Accurate and reliable quantification of 25-hydroxy-vitamin D species by liquid chromatography high-resolution tandem mass spectrometry
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In general, mass spectrometric quantification of small molecules in routine laboratory testing utilizes liquid chromatography coupled to low mass resolution triple-quadrupole mass spectrometers (QQQs). Here we introduce high-resolution tandem mass spectrometry (quadrupole-Orbitrap) for the quantification of 25-hydroxy-vitamin D [25(OH)D], a marker of the vitamin D status, because the specificity of 25(OH)D immunoassays is still questionable and mass spectrometric quantification is becoming increasingly important. Liquid chromatography coupled to high-resolution tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/HR-MS) was used to quantify 25-hydroxy-cholecalciferol [25(OH)D3], 25-hydroxy-ergocalciferol [25(OH)D2], and their C3-epimers 3-epi-25(OH)D3 and 3-epi-25(OH)D2. The method has a run time of 5 min and was validated according to the US Food and Drug Administration and the European Medicines Agency guidelines. High mass resolution was advantageously applied to separate a quasi-isobaric interference of the internal standard D6-25(OH)D2 with 3-epi-25(OH)D3. All analytes showed an imprecision of below 10% coefficient of variation (CV), trueness between 90% and 110%, and limits of quantification below 10 nM. Concentrations measured by LC-MS/HR-MS are in good agreement with those of the National Institute of Standards and Technology reference methods using LC-MS/MS (QQQ). In conclusion, quantification of 25(OH)D by LC-MS/HR-MS is applicable for routine testing and also holds promise for highly specific quantification of other small molecules.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".