Indian Journal of Nuclear Medicine
Home | About IJNM | Search | Current Issue | Past Issues | Instructions | Ahead of Print | Online submissionLogin 
Indian Journal of Nuclear Medicine
  Editorial Board | Subscribe | Advertise | Contact
Users Online: 85 Print this page  Email this page Small font size Default font size Increase font size


 
 Table of Contents     
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Year : 2023  |  Volume : 38  |  Issue : 1  |  Page : 1-7  

Validation of the HPLC analytical method for the determination of chemical and radiochemical purity of Ga-68-DOTATATE


1 Department of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, University Hospital of Parma, Via Gramsci, Italy
2 Department of Diagnostic, Medical Physics Unit, University Hospital of Parma, Via Gramsci, Parma, Italy

Date of Submission14-Jan-2022
Date of Decision18-Mar-2022
Date of Acceptance04-Apr-2022
Date of Web Publication24-Feb-2023

Correspondence Address:
Dr. Antonino Sammartano
Department of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, University Hospital of Parma, Via Gramsci 14, Parma 43126
Italy
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/ijnm.ijnm_11_22

Rights and Permissions
   Abstract 


Purpose of the Study: Ga-68-DOTA-peptides targeting somatostatin receptors have been assessed as a valuable tool in neuroendocrine tumors imaging using positron emission tomography (PET). A new selective and sensitive high-pressure liquid chromatography (HPLC) method was developed for determining chemical and radiochemical purity of Ga-68-DOTATATE (PET) tracer. The identification of peaks was achieved on a symmetry C18 column 3 μm 120Å (3.0 mm × 150 mm spherical particles) using (A) water + 0.1% trifluoroacetic acid (TFA) and (B) acetonitrile + 0.1% TFA, as the mobile phases at a flow rate of 0.600 mL/min and monitored at 220 nm. The run time was 16 min. Materials and Methods: The method was validated to fulfill International Conference on Harmonization requirements and EDQM guidelines, and it included specificity, linearity, limit of detection (LOD), limit of quantification (LOQ), accuracy, and precision. Results: The calibration curve was linear over the concentration range from 0.5 to 3 μg/ml, with a correlation coefficient (r2) equal to 0.999, average coefficient of variation (CV%) 2%, and average bias% did not deviate more than 5% for all concentrations. The LOD and LOQ for DOTATATE were 0.5 and 0.1 μg/mL, respectively. The method was considered precise, obtaining coefficients of variation between 0.22% and 0.52% for intraday and 0.20% and 0.61% for interday precision. Accuracy of method was confirmed with average bias% that did not deviate more than 5% for all concentrations. Conclusion: All results were acceptable and this confirmed that the method is suitable for its intended use in routine quality control of Ga-68-DOTATATE to guarantee the high quality of the finished product before release.

Keywords: Ga-68-DOTATATE, positron emission tomography imaging, somatostatin receptors, validation of HPLC method


How to cite this article:
Sammartano A, Migliari S, Serreli G, Scarlattei M, Baldari G, Ruffini L. Validation of the HPLC analytical method for the determination of chemical and radiochemical purity of Ga-68-DOTATATE. Indian J Nucl Med 2023;38:1-7

How to cite this URL:
Sammartano A, Migliari S, Serreli G, Scarlattei M, Baldari G, Ruffini L. Validation of the HPLC analytical method for the determination of chemical and radiochemical purity of Ga-68-DOTATATE. Indian J Nucl Med [serial online] 2023 [cited 2023 Mar 24];38:1-7. Available from: https://www.ijnm.in/text.asp?2023/38/1/1/370412




   Introduction Top


Neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) are a heterogeneous group of neoplasms that arise from cells of the endocrine and nervous systems. These tumors can originate from various areas of the body but are most commonly in the gastrointestinal or bronchopulmonary system.[1]

Many NETs may be characterized by a spectrum of overexpression of somatostatin receptors (SSTRs) on the cell surface.

Radiolabeling of DOTA-conjugate peptides with the positron emission tomography (PET) tracer Ga-68 allows to detect SSTRs overexpressed on NET cells providing in vivo visualization of primary tumor and metastatic lesions.

