The suitability of the capillary dried blood spot (DBS) sampling method was assessed for simultaneous phenotyping of cytochrome P450 (CYP) enzymes and P-glycoprotein (P-gp) using a cocktail approach. Ten volunteers received an oral cocktail capsule containing low doses of the probes bupropion (CYP2B6), flurbiprofen (CYP2C9), omeprazole (CYP2C19), dextromethorphan (CYP2D6), midazolam (CYP3A), and fexofenadine (P-gp) with coffee/Coke (CYP1A2) on four occasions. They received the cocktail alone (session 1), and with the CYP inhibitors fluvoxamine and voriconazole (session 2) and quinidine (session 3). In session 4, subjects received the cocktail after a 7-day pretreatment with the inducer rifampicin. The concentrations of probes/metabolites were determined in DBS and plasma using a single liquid chromatography–tandem mass spectrometry method. The pharmacokinetic profiles of the drugs were comparable in DBS and plasma. Important modulation of CYP and P-gp activities was observed in the presence of inhibitors and the inducer. Minimally invasive one- and three-point (at 2, 3, and 6 h) DBS-sampling methods were found to reliably reflect CYP and P-gp activities at each session.
Because of the emergence of dried blood spots (DBS) as an attractive alternative to conventional venous plasma sampling in many pharmaceutical companies and clinical laboratories, different analytical approaches have been developed to enable automated handling of DBS samples without any pretreatment. Associated with selective and sensitive MS-MS detection, these procedures give good results in the rapid identification and quantification of drugs (generally less than 3 min total run time), which is desirable because of the high throughput requirements of analytical laboratories. The objective of this review is to describe the analytical concepts of current direct DBS techniques and to present their advantages and disadvantages, with particular focus on automation capacity and commercial availability. Finally, an overview of the different biomedical applications in which these concepts could be of major interest will be presented.
Hematocrit (Hct) is one of the most critical issues associated with the bioanalytical methods used for dried blood spot (DBS) sample analysis. Because Hct determines the viscosity of blood, it may affect the spreading of blood onto the filter paper. Hence, accurate quantitative data can only be obtained if the size of the paper filter extracted contains a fixed blood volume. We describe for the first time a microfluidic-based sampling procedure to enable accurate blood volume collection on commercially available DBS cards. The system allows the collection of a controlled volume of blood (e.g., 5 or 10 μL) within several seconds. Reproducibility of the sampling volume was examined in vivo on capillary blood by quantifying caffeine and paraxanthine on 5 different extracted DBS spots at two different time points and in vitro with a test compound, Mavoglurant, on 10 different spots at two Hct levels. Entire spots were extracted. In addition, the accuracy and precision (n = 3) data for the Mavoglurant quantitation in blood with Hct levels between 26% and 62% were evaluated. The interspot precision data were below 9.0%, which was equivalent to that of a manually spotted volume with a pipet. No Hct effect was observed in the quantitative results obtained for Hct levels from 26% to 62%. These data indicate that our microfluidic-based sampling procedure is accurate and precise and that the analysis of Mavoglurant is not affected by the Hct values. This provides a simple procedure for DBS sampling with a fixed volume of capillary blood, which could eliminate the recurrent Hct issue linked to DBS sample analysis.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.