<sup>2</sup> stainless-steel surface, then wiped by the coordinating body according to each laboratory's protocol. Wipe samples were distributed to individual laboratories, where blind analyses were conducted. Target criteria for accuracy and recovery were set at 70%-130% and 50%-130%, respectively. Of the 80 samples, 69 (86%) met accuracy targets, and 70 (88%) met recovery targets. Accuracy was often overestimated for the lowest concentrations of cyclophosphamide, etoposide, methotrexate, and paclitaxel by Laboratory A. Laboratory D showed low accuracy for paclitaxel at three lower concentrations. Among the 10 samples that did not meet recovery targets, all were below 50% and involved etoposide and paclitaxel. This ILC program demonstrates a viable method for evaluating laboratory performance in HMP detection, offering an external validation mechanism for surface wipe sampling methods. A future goal is to establish a global ILC program with a designated coordinating body for managing it effectively.</p>","PeriodicalId":160,"journal":{"name":"Drug Testing and Analysis","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Surface Wipe Sampling of Hazardous Medicinal Products: A European Interlaboratory Comparison Study.\",\"authors\":\"Roland B van den Berg, Ewelina Korczowska, Mónica S F Santos, Maria Francisca Portilha-Cunha, Ana R L Ribeiro, Lucie Bláhová, Luděk Bláha, Claudia Vom Eyser, Jochen Tuerk, Richard C J M van Rossen, Erik B Wilms, Mirjam Crul\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/dta.3902\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Workplace monitoring of hazardous medicinal products (HMPs) using surface wipe sampling is becoming common practice in many European hospitals and pharmacies. However, no independent quality control is available to validate wiping procedures and analytical methods. This study aimed to conduct a Europe-wide interlaboratory comparison (ILC) program to independently and blindly assess laboratory performance and variability in HMP detection. Four European laboratories participated in the study. Six HMPs-cyclophosphamide, etoposide, gemcitabine, ifosfamide, methotrexate, and paclitaxel-were prepared at four concentrations (5000, 2000, 200, and 20 ng/mL) and applied to a 400-cm<sup>2</sup> stainless-steel surface, then wiped by the coordinating body according to each laboratory's protocol. Wipe samples were distributed to individual laboratories, where blind analyses were conducted. Target criteria for accuracy and recovery were set at 70%-130% and 50%-130%, respectively. Of the 80 samples, 69 (86%) met accuracy targets, and 70 (88%) met recovery targets. Accuracy was often overestimated for the lowest concentrations of cyclophosphamide, etoposide, methotrexate, and paclitaxel by Laboratory A. Laboratory D showed low accuracy for paclitaxel at three lower concentrations. Among the 10 samples that did not meet recovery targets, all were below 50% and involved etoposide and paclitaxel. This ILC program demonstrates a viable method for evaluating laboratory performance in HMP detection, offering an external validation mechanism for surface wipe sampling methods. A future goal is to establish a global ILC program with a designated coordinating body for managing it effectively.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":160,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Drug Testing and Analysis\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-05-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Drug Testing and Analysis\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/dta.3902\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"BIOCHEMICAL RESEARCH METHODS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Drug Testing and Analysis","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/dta.3902","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"BIOCHEMICAL RESEARCH METHODS","Score":null,"Total":0}
Surface Wipe Sampling of Hazardous Medicinal Products: A European Interlaboratory Comparison Study.
Workplace monitoring of hazardous medicinal products (HMPs) using surface wipe sampling is becoming common practice in many European hospitals and pharmacies. However, no independent quality control is available to validate wiping procedures and analytical methods. This study aimed to conduct a Europe-wide interlaboratory comparison (ILC) program to independently and blindly assess laboratory performance and variability in HMP detection. Four European laboratories participated in the study. Six HMPs-cyclophosphamide, etoposide, gemcitabine, ifosfamide, methotrexate, and paclitaxel-were prepared at four concentrations (5000, 2000, 200, and 20 ng/mL) and applied to a 400-cm2 stainless-steel surface, then wiped by the coordinating body according to each laboratory's protocol. Wipe samples were distributed to individual laboratories, where blind analyses were conducted. Target criteria for accuracy and recovery were set at 70%-130% and 50%-130%, respectively. Of the 80 samples, 69 (86%) met accuracy targets, and 70 (88%) met recovery targets. Accuracy was often overestimated for the lowest concentrations of cyclophosphamide, etoposide, methotrexate, and paclitaxel by Laboratory A. Laboratory D showed low accuracy for paclitaxel at three lower concentrations. Among the 10 samples that did not meet recovery targets, all were below 50% and involved etoposide and paclitaxel. This ILC program demonstrates a viable method for evaluating laboratory performance in HMP detection, offering an external validation mechanism for surface wipe sampling methods. A future goal is to establish a global ILC program with a designated coordinating body for managing it effectively.
期刊介绍:
As the incidence of drugs escalates in 21st century living, their detection and analysis have become increasingly important. Sport, the workplace, crime investigation, homeland security, the pharmaceutical industry and the environment are just some of the high profile arenas in which analytical testing has provided an important investigative tool for uncovering the presence of extraneous substances.
In addition to the usual publishing fare of primary research articles, case reports and letters, Drug Testing and Analysis offers a unique combination of; ‘How to’ material such as ‘Tutorials’ and ‘Reviews’, Speculative pieces (‘Commentaries’ and ‘Perspectives'', providing a broader scientific and social context to the aspects of analytical testing), ‘Annual banned substance reviews’ (delivering a critical evaluation of the methods used in the characterization of established and newly outlawed compounds).
Rather than focus on the application of a single technique, Drug Testing and Analysis employs a unique multidisciplinary approach to the field of controversial compound determination. Papers discussing chromatography, mass spectrometry, immunological approaches, 1D/2D gel electrophoresis, to name just a few select methods, are welcomed where their application is related to any of the six key topics listed below.