Recent availability of good manufacturing practice Good manufacturing practices (GMP)-grade generators for the production of the positron emission tomography (PET) tracer Ga-68 and publication of European Pharmacopoeia (Ph. Eur.) monograph (#2464) on Ga-68-chloride from generators[2] have changed the imaging scenario. Finally, various new diagnostic agents based on Ga-68 labeling have been added to the clinical activity due to the use of automated synthesis systems.[3],[4]

The continuing development of new tools for molecular imaging is not accompanied by a coherent effort in the development, standardization, and validation of quality control (QC) methods to guarantee high-quality radiopharmaceutical production, especially in the routine clinical setting.

Analytical methods play an essential role in the final product quality. However, the quality can only be reached if the analytical method undergoes an appropriate validation process. Analytical validation comprises a formal, systematic, and documented tool that measures the ability of an analytical method to provide reliable, accurate, and reproducible results.[5],[6]

In this paper, we describe the validation process of a new selective and sensitive high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) method developed for determining chemical and radiochemical purity of Ga-68-DOTATATE (PET) tracer.


   Materials and Methods Top


Reagents

All reagents were high-purity pharmaceutical grade.

The reagents used for high-pressure liquid chromatography (HPLC) and instant thin-layer chromatography (ITLC) phase (trifluoroacetic acid [TFA], acetonitrile, and ammonium acetate) were ultrapure or trace metal free and were purchased from Sigma Aldrich (Saint Louis, Missouri, USA).

The GMP-grade peptide DOTATATE, or DOTA-Tyr3-Octreotate (TATE), was obtained from ABX pharmaceuticals (ABX, Advanced Biochemical Compounds, Radeberg, Germany) as a 1 mg powder which is dissolved in 1 ml of water and used in 10 μl aliquots.

Ga-68 was obtained from a GMP-compliant 68Ge/68Ga generator (GalliaPharm® Eckert and Ziegler, E and Z, Berlin, Germany) eluted with 0.1N HCl (Rotem GmbH, Germany).

Synthesis and Quality control analysis of [68Ga] Ga-DOTATATE

The synthesis of 68Ga-DOTATATE was performed using a fully automated module (Scintomics GRP®, Fürstenfeldbruck, Germany) specifically designed for the synthesis of radiopharmaceuticals.

The radiolabeling procedure and QC tests for Ga-68-DOTATATE [radiochemical purity (HPLC), radiochemical impurity 68Ga3+ (HPLC and ITLC), chemical purity (HPLC and GC), pH (pH-strips), radionuclidic purity (principal γ-photon), 68Ge-content, Ga-68 half-life (γ-ray spectrometry), and sterility/endotoxin assay] were described previously.[7] The results of QC tests for Ga-68-DOTATATE are illustrated in [Table 1].
Table 1: Quality control results Ga-68-DOTATATE radiolabeling procedure

Click here to view


Chromatographic conditions for analytical method development and validation

HPLC analyses were performed on a Dionex UltiMate 3000 HPLC system (Thermo Fisher Scientific) equipped with an Acclaim™ 120 C18 column 3 μm 120Š (3.0 mm × 150 mm) and a UV and a γ-detector (Berthold Technologies, Milan, Italy). The flow rate of mobile phase was pumped at a rate of 0.600 mL/min with a total run of 16 min. The detection wavelength for chemical impurities was 220 nm. T Column temperature was kept at 30°C, and sample injection was performed manually using an inert injector with a multiport valve and a 20 μL calibrated loop.

The software system Chromeleon 7 (Thermo Scientific™ Dionex™) was used to put together the information.

The mobile phase was as follows:

  • -phase A: ACN: TFA in the ratio (100:0,1), (v/v);
  • -phase B: Water: TFA in the ratio (100:0,1), (v/v).


The gradient as shown in pTable 2] was used in the HPLC analysis.
Table 2: Gradient for the high-performance liquid chromatography analysis of Ga-68-DOTATAT

Click here to view


Standard stock solution preparation

The stock standard solution of DOTATATE was prepared in water (TraceSelectUltra; Fluka, Switzerland) at a concentration of 3 μg/mL and stored in a refrigerator at −20°C.

