ABSTRACT
Liquid chromatography–mass spectrometry (LC–MS) is a highly sophisticated analytical technique that has become indispensable for sample analysis across various scientific domains. In recent years, LC–MS has emerged as a cornerstone technology in comparative replicate sample analysis, particularly in the fields of proteomics, lipidomics and metabolomics. This review provides a comprehensive and in‐depth exploration of LC–MS applications in biological, and applied sciences from the key aspects include (1) a historical perspective on LC–MS development and advancements; (2) its critical role in forensic investigations and environmental science; (3) its applications in food safety, quality control and pharmaceutical analysis and (4) its significance in the examination of pharmaceuticals and biological specimens. By presenting a broad and integrated understanding of LC–MS, this review underscores its transformative impact on life sciences and its expanding role in scientific research and innovation.
Keywords: food analysis | life science | liquid chromatography–mass spectrometry (LC–MS) | omics | pharmaceuticals
1. Introduction
Liquid chromatography coupled with mass spectrometry (LC–MS) is a well‐established analytical technique known for its high accuracy and time efficiency in metabolite analysis. Over time, it has evolved to play a crucial role in biological metabolite research [1]. LC–MS‐based techniques are widely regarded as essential tools in metabolomics studies [2], particularly for monitoring metabolites in various research fields, including plant, human and animal sciences [2]. Due to its high sensitivity, specificity and rapid data acquisition, LC–MS is well suited for detecting a broad spectrum of nonvolatile hydrophobic and hydrophilic metabolites [3]. The integration of novel ultra‐high‐pressure techniques with highly efficient columns has further enhanced LC–MS, enabling the study of complex and less abundant bio‐transformed metabolites [2]. Recently, concerns have arisen regarding the presence of veterinary drug residues in food products derived from animals [4]. LC–MS serves as a robust analytical approach for monitoring and quantifying these residues, ensuring that animal‐derived products meet safety standards before entering the food supply chain [4]. Through LC–MS methodologies, the food industry can ensure compliance with regulatory requirements while providing consumers with confidence in food safety [3]. LC–MS plays an extensive role in biological sciences [5], particularly in pharmaceutical research, where it is applied across various stages of drug discovery and development [6]. This powerful technique facilitates the investigation of complex biological systems, aiding in the identification of disease mechanisms and the rapid discovery of new therapeutic agents [5]. Owing to its exceptional ability to classify, identify and quantify compounds with unparalleled sensitivity and accuracy, LC–MS is a preferred tool in analytical chemistry [7]. Recent advancements in ‘‐omics’ techniques have further elevated the importance of LC–MS in systems biology, allowing for the large‐scale analysis of metabolites with unprecedented detail [8]. LC–MS has solidified its presence across multiple disciplines, including pharmacology, proteomics, metabolomics, environmental research and food analysis [8].
The versatility and robustness of LC–MS make it an indispensable instrument for researchers in academia, industry and regulatory agencies. This review aims to provide a comprehensive exploration of LC–MS applications, highlighting its transformative impact across multiple scientific fields. Additionally, the review examines the pivotal role of LC–MS in forensic investigations, environmental monitoring, food safety and biopharmaceutical research. By the end of this review, readers will gain a thorough understanding of LC–MS's multifaceted applications and its significance in advancing biological and life sciences.
2. Historical Development of LC–MS
The development of LC–MS has had a profound impact on the biological and analytical sciences, ushering in a new era of advanced analytical methodologies [9]. This technique stands as a testament to the tremendous advancements in analytical methodologies. The historical development of LC–MS is marked by groundbreaking innovations, critical turning points and its enduring impact on scientific discovery (Figure 1).
FIGURE 1.

Progress in LC–MS development in the last four decades. APCI, atmospheric pressure chemical ionization; APPI, atmospheric pressure photoionization; ESI, electrospray ionization; LC–MS, liquid chromatography–mass spectrometry.
