The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Ion Suppression in Mass Spectrometry
Abstract
Background: Mass spectrometry (MS) is being introduced into a large number of clinical laboratories. It provides specificity because of its ability to monitor selected mass ions, sensitivity because of the enhanced signal-to-noise ratio, and speed because it can help avoid the need for intensive sample cleanup and long analysis times. However, MS is not without problems related to interference, especially through ion suppression effects. Ion suppression results from the presence of less volatile compounds that can change the efficiency of droplet formation or droplet evaporation, which in turn affects the amount of charged ion in the gas phase that ultimately reaches the detector. Content: This review discusses materials shown to cause ion suppression, including salts, ion-pairing agents, endogenous compounds, drugs, metabolites, and proteins. Experimental protocols for examining ion suppression, which should include, at a minimum, signal recovery studies using specimen extracts with added analyte, are also discussed, and a more comprehensive approach is presented that uses postcolumn infusion of the analyte to evaluate protracted ionization effects. Finally, this review presents options for minimizing or correcting ion suppression, which include enhanced specimen cleanup, chromatographic changes, reagent modifications, and effective internal standardization. Summary: Whenever mass spectrometric assays are developed, ion suppression studies should be performed using expected physiologic concentrations of the analyte under investigation.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Hebert, A. S., Richards, A. L., Bailey, D. J., Ulbrich, A., Coughlin, E. E., Westphall, M. S., & Coon, J. J. (2014) · Molecular & Cellular Proteomics · doi:10.1074/mcp.m113.034769 · Cited by 528
The fundamental flaws of immunoassays and potential solutions using tandem mass spectrometry
Hoofnagle, A. N., & Wener, M. H. (2009) · Journal of Immunological Methods · doi:10.1016/j.jim.2009.06.003 · Cited by 561
Lindberg, R., Jarnheimer, P.-Å., Olsen, B., Johansson, M., & Tysklind, M. (2004) · Chemosphere · doi:10.1016/j.chemosphere.2004.09.015 · Cited by 455
Liu, X., & Locasale, J. W. (2017) · Trends in Biochemical Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.tibs.2017.01.004 · Cited by 453
Measuring cortisol in serum, urine and saliva—Are our assays good enough?
El-Farhan, N., Rees, D. A., & Evans, C. (2017) · Annals of Clinical Biochemistry: International Journal of Laboratory Medicine · doi:10.1177/0004563216687335 · Cited by 395
Metadata
- Authors
- Annesley, T. M.
- Venue
- Clinical Chemistry
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2003-07-01
- Volume
- 49
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- 1041-1044
- ISSN
- 0009-9147 (ISSN-L)
- 1530-8561
- OpenAlex
- W2140695271
- Cited by
- 1,591
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 19.08
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Ion Suppression in Mass Spectrometry. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1373/49.7.1041
- The paper
- Annesley, T. M. (2003). Ion Suppression in Mass Spectrometry. Clinical Chemistry. https://doi.org/10.1373/49.7.1041
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.