Different working standard solutions of DOTATATE (0.5–3 μg/ml) were prepared by diluting the above-mentioned stock solution in water and were stored at −20°C.

Method of validation

Validation of HPLC method to determine the chemical purity

The HPLC method to determine the chemical purity of Ga-68-DOTATATE was validated in term of specificity, linearity, precision (repeatability), accuracy, and limit of quantification (LOQ) according to the International Conference on Harmonization (ICH) requirements and EDQM guidelines.[6],[7]

The acceptance criteria for each parameter are listed in [Table 3].[8],[9]
Table 3: Tests and acceptance criteria in determining chemical purity using high-performance liquid chromatography

Click here to view


Specificity

The specificity of the HPLC method was evaluated to ensure that there was no interference from the excipients present in the formulations. The specificity was studied by analyzing mixture containing critical components that might be present in the finished product Ga-68-DOTATATE solution and demonstrating that the method is capable to distinguish the various components present at the limit of concentration for the considered standards. The specificity of the method was evaluated by injecting solutions of standard, blank, 68Ga-DOTATATE, and Ga-68.

Linearity

To evaluate linearity and range of the method, different standard solutions were prepared by diluting the standard stock solution with water in different concentrations: 3.00; 2.00; 1.5; 1.00; 0.8; and 0.5 μg/mL, which cover 100%, 67%, 50%, 33%, 27%, and 17% of the target concentration, respectively.

The statistical function used to assess linearity was the linear regression with least squares. The curve equation, the correlation coefficient, and the determination coefficient (r2) were calculated through the equation y = ax + b, where y is peak area, a the slope, x the analyte concentration, and b the intercept.

Limit of detection and limit of quantification

Limit of detection (LOD) and LOQ are the lowest concentration in a sample that can be detected but not necessarily quantified under the stated experimental conditions.

LOQ is the lowest concentration of analyte that is determined by analyzing a series of diluted solutions of standard DOTATATE until a concentration level quantified with acceptable accuracy and precision >95% is reached.

The experimental value determined as described above needs to be confirmed through a precision analysis, using a sample at the concentration corresponding to the found LOQ. Acceptance criteria are CV% <5%.

Moreover, to determine the detection limit (DL) and the quantification limit (QL), we considered the standard deviation of the y-axis intercept of calibration curve (S intercept) and the average of its angular coefficient (slope of the line).

The DL and QL values were expressed in concentration and were based on the ratio of five times the baseline noise for DL, and ten times for QL, as shown in the following equations (1 and 2):



Precision and accuracy

Precision may be considered, at different levels, as a measure of repeatability or intermediate precision.

Repeatability may be calculated based on the content of standard DOTATATE, and the statistical parameter of concern is the variation coefficient (CV%) or relative standard deviation (RSD), which is determined using the equation: CV% = s/m × 100, where m is the average of the concentrations and s is the standard deviation.

Accuracy is a measure of the degree of conformity of a value generated by a specific procedure to the assumed or accepted true value, and it is expressed through bias% value.

Bias% value measures the difference between the experimental value (calculated from replicate measurements) and the nominal (reference) values. Acceptance criteria are bias% >95%.

The data were obtained by replicate analysis of samples containing known amounts of analyte at three different concentrations, chosen so that they are representative of the validation interval. Five replicates were performed for each concentration for 3 consecutive days.

Intraday and interday precision are expressed through the coefficient of variation, which must be ≤2% for all concentrations; the intraday and interday accuracy are expressed through the bias%, which must not deviate more than 5% for all concentrations.

Validation of HPLC method to determine the radiochemical purity

Some of the ICH guidelines validation parameters may not be of concern and do not apply for radioactive compounds.

The validation of the analytical method for the determination of the radiochemical purity is presented here.

