Leung Gary N W, Ho Emmie N M, Kwok W Him, Leung David K K, Tang Francis P W, Wan Terence S M, Wong April S Y, Wong Colton H F, Wong Jenny K Y, Yu Nola H
Racing Laboratory, The Hong Kong Jockey Club, Sha Tin Racecourse, Sha Tin, NT, Hong Kong, China.
J Chromatogr A. 2007 Sep 7;1163(1-2):237-46. doi: 10.1016/j.chroma.2007.06.035. Epub 2007 Jun 27.
Quantitative determination, particularly for threshold substances in biological samples, is much more demanding than qualitative identification. A proper assessment of any quantitative determination is the measurement uncertainty (MU) associated with the determined value. The International Standard ISO/IEC 17025, "General requirements for the competence of testing and calibration laboratories", has more prescriptive requirements on the MU than its superseded document, ISO/IEC Guide 25. Under the 2005 or 1999 versions of the new standard, an estimation of the MU is mandatory for all quantitative determinations. To comply with the new requirement, a protocol was established in the authors' laboratory in 2001. The protocol has since evolved based on our practical experience, and a refined version was adopted in 2004. This paper describes our approach in establishing the MU, as well as some other important considerations, for the quantification of threshold substances in biological samples as applied in the area of doping control for horses. The testing of threshold substances can be viewed as a compliance test (or testing to a specified limit). As such, it should only be necessary to establish the MU at the threshold level. The steps in a "Bottom-Up" approach adopted by us are similar to those described in the EURACHEM/CITAC guide, "Quantifying Uncertainty in Analytical Measurement". They involve first specifying the measurand, including the relationship between the measurand and the input quantities upon which it depends. This is followed by identifying all applicable uncertainty contributions using a "cause and effect" diagram. The magnitude of each uncertainty component is then calculated and converted to a standard uncertainty. A recovery study is also conducted to determine if the method bias is significant and whether a recovery (or correction) factor needs to be applied. All standard uncertainties with values greater than 30% of the largest one are then used to derive the combined standard uncertainty. Finally, an expanded uncertainty is calculated at 99% one-tailed confidence level by multiplying the standard uncertainty with an appropriate coverage factor (k). A sample is considered positive if the determined concentration of the threshold substance exceeds its threshold by the expanded uncertainty. In addition, other important considerations, which can have a significant impact on quantitative analyses, will be presented.
定量测定,尤其是针对生物样品中的阈值物质,比定性鉴定要求更高。对任何定量测定的恰当评估是与测定值相关的测量不确定度(MU)。国际标准ISO/IEC 17025《检测和校准实验室能力的通用要求》对测量不确定度的规定性要求比其取代的文件ISO/IEC指南25更多。在2005年版或1999年版的新标准下,对所有定量测定进行测量不确定度的估计是强制性的。为符合新要求,作者所在实验室于2001年制定了一项方案。此后,该方案根据我们的实际经验不断演变,并于2004年采用了一个改进版本。本文描述了我们在建立测量不确定度方面的方法,以及在马的反兴奋剂控制领域中对生物样品中阈值物质进行定量时的一些其他重要考虑因素。对阈值物质的检测可视为符合性测试(或按规定限值进行的测试)。因此,仅需在阈值水平建立测量不确定度。我们采用的“自下而上”方法的步骤与EURACHEM/CITAC指南《分析测量中的不确定度量化》中描述的步骤相似。这些步骤首先包括明确被测量,包括被测量与它所依赖的输入量之间的关系。接着使用“因果”图识别所有适用的不确定度来源。然后计算每个不确定度分量的大小并转换为标准不确定度。还进行回收率研究以确定方法偏差是否显著以及是否需要应用回收率(或校正)因子。然后使用所有大于最大标准不确定度值30%的标准不确定度来推导合成标准不确定度。最后,通过将标准不确定度乘以适当的包含因子(k),在99%单尾置信水平下计算扩展不确定度。如果阈值物质的测定浓度超过其阈值加上扩展不确定度,则该样品被视为阳性。此外,还将介绍其他可能对定量分析产生重大影响的重要考虑因素。