Analytical performance reference material

Laser based mass spectrometric methods, such as laser ionization (LIMS) and laser ablation in combination with inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (LA-ICP-MS) are powerful analytical techniques for survey analysis of solid substances. To realize the analytical performances methods for the direct trace analysis of synthetic and natural crystals modification of a traditional analytical technique was necessary and suitable standard reference materials (SRM) were required. Recent developments allowed extending the range of analytical applications of LIMS and LA-ICP-MS will be presented and discussed. For example ... 

Because of the complex nature of the discharge conditions, GD-OES is a comparative analytical method and standard reference materials must be used to establish a unique relationship between the measured line intensities and the elemental concentration. In quantitative bulk analysis, which has been developed to very high standards, calibration is performed with a set of calibration samples of composition similar to the unknown samples. Normally, a major element is used as reference and the internal standard method is applied. This approach is not generally applicable in depth-profile analysis, because the different layers encountered in a depth profile of ten comprise widely different types of material which means that a common reference element is not available. 

Ihnat M (2000) Performance of neutron activation analytical methods in an international interlaboratory reference material characterization campaign. J Radioanal Nud Chem 245 73-80... 

Within collaborative work on element concentrations in a number of biological reference materials using solid sampling and other analytical methods, calibration of Cd, Cu, Pb and Zn in BCR CRM 185 Bovine liver with solid CRMs was performed for each element with a reference material of the same matrix, NIST SRM 1577... 

Taylor A (1996) Reference materials and analytical standards to stimulate improved laboratory performance Experience from the external quality assessment scheme for trace elements in biological samples. Mikrochim Acta 123 251-260. 

A second reason for using reference materials in clinical chemistry is to ensure values obtained are traceable to those in a recognized, authoritative reference material (Johnson et al. 1996). As a result, the assignment of values of secondary and tertiary reference materials, calibrants, controls, and proficiency samples shordd be performed as precisely as possible (Johnson et al. 1996). Surprisingly there is still debate on this topic, and on the need for clinical chemistry to incorporate the principals of analytical quality assurance (Dybkaer et al. 1999). 

Third, in order to ensure that a collaborated method is being performed properly, and that resultant data obtained is sound, an appropriate set of controls or reference materials is needed to test the method as it is being used (Chase and Long 1997). However, there is a difference in how one views the aforementioned concepts. For example, analytical method development is a process-oriented approach in which each step of the process is continually tested whereas, the use of a RM, standard control or comparison with another method is a result-oriented view (Taimer et al. 1995). 

Chase and Long (1997) propose that this conundrum can be eliminated by the use of Zero Reference Materials (ZRMs) in analytical methods development to fully evaluate the method. A ZRM is a product matrix that lacks those nutrient components that are to be assayed, i.e. a blank matrix. The use of a ZRM in method development can and will give a true indication as to how the method will perform as the spiked nutrient levels approach zero. For example, two products. Corn Starch (NIST RM 8432) and Microcrystalline Cellulose (NIST RM 8416), contain very low elemental concentrations and could conceivably serve as real sample blanks or ZRMs in some analytical procedures. 

This validation typically requires samples with radiolabeled analytes. However, alternative approaches are proposed which involve (i) comparison with extraction of samples using a procedure which has been previously validated rigorously, (ii) comparison with extraction of samples by a very different technique or (iii) analysis of a certified reference material. Generally, this validation should be performed with samples containing analyte incurred by the route by which residues would normally be expected to arise. The simplest option (i) requires fully validated and documented enforcement methods provided by the manufacturer of a pesticide. 

The establishment of performance criteria for a given tumor marker test is not a simple process because accuracy and precision are unique for each type of analyte and its application. Establishing methodological limits for accuracy, precision, sensitivity, and specificity often requires standard reference materials, quality control materials, comparative studies, and actual clinical specimens. Accuracy and precision must be measured over the analyte reportable range for which the device is intended to be used. Sensitivity and specificity must be considered with respect to the intended clinical use of the device. Also, the indications for use should be carefully considered in the design of the study protocol. The indications for class II should be to monitor residual tumor after surgery (or radiation), the recurrence of tumor, or response to therapy. A 510(k) must provide clear evidence that the device is accurate, safe, effective, and substantially equivalent to a device legally marketed in the United States. 

Two different and possibly complementary approaches have been explored. One utilizes a panel of quantifiable internal reference standards (QIRS), which are common proteins present widely in tissues in relatively consistent amounts.11,22 In this instance because the reference proteins are intrinsic to the tissue they are necessarily subjected to identical fixation and processing, and incur no additional handling or cost, other than synchronous performance of a second IHC assay (stain), such that the intensity of reaction for the QIRS and the test analyte can be compared by IA, allowing calculation of the amount of test analyte (protein) present on a formulaic standard curve basis. The other approach seeks to identify external reference materials and to introduce these into each step of tissue preparation for cases where IHC studies are anticipated in this instance the logistical issues of production, distribution, and inclusion of the reference standard into all phases of tissue processing also must be considered, along with attendant costs. 

Becker, D., Christensen, R., Currie, L., Diamondstone, B., Eberhardt, K. R., Gills, T., Hertz, H., Klouda, G., Moody, J., Parris, R., Schaffer, R., Steel, E., Taylor, J., Watters, R. and Zeisler, R., Use of NIST Standard Reference Materials for Decisions on Performance of Analytical Chemical Methods and Laboratories, NIST Special Publication 829, National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), Gaithersburg, MD, USA, 1992. 

