|
A new paradigm for metabolism studies: UPLC/Q-Tof
As technology progresses, better levels of detection are
obtainable not only via a more sensitive assay, but through better quality data,
say Jose Castro-Perez, Robert Plumb and Jennifer Granger
Over the past 15 years LC/MS has become one of the most widely
used technologies in bioanalytical laboratories worldwide. During all this time,
there have been no major advances in HPLC technology apart from new column chemistries
and smaller particle sizes (down to 3.5 mm). With the recent focus on advances
in MS and MS/MS, it is easy to forget how important chromatography is when running
bioanalytical assays, whether for quantitative or qualitative purposes.

|
Without UPLC, one of
the glucuronides would have
been missed even if MS/MS or
MSn was employed. This
would cause issues if this was
a toxic metabolite and you
were trying to change the
chemistry to block the site of metabolism
|
Despite early claims that MS, and particularly MS/MS, removed
the need for good chromatography, a poor LC assay will lead to issues of ion
suppression and isobaric interferences that cannot be overcome by a mass spectrometer
alone. These concerns often become apparent when you start asking questions
such as: How fast do I need to run my analyses? What metabolite levels would
I like to detect? How much do I know about my sample? What happens if two similar
metabolites or impurities elute in the same chromatographic peak?
In order to generate the best quality bioanalytical data within the constraints
imposed by throughput requirements, it is necessary to place equal emphasis
on chromatographic separation and mass spectrometric detection. A good analytical
separation will give better detection levels and improved MS data quality. With
pressure on todays laboratories to increase throughput, there has been
a tendency to neglect the importance of the chromatographic separation. However,
the success of detecting and identifying metabolites depends upon having both
LC and MS methods designed appropriately.
In order to address these issues, a novel approach to drug metabolism using
UPLC (Ultra Performance Liquid Chromatography) coupled to a hybrid quadrupole
orthogonal time of flight (Q-Tof) mass spectrometer will be described in detail
in this paper.
UPLC leverages the theories and principles of HPLC and adds a new dimension
to mass spectrometry. The heart of this technology lies in the particle size
and new column chemistry. By using much smaller particles sizes, a new end point
for the separation can be realized. The underlying principle to this approach
is illustrated by the Van Deemter plot (Figure 1). The Van Deemter equation
is an empirical formula that describes the relationship between linear velocity
and plate height (column efficiency). It considers particle size as one of the
variables that can be used to characterize performance at different linear velocities.
From Figure 1, it can be observed that below a 2m particle
size, a new realm of chromatography is accessible.

Sub-2m particles offer the highest efficiency, and this higher efficiency is
obtained at significantly higher linear velocities than with larger particles.
Utilizing sub-2m particles allows us to push the limits of both peak capacity
(due to the higher efficiency) and speed of analysis (due to the higher linear
velocities). In addition, sensitivity is improved because chromatographic bands
are more concentrated and elute as sharper peaks.
The enhancement of chromatographic resolution and sensitivity is especially
important when analysing complex mixtures in biological samples. However, to
achieve the benefits of operating at higher linear velocities, it is necessary
to run at higher pressures in the order of 10,000 psi. Waters Acquity UPLC systems
and columns have been designed to operate effectively under these conditions.
Results
Figure 2 shows the in-vivo metabolism of midazolam, an anti-convulsant, in rat
liver bile. This is one of the most challenging separations faced in bioanalysis
due to the high concentration of bile salts and endogenous compounds present.
As can be seen, the peak capacity in the UPLC chromatogram is greatly improved,
resulting in greater differentiatio among the peaks. For identification purposes,
this is a tremendous leap forward because it means that less time will be spent
ruling out false positives and redeveloping methods to improve the separation
of metabolites. The impact from this is especially beneficial because in most
cases, metabolite standards are not available for method optimisation.
Moreover, increased peak capacity minimises ion suppression
resulting from the co-elution of metabolites with bile salts or endogenous compounds.
Having a high peak capacity improves separations with complex matrices and limits
the amount of coelution. More peaks can be resolved in the same run time.

The extracted ion chromatograms (Figure 3) for the glucuronide metabolites of
midazolam show that, with HPLC, just one peak is detected. However, by employing
UPLC, it is evident that there are in fact two separate glucuronides. Without
UPLC, one of the glucuronides would have been missed even if MS/MS or MSn was
employed. This would cause issues if this was a toxic metabolite and you were
trying to change the chemistry to block the site of metabolism. It goes back
to the core concerns:
Am I sure about what Im detecting? How much information
am I missing?
Drug metabolism cannot always be predicted and often produces
unexpected biotransformations. Therefore, good data and accurate information
is paramount in order to identify weak spots or possible sites of toxicity.

If the spectra of the two metabolite peaks resulting from HPLC and UPLC analysis
(Figure 4) are examined, in the UPLC analysis there is a clear strong signal
for the glucuronide at m/z 548 whereas with HPLC, this peak is buried in the
spectral noise due to co-eluting components. This makes the entire process of
identification a lot more complex.
In this case there is a point of reference, the isotopic signature
of chlorine in midazolam, which can be used to eliminate false positives. But
this is not the case for all compounds because there may not always be an isotopic
descriptor to detect and identify putative metabolites. In both cases the mass
measurement error is better than 3 ppm, showing that the Q-Tof is capable of
generating good mass accuracy even across the narrow chromatographic peaks generated
by UPLC. The data for both the HPLC and UPLC separations have been shown using
a 30 minute gradient.

What happens if an even shorter gradient, such as six minutes (Figure 5), is
used with UPLC? Obviously the run-time will be faster, but by shortening the
gradient, resolution will be compromised compared to the 30 minute gradient.
Even with the faster gradient, the two metabolites are still separated (Figure
6). Although the resolution is not as good as that achieved with the longer
gradient, UPLC still produces significantly increased data quality compared
to the HPLC system. Gains in chromatographic resolution as well as analysis
speed and sensitivity are achieved with UPLC.
Having said that, for in-vivo samples, a 30-minute run-time
will yield a much higher peak capacity, which is optimal for separating co-eluting
metabolites and endogenous compounds to generate the best qualitative data possible.

Conclusion
From the data presented, the advantages of using UPLC with Q-Tof MS for metabolism
studies are obvious. As technology progresses, better levels of detection are
obtainable not only via a more sensitive assay, but through better quality data.
In a recent paper, Nicholson and Wilson postulated that metabolism is not logical
but probabilistic, and all possible metabolites that can be created, will be
created. Whether you see them or not depends on your analytical LC/MS strategy.
Using UPLC with Q-Tof MS adds a new dimension to metabolism studies, enabling
attainment of better detection limits, better throughput, and increased chromatographic
resolution, which in turn will improve data quality from the mass spectrometer.
It is a major leap forward, not just for this metabolism quantitative bioanalysis.
Finally, we all worry about how fast we can run samples and
obtain good data. Too often, the bottleneck is merely shifted to
the data processing step, which requires a considerable amount of
time to sieve through the data to find potential metabolites. Better
quality data facilitates this step and provides improved input for
automated processing routines for detecting drug metabolites. Using
UPLC is a novel approach that offers a platform on which we will
be able to improve data quality and increase the knowledge of our
samples. We only observe what we can detect and this
limits our knowledge.
|
Sample Preparation
A bile sample from a rat
dosed with midazolam at a concentration 10 mg/kg was collected and 1:10
with water prior to sample analysis.
Chromatography Conditions
Solvent Delivery System:
Waters ACQUITY UPLC
Column: ACQUITY UPLC
BEH C18 column, 2.1x100 mm, 1.7 mm particle size
Mobile Phase A: water
+ 0.1% formic acid
Mobile Phase B: acetonitrile
+ 0.1% formic acid
Gradient for 30 minute
run*: 00.25 min 100% A, 30.25 min 5% A, 32 min 5% A, 32.132.5
min 100% A
(curve 6 for
all)
Gradient for 6 minute
run: 00.25 min 100% A, 5.25 min 5% A, 6 min 5% A, 6.16.5
min 100% A
(curve 6 for
all)
Flow Rate: 400 mL/min
Injection Volume:
5 mL
* Similar gradient conditions
were used for the HPLC comparison at the same flow rate using a Waters
Symmetry
C18 column, 2.1x100 mm, 3.5
m particle size.
Mass Spectrometry Conditions
Mass Spectrometer:
Micromass Q-Tof micro
Ionisation Mode: Electrospray
positive ion mode
Cone Voltage: 35 V
Capillary Voltage:
3.1 kV
Source Temperature:
120 °C
Desolvation Temperature:
300 °C Lock Mass: Leucine enkephalin m/z 556.2771, concentration 0.5
ng/mL
|
Jose Castro-Perez is with Waters Corporation,
MS Technologies, Manchester, UK. Robert Plumb and Jennifer Granger
are with Waters Corporation, Milford, USA
|