不确定因素和相对响应因素:在可提取物和可浸物研究中纠正检测和定量偏差。

IF 3.8 2区 化学 Q1 BIOCHEMICAL RESEARCH METHODS
Analytical and Bioanalytical Chemistry Pub Date : 2025-08-01 Epub Date: 2025-07-15 DOI:10.1007/s00216-025-05946-5
Marco Giulio Rozio, Davide Angelini, Simone Carrara
{"title":"不确定因素和相对响应因素:在可提取物和可浸物研究中纠正检测和定量偏差。","authors":"Marco Giulio Rozio, Davide Angelini, Simone Carrara","doi":"10.1007/s00216-025-05946-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The transfer of chemicals from packaging or medical devices to drug formulations, known as extractables and leachables (E&L) release, can affect drug strength and safety. These released substances must be monitored and assessed through toxicological evaluation. Identifying and quantifying analytes above a specific analytical evaluation threshold (AET) is crucial, but variability in response factors (RFs) complicates accurate detection, leading to potential errors in quantitation. An uncertainty factor (UF) can partially correct this, though it is limited by RF variability, and a multidetector approach improves characterization but does not fully resolve quantitation bias. The RRFlow model proposed in this study offers a solution by determining E&L concentrations without real-time reference standards analysis. It involves identity confirmation, RRF validation, and applies an average corrective factor (RRFi). A numerical simulation benchmark (NSB) is used to compare different scenarios, such as varying UF values, RRFlow application, and fixed rescaling factors. The benchmark assigns concentration values to model compounds with different response factors, iterating the process to evaluate the number of false positive and negative errors. The numerical simulations show that RRFlow reduces detection bias and outperforms UF-based methods, mitigating false positives and negatives.</p>","PeriodicalId":462,"journal":{"name":"Analytical and Bioanalytical Chemistry","volume":" ","pages":"4331-4349"},"PeriodicalIF":3.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12283826/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Uncertainty factors and relative response factors: correcting detection and quantitation bias in extractables and leachables studies.\",\"authors\":\"Marco Giulio Rozio, Davide Angelini, Simone Carrara\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s00216-025-05946-5\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The transfer of chemicals from packaging or medical devices to drug formulations, known as extractables and leachables (E&L) release, can affect drug strength and safety. These released substances must be monitored and assessed through toxicological evaluation. Identifying and quantifying analytes above a specific analytical evaluation threshold (AET) is crucial, but variability in response factors (RFs) complicates accurate detection, leading to potential errors in quantitation. An uncertainty factor (UF) can partially correct this, though it is limited by RF variability, and a multidetector approach improves characterization but does not fully resolve quantitation bias. The RRFlow model proposed in this study offers a solution by determining E&L concentrations without real-time reference standards analysis. It involves identity confirmation, RRF validation, and applies an average corrective factor (RRFi). A numerical simulation benchmark (NSB) is used to compare different scenarios, such as varying UF values, RRFlow application, and fixed rescaling factors. The benchmark assigns concentration values to model compounds with different response factors, iterating the process to evaluate the number of false positive and negative errors. The numerical simulations show that RRFlow reduces detection bias and outperforms UF-based methods, mitigating false positives and negatives.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":462,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Analytical and Bioanalytical Chemistry\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"4331-4349\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12283826/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Analytical and Bioanalytical Chemistry\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"92\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00216-025-05946-5\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"化学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/7/15 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"BIOCHEMICAL RESEARCH METHODS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Analytical and Bioanalytical Chemistry","FirstCategoryId":"92","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00216-025-05946-5","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"化学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/7/15 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BIOCHEMICAL RESEARCH METHODS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

化学物质从包装或医疗器械转移到药物制剂,称为可萃取物和可浸出物(E&L)释放,会影响药物强度和安全性。这些释放的物质必须通过毒理学评估进行监测和评估。识别和定量高于特定分析评价阈值(AET)的分析物是至关重要的,但响应因子(rf)的可变性使准确检测复杂化,导致定量中的潜在误差。不确定因素(UF)可以部分纠正这一点,尽管它受到射频变异性的限制,多探测器方法可以改善表征,但不能完全解决定量偏差。本研究提出的RRFlow模型提供了一种解决方案,即无需实时参考标准分析即可确定E&L浓度。它涉及身份确认、RRF验证,并应用平均校正因子(RRFi)。NSB (numerical simulation benchmark)用于比较不同的场景,如不同的UF值、应用RRFlow、固定的缩放因子等。该基准为具有不同响应因子的模型化合物分配浓度值,迭代该过程以评估假阳性和阴性误差的数量。数值模拟表明,RRFlow减少了检测偏差,优于基于uf的方法,减少了假阳性和假阴性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Uncertainty factors and relative response factors: correcting detection and quantitation bias in extractables and leachables studies.

The transfer of chemicals from packaging or medical devices to drug formulations, known as extractables and leachables (E&L) release, can affect drug strength and safety. These released substances must be monitored and assessed through toxicological evaluation. Identifying and quantifying analytes above a specific analytical evaluation threshold (AET) is crucial, but variability in response factors (RFs) complicates accurate detection, leading to potential errors in quantitation. An uncertainty factor (UF) can partially correct this, though it is limited by RF variability, and a multidetector approach improves characterization but does not fully resolve quantitation bias. The RRFlow model proposed in this study offers a solution by determining E&L concentrations without real-time reference standards analysis. It involves identity confirmation, RRF validation, and applies an average corrective factor (RRFi). A numerical simulation benchmark (NSB) is used to compare different scenarios, such as varying UF values, RRFlow application, and fixed rescaling factors. The benchmark assigns concentration values to model compounds with different response factors, iterating the process to evaluate the number of false positive and negative errors. The numerical simulations show that RRFlow reduces detection bias and outperforms UF-based methods, mitigating false positives and negatives.

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
CiteScore
8.00
自引率
4.70%
发文量
638
审稿时长
2.1 months
期刊介绍: Analytical and Bioanalytical Chemistry’s mission is the rapid publication of excellent and high-impact research articles on fundamental and applied topics of analytical and bioanalytical measurement science. Its scope is broad, and ranges from novel measurement platforms and their characterization to multidisciplinary approaches that effectively address important scientific problems. The Editors encourage submissions presenting innovative analytical research in concept, instrumentation, methods, and/or applications, including: mass spectrometry, spectroscopy, and electroanalysis; advanced separations; analytical strategies in “-omics” and imaging, bioanalysis, and sampling; miniaturized devices, medical diagnostics, sensors; analytical characterization of nano- and biomaterials; chemometrics and advanced data analysis.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信