The previous chapters of this book have discussed the many activities which laboratories undertake to help ensure the quality of the analytical results that are produced. There are many aspects of quality assurance and quality control that analysts carry out on a day-to-day basis to help them produce reliable results. Control charts are used to monitor method performance and identify when problems have arisen, and Certified Reference Materials are used to evaluate any bias in the results produced. These activities are sometimes referred to as internal quality control (IQC). In addition to all of these activities, it is extremely useful for laboratories to obtain an independent check of their performance and to be able to compare their performance with that of other laboratories carrying out similar types of analyses. This is achieved by taking part in interlaboratory studies. There are two main types of interlaboratory studies, namely proficiency testing (PT) schemes and collaborative studies (also known as collaborative trials). 

A standard reference material with an accepted analyte content of 5.85 ppm was used to compare the performance of two alternative methods of analysis. Solutions were prepared using a range of sample weights. Each solution was analysed by the two methods. Use the results obtained to assess any determinate errors exhibited by the methods. 

From the available literature it becomes clear that method evaluation studies do not surpass the level of within-laboratory performances. Although several of these (see Table 3.3.1) reveal satisfactory levels of quality and environmentally relevant limits of detection, a genuine quality assurance of these methods is still lacking. There are no reports of interlaboratory studies and certified reference materials for surfactants are not available on the market yet. It can therefore be concluded that there remains much to be done in the field of improving and evaluating quality of analytical measurements of surfactants in biota. 

Stability of calibrants and analytes is another frequently overlooked aspect of quality assurance, which is particularly relevant to surfactants. This aspect is discussed in Chapter 4.4. Very few intercalibration studies have been performed for the surfactant types of analytes (cf. Chapter 4.5). Currently, no certified reference material is available for surfactants. The European Commission has recently tendered for production of a reference material with certified surfactant concentrations [2]. We can conclude that quality assurance in quantitative surfactant analysis is still in its infancy when compared to analysis of PCB or chlorinated dioxins. Notwithstanding this, several important achievements have been made during recent years regarding improvement of the accuracy and reliability of qualitative analysis of surfactants, which will be the subject of the following chapters. 

Internal quality control is undertaken by the inclusion of particular reference materials, called control materials , into the analytical sequence and by duplicate analysis. The control materials should, wherever possible, be representative of the test materials under consideration in respect of matrix composition, the state of physical preparation and the concentration range of the analyte. As the control materials are treated in exactly the same way as the test materials, they are regarded as surrogates that can be used to characterise the performance of the analytical system, both at a specific time and over longer intervals. Internal quality control is a final check of the correct execution of all of the procedures (including calibration) that are prescribed in the analytical protocol and all of the other quality assurance measures that underlie good analytical practice. IQC is therefore necessarily retrospective. It is also required to be as far as possible independent of the analytical protocol, especially the calibration, that it is designed to test. 

A wide range of high quality, non-certified carotenoid and chlorophyll chemical standards are commercially available (e.g., Sigma-Aldrich, DHI, and Roth). The availability of a mixed pigment reference standard and biological matrix reference materials would improve analytical performance in individual laboratories, facilitate method and laboratory in-... 

In the case of validation, the property value of the certified reference material is not used to obtain the measurement result. It is only used to verify the performance of the analytical method. Thus it is not part of the traceabihty chain and it does not directly influence the establishment of measurement traceabihty. 

Which performance criteria have to be evaluated depends also on the purpose of the method. Different ICFI/USP guidelines are set up for (1) identification tests, (2) impurity tests, and (3) assay tests. An identification test ensures the identity of an analyte in a sample by comparison to a known reference material. An impurity test is intended to confirm the identity of (limit impurity test) or to accurately quantify (quantitative impurity test) an impurity, defined as an entity which may normally not be present. An assay test finally implies the major component or active ingredient in a sample and quantifies the drug substance as such as a whole or the drug substance in a drug product. 

One or more of these bias components are encountered when analyzing RMs. In general, RMs are divided into certified RMs (CRMs, either pure substances/solu-tions or matrix CRMs) and (noncertified) laboratory RMs (LRMs), also called QC samples [89]. CRMs can address all aspects of bias (method, laboratory, and run bias) they are defined with a statement of uncertainty and traceable to international standards. Therefore, CRMs are considered useful tools to achieve traceability in analytical measurements, to calibrat equipment and methods (in certain cases), to monitor laboratory performance, to validate methods, and to allow comparison of methods [4, 15, 30]. However, the use of CRMs does not necessarely guarantee trueness of the results. The best way to assess bias practically is by replicate analysis of samples with known concentrations such as reference materials (see also Section 8.2.2). The ideal reference material is a matrix CRM, as this is very similar to the samples of interest (the latter is called matrix matching). A correct result obtained with a matrix CRM, however, does not guarantee that the results of unknown samples with other matrix compositions will be correct [4, 89]. 

Certified reference materials (CRMs) are mainly applied to validate the analytical procedure developed for routine analysis in order to determine the accuracy of analytical data, the recovery for selected elements, the uncertainty of trace element determination and the detection limits. Otherwise, in solid-state mass spectrometric techniques, such as SSMS, LA-ICP-MS, GDMS, SNMS or SIMS, one point calibration using CRMs has been established as an important calibration strategy to obtain reliable analytical data. The one point calibration is performed using the experimentally determined relative sensitivity coefficients (RSCs) on a suitable CRM with a similar trace/matrix composition. An RSC of a chemical element is defined as the ratio of the measured element concentration (experimentally determined) divided by the certified element concentration (accepted or recommended value of element concentration) in a given matrix. 

---