What's the Problem with the LLOQ? — A Case Study - - Chromatography Online
 Chromatography Online All results
What's the Problem with the LLOQ? — A Case Study
 Nov 1, 2013 LCGC North America Volume 31, Issue 11, pp. 926-931

Two methods of calculating the lower limit of quantification (LLOQ) disagree. Which, if either, is correct?

Recently, a reader e-mailed me with a problem he was having determining the lower limit of quantification (LLOQ) for his method, which had a target LLOQ of 0.01 μg/mL for his analyte. He compared the LLOQ calculated using the International Committee on Harmonization guidelines (ICH) (1) with replicate injections of a reference standard and found that the two differed by more than an order of magnitude. He came to me to help him figure out what was wrong. The method was proprietary, and the reader needed to stay anonymous, so I've disguised things a bit, but this case study helps us to better understand how to evaluate a calibration curve.

The ICH (1) presents a formula to calculate what they call the quantitation limit (QL), but what most users call the limit of quantification (LOQ) or LLOQ:

 Table I: Input data and error calculations
where σ is the standard deviation of the response (the standard error [SE]) and S is the slope of the calibration curve. This is calculated easily from the regression statistics generated in Excel or your data system software. Let's see how this works.

 Table II: Summary of Excel regression statistics
Table I includes the initial data from the calibration curve. The user injected eight concentrations of his analyte, ranging from 0.01 to 1.0 μg/mL, generating the peak areas shown in the "Response" column of Table I. I used Excel's regression tool to generate the regression statistics, part of which I've included in Table II. These include the coefficient of variation (r 2), the standard error of the curve (SE-curve), the y-intercept (intercept-coefficient), the standard error of the y-values (intercept-SE-y), and the slope of the curve (X variable). Calculated values for these variables are shown in the second two columns of Table II, headed "With 1.0 μg/mL."

 Table III: Summary of LLOQ calculations
The reader used equation 1 with the standard error of the curve (SE-curve) and slope, and found that the LLOQ was predicted to be ~0.15 μg/mL (summarized as the first entry of Table III). (Here I'll pause to remind you that I've rounded and truncated numbers in the tables for ease of viewing; if you try to repeat my calculations, your results may differ slightly.) Yet, when he injected n = 10 replicates of a 0.01 μg/mL solution, he found the percent relative standard deviation (%RSD) was 1.1% (last entry, Table III), which he felt indicated the LLOQ was considerably lower than the 0.15-μg/mL prediction using the ICH technique. At this point he contacted me.

 ADVERTISEMENT
blog comments powered by Disqus

Global E-newsletters subscribe here:

 Survey
CHROMacademy
Are you aware of CHROMacademy and the learning tools it offers?
Yes, I would like to know more
Yes, I am not interested
No, I would like to know more
No, I am not interested
Yes, I would like to know more 67%
Yes, I am not interested 9%
No, I would like to know more 19%
No, I am not interested 5%

LCGC COLUMNISTS 2014

 Sample Prep Perspectives | Ronald E. Majors: LCGC Columnist Ron Majors, established authority on new column technologies, keeps readers up-to-date with new sample preparation trends in all branches of chromatography and reviews developments in existing technology lines. LATEST: The Role of Selectivity in Extractions: A Case Study History of Chromatography | Industry Veterans: With each installment of this column, a different industry veteran covers an aspect of the evolution and continued development of the science of chromatography, from its birth to its eventual growth into the high-powered industry we see today. LATEST: Georges Guiochon: Separation Science Innovator MS — The Practical Art| Kate Yu: Kate Yu is the editor of 'MS-The Practical Art' bringing her expertise in the field of mass spectrometry and hyphenated techniques to the pages of LCGC. In this column she examines the mass spectrometric side of coupled liquid and gas-phase systems. Troubleshooting-style articles provide readers with invaluable advice for getting the most from their mass spectrometers. LC Troubleshooting | John Dolan: LC Troubleshooting sets about making HPLC methods easier to master. By covering the basics of liquid chromatography separations and instrumentation, John Dolan, Vice President of LC Resources and world renowned expert on HPLC, is able to highlight common problems and provide remedies for them. LATEST: LC Method Scaling, Part I: Isocratic Separations

LCGC North America Editorial Advisory Board>>

LCGC Europe Editorial Advisory Board>>

Multimedia
 Multi-Antibiotic Residue Detection in Food:An Improved Method for Screening and Confirmation Testing, in Accordance with EU Commission Decision 2002/657/EC January 23, 2014
 The Use of Solid Core Technology in the Pharmaceutical Environment January 23, 2014
 Sample Preparation Method Development for Unconventional Matrices February 24, 2014
 VALIDATION RESOURCES FROM IVT NETWORK Process Validation Special Editions 19th Annual Validation Week Compendium Computer and Software Validation Volume II Special Edition Analytical Method Validation Toolkit More from IVT
Click here