Fast analysis of doping agents in urine by ultra-high-pressure liquid chromatography-quadrupole time-of-flight mass spectrometry I. Screening analysis.

The general strategy to perform anti-doping analyses of urine samples starts with the screening for a wide range of compounds. This step should be fast, generic and able to detect any sample that may contain a prohibited substance while avoiding false negatives and reducing false positive results. The experiments presented in this work were based on ultra-high-pressure liquid chromatography coupled to hybrid quadrupole time-of-flight mass spectrometry. Thanks to the high sensitivity of the method, urine samples could be diluted 2-fold prior to injection. One hundred and three forbidden substances from various classes (such as stimulants, diuretics, narcotics, anti-estrogens) were analysed on a C(18) reversed-phase column in two gradients of 9min (including two 3min equilibration periods) for positive and negative electrospray ionisation and detected in the MS full scan mode. The automatic identification of analytes was based on retention time and mass accuracy, with an automated tool for peak picking. The method was validated according to the International Standard for Laboratories described in the World Anti-Doping Code and was selective enough to comply with the World Anti-Doping Agency recommendations. In addition, the matrix effect on MS response was measured on all investigated analytes spiked in urine samples. The limits of detection ranged from 1 to 500ng/mL, allowing the identification of all tested compounds in urine. When a sample was reported positive during the screening, a fast additional pre-confirmatory step was performed to reduce the number of confirmatory analyses.

Ultra high performance supercritical fluid chromatography coupled with tandem mass spectrometry for screening of doping agents. I: Investigation of mobile phase and MS conditions.

The conditions for the analysis of selected doping substances by UHPSFC-MS/MS were optimized to ensure suitable peak shapes and maximized MS responses. A representative mixture of 31 acidic and basic doping agents was analyzed, in both ESI+ and ESI- modes. The best compromise for all compounds in terms of MS sensitivity and chromatographic performance was obtained when adding 2% water and 10mM ammonium formate in the CO2/MeOH mobile phase. Beside mobile phase, the nature of the make-up solvent added for interfacing UHPSFC with MS was also evaluated. Ethanol was found to be the best candidate as it was able to compensate for the negative effect of 2% water addition in ESI- mode and provided a suitable MS response for all doping agents. Sensitivity of the optimized UHPSFC-MS/MS method was finally assessed and compared to the results obtained in conventional UHPLC-MS/MS. Sensitivity was improved by 5-100-fold in UHPSFC-MS/MS vs. UHPLC-MS/MS for 56% of compounds, while only one compound (bumetanide) offered a significantly higher MS response (4-fold) under UHPLC-MS/MS conditions. In the second paper of this series, the optimal conditions for UHPSFC-MS/MS analysis will be employed to screen >100 doping agents in urine matrix and results will be compared to those obtained by conventional UHPLC-MS/MS.