4.4 Review

Analysis of endogenous glutathione-adducts and their metabolites

期刊

BIOMEDICAL CHROMATOGRAPHY
卷 24, 期 1, 页码 29-38

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/bmc.1374

关键词

glutathione-adducts; stable isotopes; LC-MS; MRM; mercapturic acids; leukotrienes

资金

  1. NIH [UO1ES16004, RO1CA091016, 1300130038, P30ES0130508]
  2. NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE [R01CA130038, R01CA091016] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER
  3. NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH SCIENCES [U01ES016004, P30ES013508] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The ability to conduct validated analyses of glutathione (GSH)-adducts and their metabolites is critically important in order to establish whether they play a role in cellular biochemical or pathophysiological processes. The use of stable isotope dilution (SID) methodology in combination with liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) provides the highest bioanalytical specificity possible for such analyses. Quantitative studies normally require the high sensitivity that can be obtained by the use of multiple reaction monitoring (MRM)/MS rather than the much less sensitive but more specific full scanning methodology. The method employs a parent ion corresponding to the intact molecule together with a prominent product ion that obtained by collision induced dissociation. Using SID LC-MRM/MS, analytes must have the same relative LC retention time to the heavy isotope internal standard established during the validation procedure, the correct parent ion and the correct product ion. This level of specificity cannot be attained with any other bioanalytical technique employed for biomarker analysis. This review will describe the application of SID LC-MR/MS methodology for the analysis of GSH-adducts and their metabolites. It will also discuss potential future directions for the use of this methodology for rigorous determination of their utility as disease and exposure biomarkers. Copyright (C) 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据