Published: Journal of Analytical Toxicology, ISSN 0146-4760, Volume 32, Number 1, January/February, pp.31-36

Improvements in the Methodology of Monitoring Sulfur Mustard Exposure by Gas Chromatography– Mass Spectrometry Analysis of Cleaved and Derivatized Blood Protein Adducts
Richard J. Lawrence[1], J. Richard Smith[1], Brian L. Boyd[2], and Benedict R. Capacio[1]
[1]U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Chemical Defense, 3100 Ricketts Point Road, Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland 21010-5400 and
[2]Battelle Memorial Institute, Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland 21010-5400

An analytical method for determining exposure to 2,2'-dichlorodiethyl sulfide (sulfur mustard, HD) has been enhanced. The method is based on the cleavage of adducted HD (protein-hydroxyethylthioethyl esters) to produce thiodiglycol. Following cleavage, a deuterated internal standard is added, and the analytes are extracted, derivatized, and analyzed by gas chromatography–negative ion chemical ionization-mass spectrometry. Inclusion of a concentration step, addition of solid sodium bicarbonate to neutralize excess derivatization reagent, and optimization of method and instrument conditions provided dramatic increases in signal-to-noise ratio. A five-day precision and accuracy study was conducted, including interday and intraday unknown analysis. Linearity was verified by a R2 > 0.9995 for all five curves evaluated. The precision and accuracy of the assay were demonstrated to be excellent by evaluation of the interday and intraday unknown samples (< 10% relative standard deviation and relative error in most cases). Statistical treatment of the method blanks and calibration results demonstrated a reduction in the limit of quantitation from 25nM (HD, human plasma, in vitro) to 1.56nM. Sample and calibration stability through the analytical sequence was established by the inclusion of continuing calibration verification standards (< 5% error). Short-term sample stability was verified by reinjection of a calibration set after 18 days (R2 = 0.9997). Quantitative agreement with the previous method was supported by the analysis of a 50nM standard protein sample (HD, rat plasma) with both methodologies (< 1% error).

Reproduction of editorial content of this journal is prohibited without publisher’s permission.

| Home | Subscribe | Current Issue | Back Issues | Search | Advertise | Other Publications |