Assessing Adherence to Antihypertensive Medication by Means of Dose-Dependent Reference Plasma Concentration Ranges and Ultra-High Performance Liquid Chromatography-Ion Trap Mass Spectrometry Analysis
- PMID: 33803489
- PMCID: PMC7967203
- DOI: 10.3390/molecules26051495
Assessing Adherence to Antihypertensive Medication by Means of Dose-Dependent Reference Plasma Concentration Ranges and Ultra-High Performance Liquid Chromatography-Ion Trap Mass Spectrometry Analysis
Abstract
Poor adherence to antihypertensive drug therapy is a well-recognized problem and can be assessed by mass spectrometry-based analyses of body fluids. However, contrary statements exist whether drug quantification in blood or qualitative screening in urine is more suitable. The present pilot study aimed to further elucidate the power of blood plasma drug concentrations for adherence monitoring by developing and validating a quantification procedure for nine antihypertensive drugs (amlodipine, bisoprolol, candesartan, canrenone, carvedilol, metoprolol, olmesartan, torasemide, and valsartan) in blood plasma using liquid-liquid extraction and an ultra-high-performance liquid chromatography-ion trap mass spectrometry analysis. The procedure should then be used for an adherence assessment and compared with the results of an established qualitative urine screening. Selectivity, carryover, matrix effect, accuracy, precision, dilution integrity, and stability were successfully validated, except for amlodipine. The applicability was demonstrated by analyzing 19 plasma samples containing 28 antihypertensive drugs and comparing the measured concentrations with calculated dose-dependent reference plasma concentration ranges. The interpretation of plasma concentrations was found to be more sophisticated and time-consuming than that of urine screening results, and adherence could not be assessed in two cases (10%) due to measured plasma concentrations below the lower limit of quantification. However, 14 out of 19 subjects were classified as adherent (75%) and three as nonadherent (15%), in contrast to 19 (100%) that were claimed to be adherent based on the results of the qualitative urine screening. Nevertheless, further data is needed to estimate whether plasma quantification is superior in terms of assessing adherence to antihypertensive medication.
Keywords: LC-MS/MS; adherence monitoring; antihypertensive drugs; bioanalysis; hypertension.
Conflict of interest statement
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Figures
References
-
- Ettehad D., Emdin C.A., Kiran A., Anderson S.G., Callender T., Emberson J., Chalmers J., Rodgers A., Rahimi K. Blood pressure lowering for prevention of cardiovascular disease and death: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet. 2016;387:957–967. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(15)01225-8. - DOI - PubMed
-
- Thomopoulos C., Parati G., Zanchetti A. Effects of blood pressure lowering on outcome incidence in hypertension: 7. Effects of more vs. less intensive blood pressure lowering and different achieved blood pressure levels—updated overview and meta-analyses of randomized trials. J. Hypertens. 2016;34:613–622. doi: 10.1097/HJH.0000000000000881. - DOI - PubMed
-
- Liu L., Wen Y., Liu K., Sun L., Lu Y., Yin Z. Simultaneous determination of a broad range of cardiovascular drugs in plasma with a simple and efficient extraction/clean up procedure and chromatography-mass spectrometry analysis. RSC Adv. 2014;4:19629–19639. doi: 10.1039/C4RA01045K. - DOI
-
- WHO Adherence to Long-Term Therapies: Evidence for Action. [(accessed on 23 February 2021)];2003 Available online: https://www.who.int/chp/knowledge/publications/adherence_report/en/
MeSH terms
Substances
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Medical
