LC-MS Analysis of Dimethyl Fumarate in Rat plasma with Measurement Uncertainty Estimation

Authors

  • Raja Rajeswari Katta Sri Venkateswara College of Pharmacy, Etcherla, Srikakulam-532402, Andhra Pradesh, India.
  • Suneetha Achanti Department of Pharmaceutical Analysis, Hindu College of Pharmacy, Amaravathi road, Guntur 522 002, Andhra Pradesh, India.

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.48165/

Keywords:

Dimethyl fumarate, Rat plasma, Pharmacokinetics, LC-MS, Measurement of Uncertainty, Monomethyl fumarate

Abstract

Dimethyl fumarate (DMF) is the methyl ester of  fumaric acid initially recognized as a very  effective hypoxic cell radio sensitizer. Phase III  clinical trials found that DMF successfully  reduced relapse rate and increased time to  progression of disability in multiple sclerosis.  Small molecules like dimethyl fumarate pose  particular difficulties when analyzing biological  samples due to the increased possibility of matrix  effects and in this scenario DMF immediately  converts to its active metabolite MMF  (Monomethyl fumarate) by oral route. It is for  this reason that a sensitive liquid  chromatography–tandem mass spectrometry  method has now been developed for the analysis  of DMF and for studying the pharmacokinetic  profile in rats. Sample preparation was by rapid  protein precipitation with acetonitrile. Analyte  separation was achieved on a reversed-phase  XTerra MS C18 column (100 x 3.9 mm, 3.5µ) with  0.01M ammonium formate and acetonitrile in  gradient mode as the mobile phase at a flow rate  of 1.0 mL/min and analyzed by a hybrid triple quadrupole linear ion trap mass spectrometer in  positive electrospray ionization mode for both  DMF and MMF. Limits of detection, and quantification were 20 and 50 ng/mL, for DMF  and 1 and 10 ng/mL for MMF respectively.  Calibration curve showed excellent linearity  within the 50–2500 ng/mL range for DMF and  10–500 ng/mL range (r2 > 0.999) for MMF. Intra and inter-day precision defined by coefficient of  variation was <10% and accuracy (bias %) was  within 90–110%. Measurement uncertainty  estimation was 8.6% for DMF and 11.6% for  MMF. The method has been successfully used in  the analysis of DMF and MMF in rat plasma  following its administration to male wistar rats  for pharmacokinetic studies.  

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Held, K.D., Epp, E.R., Clark, E.P., Biaglow, J.E. 1988. Effect of Dimethyl Fumarate on the Radiation Sensitivity of Mammalian Cells in Vitro. Radiation Research. 115 (3): 495–502. 2. Kappos, L., Gold, R., Miller, D.H., Macmanus, D.G., et al. 2008. Efficacy and safety of oral fumarate in patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis: a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase IIb study. Lancet. 372: 1463–1472.

Gold, R., Kappos, L., Arnold, D.L., Bar-Or, A., Giovannoni, G., Selmaj, K.et al. 2012. Placebo Controlled Phase 3 Study of Oral BG-12 for Relapsing Multiple Sclerosis. New England Journal of Medicine. 367 (12): 1098–1107.

Lamas, J.P., Sanchez‐Prado, L., Regueiro, J., Llompart, M., Garcia‐Jares, C. 2009. Determination of dimethyl fumarate and other potential allergens in desiccant and antimould sachets. Analytical and Bioanalytical Chemistry. 394: 2231–2239.

Liu, S., Su, K. 1998. Determination of antimicrobial preservative dimethyl fumarate by high performance liquid chromatography. Se Pu. 16: 180–181.

HuiWen, H., FeiFei, H., JiaYin, Z., YaBin, H., JianJun, W. 2009. Determination of dimethyl fumarate in food by high performance liquid chromatography; Acta Agriculturae Shanghai. 25 (3): 72-74.

Narizzano, R., Risso, F., Venturelli, G., Devia, C., Carlini, E., Maggiolo, S. 2009. Gas chromatography–mass spectrometry analysis of dimethyl fumarate in consumer products. Journal of Chromatography A. 1216: 6762–6766.

Patrizia, S., Danilo, A.B., Silvana, G., Angela, S., Roberto, D. 2011. Determination of dimethyl fumarate (DMFu) in silica gel pouches using gas chromatography coupled ion trap mass spectrometry. Journal of Environmental Sciences and Health B. 46(4): 341-349.

Tsuyoshi, K., Kazuo, I., Atsuko, M., Tetsuji, N. 2011. Determination of Dimethyl fumarate and other fumaric and maleic acid diesters in desiccants and consumer products in Japan. Journal of Health Science. 57(3): 236-244.

Oriella, G., Domenico, M., Antonio, S., Stefania, A., Lucia, G. 2011. Determination of dimethyl fumarate in desiccant and antimould sachets by reversed‐phase liquid chromatography. Biomedical Chromatography. 25: 1315–1318.

Suneetha A., Raja K.R. 2016. Prescriptive Oriented Drug Analysis of Multiple Sclerosis Disease by LC-UV in Whole Human Blood. Journal of Chromatographic Science, 54(2): 165–174.12. Suneetha A., Raja K.R. 2016. Comparison of LC-UV and LC–MS methods for simultaneous determination of teriflunomide, dimethyl fumarate and fampridine in human plasma: application to rat pharmacokinetic study. Biomedical Chromatography. 30: 1371–1377.

Bell, S. 1999. A beginner’s guide to uncertainty of measurement. In Measurement Good Practice Guide, No. 11, NPL.

Lee, S., Choi, H., Kim, E., Choi, H., Chung, H., Chung, K.H. 2010. Estimation of the measurement uncertainty by the bottom-up approach for the determination of methamphetamine and amphetamine in urine. Journal of Analytical Toxicology. 34: 222–228.

Adams T.M. 2002. In A2LA Guide for the Estimation of Measurement Uncertainty in Testing. American Association of Laboratory Accreditation Manual. July 1.

A2LA Type III Policy on Measurement Uncertainty. American Association of Laboratory Accreditation. August 1, 2002.

Published

2019-05-05

How to Cite

LC-MS Analysis of Dimethyl Fumarate in Rat plasma with Measurement Uncertainty Estimation . (2019). Bulletin of Pure and Applied Sciences-Chemistry , 38(1), 74–83. https://doi.org/10.48165/