The validation parameters and their acceptance criteria are summarized in [Table 4].
Table 4: Tests and acceptance criteria in determining radiochemical purity using high-performance liquid chromatography

Click here to view


Linearity

Considering the radioactive nature and the short half-life of Ga-68, the typical experimental approach based on the preparation of a series of solutions with different concentrations does not apply. On the contrary, in this case, one sample solution only, with a suitable radioactive concentration, is analyzed 5 times at defined time intervals (15 min). Indeed, the radioactivity being the physical parameter of concern for radiochemical detectors, the radionuclide decay itself provides the necessary linear series of value.

r2 may be extrapolated from the calibration curve by analyzing five different radioactive concentrations of Ga-68-DOTATATE.

Precision

Here also apply the same considerations described for linearity, i.e., the decay of the radionuclide Ga-68 inevitably leads to a decrease over time of the radioactivity. However, repeatability may be evaluated by analyzing a series of HPLC runs obtained with repetitive injections of a single Ga-68-DOTATATE sample and recalculating the obtained peak area values with the decay equation: lnA0 = lnA + λt, where λ = 0,693/t1/2, A0 = corrected peak area, A = measured peak area, t = time interval between the considered injection and the first one, T1/2 = half-life (68Ga = 67.63 min).

The peak area values normalized for decay may then be compared and yield a consistent statistical analysis. Average, standard deviation, and CV% are then calculated.

Repeatability has to be determined in 3 different days to verify the instrument outcome during the time course.


   Results Top


Specificity

Under the chromatographic conditions described in the materials and methods section, DOTATATE and the internal standard peaks were well resolved.

The blank chromatogram in [Figure 1], the DOTATATE in [Figure 2], the Ga-68-DOTATATE in [Figure 3], and gallium-68 chromatograms in [Figure 4] were used for the validation of the analytical HPLC method.
Figure 1: HPLC chromatogram of the blank sample

Click here to view
Figure 2: HPLC chromatogram of DOTATATE

Click here to view
Figure 3: High-pressure liquid chromatogram of gallium-68-DOTA-Tyr3-octreotate. The peaks seen in these two chromatograms were analyzed in ultraviolet channel; therefore, only the solvent signal (0.0–2.0 min) is seen, the DOTA-Tyr3-octreotate signal (5.5 min) and no free gallium-68. The peak seen in both chromatograms (10-12 min) is not related to a substance or free gallium-68, but it is related to the gradient high-pressure liquid chromatography method (used to analyze the sample). The labeling efficiency of the three validation runs was 63.34%, 63.71%, and 64.01%

Click here to view
Figure 4: HPLC chromatogram of Gallium-68

Click here to view


The average retention time of Ga-68-DOTATATE was 5.565 min ± 0.016.

Linearity

The determination of linearity of DATATATE was done on 6 solution sets in the concentration range 0.5–3 μg/mL.

From the evaluated chromatograms, we determined the area's peaks and height and plotted graphically their values against concentrations determining the correlation coefficient (R2). From the regression analysis, a linear equation was obtained: y = 1.0298X − 0.4624. The correlation coefficient value was 0.9998, in accordance to the acceptance criteria [Table 3], indicating a linear relationship between the concentration of analyte and area under the peak. Linearity was statistically confirmed for each calibration curve [Figure 5].
Figure 5: Calibration curve obtained with the average values of peak areas and height of five different concentrations (3.00, 2.00, 1.50, 1.00, 0.80, 0.50 μg/mL) of DOTATATE

Click here to view


For each point of calibration standard, the concentrations of DOTATATE were recalculated from the equation of linear regression curve. The coefficients of variation (CV%) were <2%, while the bias values% does not deviate more than 5% for all concentrations [Supplemental Material Table 1].



For Ga-68-DOTATATE, linearity was determined analyzing one sample solution with a suitable radioactive concentration [Table 5]. As shown in [Figure 6], the calibration curve was linear and the linearity of this method was confirmed from the regression analysis, Y = 0.1712X + 9.9952. The r2 was 0.9935 and the average coefficient of variation (CV%) was <2% which is in accordance to acceptance criteria [Table 4].
Figure 6: Calibration curve obtained with the average values of peak areas of Ga-68-DOTATATE

Click here to view
Table 5: Linearity of the radiochemical purity

Click here to view


Limit of detection and limit of quantification

The LOD and limit of quantitation (LOQ) values were determined by the analysis of samples with known concentrations of analytes in which the analyte can be reliably detected

