Cited by 63Effects and risks of endocrine disrupting chemicalsAnalytical chemistry methods developmentPesticide Residue Analysis and Safety

Quantifying Phthalate Metabolites in Human Meconium and Semen Using Automated Off-Line Solid-Phase Extraction Coupled with On-Line SPE and Isotope-Dilution High-Performance Liquid Chromatography−Tandem Mass Spectrometry

Kato, Kayoko, Silva, Manori J., Needham, Larry L., Calafat, Antonia M.·2006·Analytical Chemistry

Abstract

We developed an analytical method using off-line solid-phase extraction (SPE) coupled with on-line SPE and isotope-dilution high-performance liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (HPLC-MS/MS) to determine the concentrations of phthalate metabolites in human meconium and in semen. First, we used off-line SPE to remove interfering proteins and other biomolecules from the samples. Then, we preconcentrated the phthalate metabolites in the extract using on-line SPE before measuring them by HPLC-MS/MS. For most of the analytes, the limits of detection ranged between 0.2 and 0.7 ng/g for meconium and between 0.3 and 0.7 ng/mL for semen. The recovery after off-line SPE varied for most analytes between 65 and 99% at concentrations ranging from 3.0 to 30.0 ng/mL in semen and between 67 and 103% at concentrations ranging from 2.0 to 10.0 ng/mL in meconium. Precision measured by the relative standard deviation ranged from 3.2 to 19.1% for intraday and from 3.9 to 18.6% for interday. We validated this novel approach--which is applicable to other biological matrixes, including serum and breast milk--on spiked samples and on five meconium samples and one pooled semen sample from people with no known occupational exposure to phthalates.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1021/ac0608220

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Human saliva samples (n = 39) contained phthalate metabolites.

    “Human saliva samples (n = 39) also contained phthalate metabolites [57,160].”

    From A Review of Biomonitoring of Phthalate Exposures (2019) · cites this paper as [160]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Kato, K., Silva, M. J., Needham, L. L., & Calafat, A. M.
Affiliations
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (US)
Corresponding author
Calafat, Antonia M.
Venue
Analytical Chemistry
Published
2006-08-03
Volume
78
Issue
18
Pages
6651-6655
ISSN
  • 0003-2700 (ISSN-L)
  • 1520-6882
OpenAlex
W2055999269
Cited by
63
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 1
FWCI
3.50
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Analytical Chemistry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • U.S. Department of Energy
  • U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
  • Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
  • Oak Ridge Institute for Science and Education
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Health, Toxicology and Mutagenesis › Effects and risks of endocrine disrupting chemicals
  • Physical Sciences › Chemistry › Analytical Chemistry › Analytical chemistry methods development
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Food Science › Pesticide Residue Analysis and Safety
Keywords
phthalate metabolites, meconium, semen, isotope dilution, solid-phase extraction, HPLC-MS/MS, biomonitoring, prenatal exposure, occupational exposure, preconcentration
MeSH terms
Animals, Cattle, Chromatography, High Pressure Liquid, Humans, Male, Meconium, Phthalic Acids, Semen, Reproducibility of Results, Solid Phase Extraction, Tandem Mass Spectrometry

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review