Mostra i principali dati dell'item

dc.contributor.authorPeña Lorenzo, Diego
dc.contributor.authorRebollo Díaz, Noemí 
dc.contributor.authorSánchez Hernández, José Germán 
dc.contributor.authorZarzuelo Castañeda, Aránzazu 
dc.date.accessioned2025-01-21T11:30:06Z
dc.date.available2025-01-21T11:30:06Z
dc.date.issued2021
dc.identifier.issn0004-5632
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10366/162162
dc.description.abstractTherapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) of voriconazole is recommended for personalizing doses. The objective of this study was to compare the enzyme immunoassay developed by ARKTM Diagnostics Inc. for the quantification of voriconazole adapted to the Architect C4000 autoanalyzer (Abbott®) with ultra-performance liquid chromatography using ultraviolet detector (UPLC-UV) method. Materials and Methods: Linearity, precision and accuracy of both methods were validated according to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and European Medicines Agency guidelines. The limit of quantification (LOQ) of the UPLC-UV method was determined experimentally. Both methods were applied to the analysis of 62 samples from patients. Correlation was evaluated by Passing-Bablok analysis and the concordance by the Bland–Altman method. Dosage recommendations were generated; the discordances according to the technique were evaluated. Results: All validation parameters determined for UPLC-UV met the criteria set out and LOQ of 0.1 μg/mL was established. However, when the enzyme immunoassay was used to determine concentrations ≤1 μg/ml, CVs were >20%. A linear correlation between both methods was found. However, an overestimation of immunoassay (systematic error of 0.39 μg/mL) was detected. In 11.3% of the samples, the differences in concentrations when they were determined by different techniques would imply a different therapeutic regime. These samples had concentrations close to 1 μg/mL. Conclusion: Although both techniques can be used for TDM of voriconazole, when a value close to the lower limit of the therapeutic range is determined by the ARKTM immunoassay, it would be better to verify the result by a non-automated technique to avoid possible underdosing.es_ES
dc.language.isoenges_ES
dc.rightsAttribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 Internacional
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
dc.subjectVoriconazolees_ES
dc.subjectMonitoringes_ES
dc.subjectImmunoassayes_ES
dc.subjectUPLCes_ES
dc.titleComparison of ultra-performance liquid chromatography and ARK immunoassay for therapeutic drug monitoring of voriconazolees_ES
dc.typeinfo:eu-repo/semantics/articlees_ES
dc.relation.publishversionhttps://doi.org/10.1177/00045632211041887es_ES
dc.subject.unesco2301 Química Analíticaes_ES
dc.subject.unesco3201 Ciencias Clínicases_ES
dc.identifier.doi10.1177/00045632211041887
dc.rights.accessRightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/embargoedAccesses_ES
dc.identifier.essn1758-1001
dc.journal.titleAnnals of Clinical Biochemistry: International Journal of Laboratory Medicinees_ES
dc.volume.number58es_ES
dc.issue.number6es_ES
dc.page.initial657es_ES
dc.page.final660es_ES
dc.type.hasVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersiones_ES
dc.subject.decsmétodos analíticos *


Files in questo item

Thumbnail

Questo item appare nelle seguenti collezioni

Mostra i principali dati dell'item

Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 Internacional
Excepto si se señala otra cosa, la licencia del ítem se describe como Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 Internacional