LOD and LOQ were calculated as 0.5 and 0.1 μg/mL, respectively [Table 6].
Table 6: The values of the detection limit and quantification limit for DOTATATE

Click here to view


Accuracy and precision of HPLC analytical method: validation intraday and interday

[Table 7] and [Table 8] show the average values of the QC concentrations recalculated on the basis of the calibration line, the coefficient of variation%, as index of the precision of the collected data, and the accuracy, expressed as bias% ([average concentration observed/nominal concentration × 100] − 100).
Table 7: Intra-day accuracy and precision of the proposed high-performance liquid chromatography method for DOTATATE (n=5)

Click here to view
Table 8: Inter-day precision and accuracy of the proposed high-performance liquid chromatography method for DOTATATE (n=15)

Click here to view


The intra and interday precision were expressed as coefficient of variation% (CV%) which must be b2% for all the concentrations. The method was considered precise obtaining coefficients of variation between 0.22% and 0.52% for intraday and 0.20% and 0.61% for the interday precision. The intraday and interday accuracy is expressed through the bias% which must not deviate more than 5% for all concentrations. The bias% did not deviate more than 5% for all the concentrations.


   Conclusion Top


Transition of radiopharmaceuticals to routine clinical use needs standardized procedures for assessing drug quality, to guarantee safety and efficacy of the final product and to comply with good manufacturing practice. Recently, guidance on the validation of radio-analytical methods for radiopharmaceuticals has been published by EANM, recommending the general approach with two practical examples.[7]

During recent years, attention to QC methods has grown up in the development of radiopharmaceuticals, especially in establishing clinical grade compounds. So that, HPLC method has become crucial for identification/characterization of the final product, demanding higher resolution than standard TLC method.

Our group is expending many efforts in developing and validating radiolabeled probes for molecular imaging.[8],[9],[10],[11],[12],[13],[14],[15],[16],[17] However, the expanding field of molecular imaging drives a growing development of new radiopharmaceuticals targeting a specific biologic process.

The lack of generic and peer-reviewed QC guidelines and recommendations for their application in human patients is a major concern.

Therefore, it is necessary to establish acceptance criteria for the selected quality parameters and validate them to transfer radiopharmaceutical production in the clinical/research activity.

The analytical method conditions and the mobile phase solvents used in the validation process provided good resolution for DOTATATE. In addition, the main features of the developed method are the short run time and retention time around 5.5 min.

Results evidenced that the proposed HPLC method is suitable for chemical and radiochemical purity evaluation of Ga-68-DOTATATE considering operational conditions of our laboratory, owing to its adequate specificity, linearity, LOD, LOQ, accuracy, and precision. The method was validated in accordance with ICH guidelines.

Consent for publication

All of the authors have read and approved the paper for publication.

Financial support and sponsorship

Nil.

Conflicts of interest

There are no conflicts of interest.



 
   References Top

1.
Hauso O, Gustafsson BI, Kidd M, Waldum HL, Drozdov I, Chan AK, et al. Neuroendocrine tumor epidemiology: Contrasting Norway and North America. Cancer 2008;113:2655-64.  Back to cited text no. 1
    
2.
European Directorate for the Quality of Medicines. Gallium (68 Ga) chloride solution for radiolabelling. In: European Pharmacopeia. Vol. 2464:1060-1. European Directorate for the Quality of Medicines; 2013. p. 1060-1.  Back to cited text no. 2
    
3.
Luo Y, Pan Q, Yao S, Yu M, Wu W, Xue H, et al. Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor PET/CT with 68Ga-NOTA-exendin-4 for detecting localized insulinoma: A prospective cohort study. J Nucl Med 2016;57:715-20.  Back to cited text no. 3
    
4.
Aslani A, Snowdon GM, Bailey DL, Schembri GP, Bailey EA, Roach PJ. Gallium-68 DOTATATE production with automated PET radiopharmaceutical synthesis system: A three year experience. Asia Ocean J Nucl Med Biol 2014;2:75-86.  Back to cited text no. 4
    
