PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
January 12, 2005Rapid Communications in Mass Spectrometry585 citations

Stable isotopically labeled internal standards in quantitative bioanalysis using liquid chromatography/mass spectrometry: necessity or not?

View Full Paper
ESEllen StokvisHRHilde RosingJBJos H. Beijnen

Key Points

Key points are not available for this paper at this time.

Abstract

It appears to be a general belief that stable isotopically labeled (SIL) internal standards yield better assay performance results for quantitative bioanalytical liquid chromatography/mass spectrometry (LC/MS) assays than does any other internal standard. In this article we describe our experiences with structural analogues and SIL internal standards and their merits and demerits. SIL internal standards are the first choice, but deuterium-labeled compounds may demonstrate unexpected behavior, such as different retention times or recoveries, than the analyte. In addition, a SIL internal standard with identical chemical properties as the analyte may cover up assay problems with stability, recovery, and ion suppression. Since SIL internal standards are not always available or are very expensive, structural analogues can be used, however, with consideration of several issues, which are usually displayed during method validation.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Stokvis et al. (2005) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/69d7774ddb9d5e1bf4b8adf2https://doi.org/10.1002/rcm.1790
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper