Quantitative analysis of buprenorphine and norbuprenorphine in urine using liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry.

Department of Clinical Biochemistry, Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, Britannia House, Britannia Road, Morley, Leeds, LS27 0DQ, U.K.
Journal of analytical toxicology (Impact Factor: 2.63). 06/2006; 30(4):238-44. DOI: 10.1093/jat/30.4.238
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Buprenorphine is an opioid analgesic drug that is used as an alternative to methadone to treat heroin addiction. Established methods for the analysis of buprenorphine and its metabolites in urine such as gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS) involve complicated sample extraction procedures. The aim of the present study was to develop a sensitive yet straightforward method for the simultaneous analysis of buprenorphine and norbuprenorphine in urine using liquid chromatography-MS-MS. The method comprised an enzymatic hydrolysis using Patella vulgata b-glucuronidase, followed by centrifugation and direct analysis of the supernatant. The limits of detection and quantitation were < 1 microg/L for buprenorphine and < 1 and 4 microg/L, respectively, for norbuprenorphine. Assay coefficients of variation (CVs) were < 15%, with the exception of concentrations close to the limit of quantitation, where CVs were below 20%. In direct comparison with an established GC-MS protocol, the method showed minimal negative bias (8.7% for buprenorphine and 1.8% for norbuprenorphine) and was less susceptible to sample carryover. The extent of conjugation in unhydrolyzed urine was investigated and found to be highly variable, with proportions of unconjugated buprenorphine and norbuprenorphine of 6.4% [range 0% to 67%; standard deviation (SD) 9.7%] and 34% (range 0% to 100%; SD 23.8%), respectively.

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: When chronic pain patients are suspected of being non-compliant, their therapy can be withdrawn. Therefore, sensitive and specific confirmatory testing is important for identifying diversion and adherence. This work aimed to develop a novel liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS-MS) method to detect 14 opioids and six opioid glucuronide metabolites in urine with minimal sample preparation. Analytes included were morphine, oxymorphone, hydromorphone, oxycodone, hydrocodone, codeine, fentanyl, norfentanyl, 6-monoacetylmorphine, meperidine, normeperidine, propoxyphene, methadone, buprenorphine, morphine-3-glucuronide, morphine-6-glucuronide, oxymorphone glucuronide, hydromorphone glucuronide, codeine-6-glucuronide and norbuprenorphine glucuronide. Samples were processed by centrifugation and diluted in equal volume with a deuterated internal standard containing 14 opioids and four opioid glucuronides. The separation of all compounds was complete in nine minutes. The assay was linear between 10 and 1,000 ng/mL (fentanyl 0.25-25 ng/mL). Intra-assay imprecision (500 ng/mL, fentanyl 12.5 ng/mL) ranged from 1.0 to 8.4% coefficient of variation. Inter-assay precision ranged from 2.9 to 6.0%. Recovery was determined by spiking five patient specimens with opioid and opioid glucuronide standards at 100 ng/mL (fentanyl 2.5 ng/mL). Recoveries ranged from 82 to 107% (median 98.9%). The method correlated with our current quantitative LC-MS-MS assay for opioids, which employs different chromatography. Internal standards were not available for every analyte to critically evaluate for ion suppression. Instead, a novel approach was designed to achieve the most rigorous quality control possible, in which the recovery of each analyte was evaluated in each negative sample.
    Journal of analytical toxicology 07/2012; 36(8):541-7. · 2.63 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Buprenorphine (BUP), a semi-synthetic opioid analgesic, is increasingly prescribed for the treatment of chronic pain and opioid dependence. Urine immunoassay screening methods are available for monitoring BUP compliance and misuse; however, these screens may have poor sensitivity or specificity. We evaluated whether the pretreatment of urine with β-glucuronidase (BG) improves the sensitivity and overall accuracy of three BUP enzyme immunoassays when compared with liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS-MS). Urine samples sent to our laboratories for BUP testing (n = 114) were analyzed before and after BG pretreatment by cloned enzyme donor immunoassay (CEDIA), enzyme immunoassay (EIA) and homogenous EIA (HEIA) immunoassays using a common 5 ng/mL cutoff. Total BUP and norbuprenorphine (NBUP) concentrations were measured by LC-MS-MS as the reference method. Urine BG pretreatment improved EIA, HEIA and CEDIA sensitivities from 70, 82 and 94%, respectively, to 97% for each of the three methods, when compared with LC-MS-MS. While the specificity of the EIA and HEIA remained 100% after BG pretreatment, the specificity of the CEDIA decreased from 74 to 67%. Urine pretreatment with BG is recommended to improve sensitivity of the EIA and HEIA BUP screening methods.
    Journal of analytical toxicology 05/2014; · 2.63 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: (i) Standard solutions of buprenorphine (B) and three metabolites; (ii) immunoassay (IA) reagents designed for the analysis of B and/or its metabolites; and (iii) clinical urine specimens collected from patients (under B-treatment), constitute the B-System for fundamental study of parameters critical to the two-step test strategy, an analytical approach designed for a high-volume testing environment. The cross-reacting characteristics of IA reagents were examined using standard solutions of B and its metabolites. Resulting data were used as the basis for selecting target analytes suitable for the preliminary and the confirmatory test steps. Test data derived from IA and GC-MS analysis of clinical urine specimens (with natural distribution of B and its metabolites) were quantitatively correlated. Correlation parameters were examined: (i) to verify whether the analyte-pair targeted by the IA and GC-MS test steps has been properly selected; and (ii) to decide on appropriate cutoffs for the two test steps. In conclusion, this study has demonstrated that the most effective analyte(s) that should be targeted in the GC-MS determination step vary with the IA selected in the preliminary test step. All analytes that generate significant responses to the IA reagent should be targeted in the GC-MS test step.
    The Analyst 10/2009; 134(9):1848-56. · 3.91 Impact Factor