5.
European Association of Nuclear Medicine. Guidelines on Current Good Radiopharmacy Practice (cGRPP) in the Preparation of Radiopharmaceuticals. Ver. 2. 2007: European Association of Nuclear Medicine; 2007.  Back to cited text no. 5
    
6.
Gillings N, Hjelstuen O, Ballinger J, Behe M, Decristoforo C, Elsinga P, et al. Guideline on current good radiopharmacy practice (cGRPP) for the small-scale preparation of radiopharmaceuticals. EJNMMI Radiopharm Chem 2021;6:8.  Back to cited text no. 6
    
7.
EDQM Guidelines: Guide for the Elaboration of Monographs on Radiopharmaceutical Preparations European Pharmacopoeia Edition; 2020.  Back to cited text no. 7
    
8.
Levin S. Analysis and pharmaceutical quality. In: High Performance Liquid Chromatography (HPLC) in the Pharmaceutical Analysis. Molecules MDPI; 2010. p. 1-34.  Back to cited text no. 8
    
9.
Zarghi A, Foroutan SM, Shafaati A, Khoddam A. A rapid HPLC method for the determination of losartan in human plasma using a monolithic column. Arzneimittelforschung 2005;55:569-72.  Back to cited text no. 9
    
10.
Velikyan I. 68Ga-Based radiopharmaceuticals: Production and application relationship. Molecules 2015;20:12913-43.  Back to cited text no. 10
    
11.
Good Practice for Introducing Radiopharmaceuticals for Clinical Use. European Association of Nuclear Medicine; 2016. Available from: http://inis.iaea.org.[Last accessed on 2021 Dec 13].  Back to cited text no. 11
    
12.
Sammartano A, Migliari S, Scarlattei M, Baldari G, Ruffini L. Validation of quality control parameters of cassette-based gallium-68-DOTA-Tyr3-octreotate synthesis. Indian J Nucl Med 2020;35:291-8.  Back to cited text no. 12
  [Full text]  
13.
Gillings N, Todde S, Behe M, Decristoforo C, Elsinga P, Ferrari V, et al. EANM guideline on the validation of analytical methods for radiopharmaceuticals. EJNMMI Radiopharm Chem 2020;5:7.  Back to cited text no. 13
    
14.
Migliari S, Sammartano A, Scarlattei M, Serreli G, Ghetti C, Cidda C, et al. Development and validation of a high-pressure liquid chromatography method for the determination of chemical purity and radiochemical purity of a [68Ga]-labeled Glu-Urea-Lys (Ahx)-HBED-CC (Positron Emission Tomography) tracer. ACS Omega 2017;2:7120-6.  Back to cited text no. 14
    
15.
Migliari S, Sammartano A, Scarlattei M, Baldari G, Silva C, Ruffini L. A rapid and specific HPLC method to determine chemical and radiochemical purity of [68Ga] Ga-DOTA-Pentixafor (PET) tracer: Development and validation. Curr Radiopharm 2021;14:121-30.  Back to cited text no. 15
    
16.
Migliari S, Sammartano A, Cidda C, Baldari G, Scarlattei M, Serreli G, et al. Novel approach for quality assessment and improving diagnostic accuracy in cell-based infection imaging using 99mTc-HMPAO labeled leukocytes. Acta Biomed 2018;89:355-64.  Back to cited text no. 16
    
17.
Sammartano A, Scarlattei M, Migliari S, Baldari G, Ruffini L. Validation of in vitro labeling method for human use of heat-damage red blood cells to detect splenic tissue and hemocateretic function. Acta Biomed 2019;90:275-80.  Back to cited text no. 17
    


    Figures

  [Figure 1], [Figure 2], [Figure 3], [Figure 4], [Figure 5], [Figure 6]
 
 
    Tables

  [Table 1], [Table 2], [Table 3], [Table 4], [Table 5], [Table 6], [Table 7], [Table 8]



 

Top
  
 
  Search
 
  
    Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
    Access Statistics
    Email Alert *
    Add to My List *
* Registration required (free)  

 
  In this article
    Abstract
   Introduction
    Materials and Me...
   Results
   Conclusion
    References
    Article Figures
    Article Tables

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed226    
    Printed26    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded49    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal