Quantification of nivolumab in human plasma by LC-MS/HRMS and LC-MS/MS, comparison with ELISA

Nivolumab is a fully human immunoglobulin G4 used for the treatment of several advanced solid cancers as immune checkpoint inhibitors. There are some challenges for the quantification of mAb in plasma because IgG are present intrinsically in complex biologic matrices and this determination must be based on reliable, selective, and accurate analytical methods. This study described two validated methods carried out in two separate laboratories, one developed with a triple quadrupole tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) and the other with high resolution mass spectrometry with an orbitrap system (LC-MS/HRMS). Both methods used full-length stable isotope-labeled nivolumab-like (Arginine C-13(6)-N-15(4) and Lysine C-13(6)-N-15(2)) as internal standard. The sample preparation was based on IgG immunocapture, then trypsin digestion was performed and one surrogate peptide was quantified in positive mode. Assays showed good linearity over the range of 5-100 mu g/mL and 5-150 mu g/mL for LC-MS/HRMS and LC-MS/MS, respectively. The limit of quantification was set at 2 and 5 mu g/mL for LC-MS/HRMS and LC-MS/MS, respectively. Acceptable accuracy (from - 13.6% to 3.0%) and precision (within 20%) values were also obtained with both methods. The two LC-MS methods showed a very different matrix effect linked to the use of different analytical columns and elution gradients. Nivolumab plasma concentrations from 60 cancer outpatients were compared with the two mass spectrometry methods and also with a home-made ELISA method. The Bland-Altman analysis did not show any significant bias between the three methods. The Passing-Bablock linear regression analysis showed a good agreement between the three methods with a better correlation between the two mass spectrometry methods.

Automated summary

The study discussed two validated methods for quantification of Nivolumab in plasma, using LC-MS/MS and LC-MS/HRMS, both methods showed good linearity and acceptable accuracy and precision values. Comparison among the two mass spectrometry methods and a home-made ELISA method showed good agreement, with better correlation between the two mass spectrometry methods.