Mass transitions are depicted in Table 1. Further details are given in Gries et al. (2012). Calibration was carried out by spiking 1 ml of water with concentrations ranging from 0.1 μg/l to 5000 μg/l of each deuterated standard. All calibration samples were analyzed as described in the sample section. Due to the high dynamic range of the HPLC–MS/MS a calibration range up to 5000 μg/l of each metabolite can be obtained Selleck GSK2126458 in case a quadratic curve fit is used (coefficient of correlation better than 0.99 for each analyte). The wide calibration range was desirable for the determination of some high metabolite concentrations expected in this dosing study. Samples with concentrations
above the calibration range were analyzed again after sample dilution with water. The calibration curves were obtained by plotting the quotient of the peak areas of the target deuterated analytes and the corresponding unlabeled internal standards against the standard concentrations. As quality control samples were not available, they had to be prepared in the laboratory with spiked Sirolimus solubility dmso urine samples to cover different concentration ranges (1 μg/l, 10 μg/l or 100 μg/l of each labeled metabolite).
One millilitre aliquots of these control samples were stored frozen at −18 °C. Two samples with either 10 or 100 μg/l concentration of each deuterated standard were analyzed during the analysis sequences for each volunteer on five different days to determine between day precision data. The within-day precision was obtained by analyzing pooled urine samples in three concentrations of each deuterated standard as described above. These samples were analyzed eight times in a row and all samples were quantified against the calculated
calibration curve. Moreover, the background of unlabeled DIDP/DPHP metabolites in the samples was tested in several experiments. As there was no significant interfering DIDP/DPHP background observed in the dosing samples (DIDP/DPHP metabolite levels Obatoclax Mesylate (GX15-070) were consistent below 2 μg/l), the samples were spiked with 200 μg/l of each unlabeled DPHP metabolite as internal standards. Quality control data (relative recovery, precision), depicted in Table 2, was acceptable and comparable to that of Gries et al. (2012). Detection limits were calculated according to the calibration curve method (DIN 32645) by use of the six lowest calibration points. LODs were 0.1 μg/l for cx-MPHxP-d4 and 0.2 μg/l for OH-MPHP-d4 and oxo-MPHP-d4. The corresponding LOQs were 0.3 μg/l, 0.5 μg/l and 0.5 μg/l for cx-MPHxP-d4, OH-MPHP-d4 and oxo-MPHP-d4, respectively. Statistical analysis was carried out using Microsoft Excel 2010. Exponential regression modeling was used to calculate exponential functions for decreasing metabolite levels after cmax. C(t) is the time dependent concentration, whereas C0 is the maximum concentration. K is the metabolite specific renal excretion constant.