Quantitation of plasma metanephrines using isotope dilution liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry (ID-LC/MS/MS): a candidate reference measurement procedure and its application to evaluating routine ID-LC/MS/MS methods.

Abstract

Accurate measurement of plasma metanephrines (MNs) including metanephrine (MN) and normetanephrine (NMN) is crucial for the screening and diagnosis in pheochromocytomas and paragangliomas (PPGLs). Although the number of laboratories using liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) method to measure MNs has been increasing rapidly, those laboratory-developed assays showed incomparable results. There are no reference measurement procedures (RMPs) or reference materials (RMs) for MNs in Joint Committee for Traceability in Laboratory Medicine (JCTLM), which hindered the standardization of MNs measurement. We established a candidate RMP (cRMP) based on isotope dilution liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry (ID-LC/MS/MS) method for plasma MNs measurement. Plasma samples were spiked with MN-D3 and NMN-D3 as internal standards; protein precipitation and ion-exchange solidphase extraction (SPE) were performed to extract samples, eventually analyzed by LC-MS/MS. The cRMP was applied to evaluate two routine ID-LC/MS/MS methods through split-sample comparisons. Fifty-three individual patient samples were determined by cRMP and two routine ID-LC/MS/MS methods; results were analyzed by ordinary linear regression and Bland-Altman plots. The cRMP exhibited desirable imprecision, with intra-run and total imprecision (coefficient variation, CV) for MN being 0.79-1.36% and 1.53-1.87% and for NMN being 1.10-1.34% and 1.15-1.64%. The analytical recoveries of MN and NMN ranged from 98.3 to 101.7% and from 98.5 to 101.9%, respectively. Significant calibrator biases and sample-specific deviations were observed in method comparison. An accurate, precise, and reliable cRMP for plasma MNs was developed, and RMs with value assigned following the cRMP would help minimize the calibration bias and improve the comparability of different measuring systems.