The integration of LC–MS was first conceptualized in the mid‐20th century, as the analytical chemistry community sought to develop a versatile tool for complex sample analysis [10]. Early breakthroughs in both fields laid the foundation for the development of LC–MS, merging the separation capabilities of LC with the structural elucidation power of MS. This integration led to a revolutionary shift in analytical chemistry, providing researchers with an unparalleled ability to study intricate mixtures, including pharmaceuticals, proteins and biological matrices [10]. One of the most significant milestones in the development of LC–MS occurred in the 1970s, when the first commercial LC–MS system was introduced. This marked the beginning of a new era for analytical techniques, allowing scientists to combine the advantages of both LC and MS for real‐time, accurate, and high‐resolution analysis [11]. This early version of the LC–MS system utilized quadrupole mass spectrometers, which provided good sensitivity and resolution for basic applications. Throughout the 1980s and 1990s, the technology continued to evolve with the introduction of new ionization techniques that expanded LC–MS's capabilities. Among the most important were electrospray ionization (ESI) and atmospheric pressure chemical ionization (APCI), both of which significantly enhanced sensitivity and widened the range of analytes that could be detected [6]. These techniques enabled the analysis of large, polar biomolecules such as proteins, peptides and nucleic acids, marking a turning point for biomolecular research. To further improve sensitivity and metabolite quantification, advanced applications such as twin derivatization–based LC–MS (TD–LC–MS) and chemical isotope labelling (CIL)‐based LC–tandem mass spectrometry (MS/MS) were introduced [2]. The addition of MS/MS also enabled deeper structural analysis of molecules, facilitating the study of metabolites, proteins and pharmaceuticals with greater precision. The contributions of LC–MS to the fields of analytical chemistry and life sciences are immeasurable. It has revolutionized the way complex biological, environmental, and pharmaceutical samples are analysed, providing researchers with the ability to perform high‐throughput analyses with precision [12]. Today, LC–MS is indispensable in numerous disciplines, including pharmaceuticals, environmental sciences, and food safety [2, 13, 14]. Its ability to detect a wide range of analytes at low concentrations has made it a critical tool for everything from drug development to biomarker discovery and toxicological analysis.
3. Advancements in LC–MS Instrumentation
The continuous improvement of instrumentation is the key to LC–MS's success [15]. The advancement of LC and MS components has been instrumental in the evolution of LC–MS technology [15]. LC systems have evolved from basic manual pumps and columns to sophisticated automated systems that provide precise control over chromatographic separations [6]. Miniaturization of LC components has led to higher throughput and reduced sample requirements, making LC–MS more efficient and practical [6]. The development of ionization sources has also had a profound impact on LC–MS performance (Figure 2) [6]. Techniques such as ESI, APCI and atmospheric pressure photoionization (APPI) have facilitated the analysis of pharmaceutical compounds, including nonvolatile and polar or less polar molecules with lower molecular weights [6, 16]. Mass analysers have also undergone significant improvements. Commonly used analysers in pharmaceutical analysis include ion traps (ITs), quadrupoles (Q), Orbitrap and time‐of‐flight (TOF) instruments, as well as hybrid systems offering high resolution, enhanced sensitivity and superior mass accuracy across a wide dynamic range [17]. Among these, triple quadrupole (QQQ), quadrupole TOF (Q‐TOF), ion trap‐Orbitrap (IT‐Orbitrap) and quadrupole‐Orbitrap (Q‐Orbitrap) remain particularly popular [6]. LC–MS systems can operate in full‐scan mode for untargeted analysis or in targeted acquisition modes such as single‐ion monitoring (SIM) and extracted ion chromatogram (EIC) for precise compound detection. MS/MS, which enables sequential mass analysis to investigate compound fragmentation behaviour, has further enhanced LC–MS capabilities in pharmaceutical applications [18, 19].
FIGURE 2.

Advancement in LC–MS ionization sources and MS‐analysers. LC–MS, liquid chromatography–mass spectrometry.
A significant revolution in LC–MS technology has been the dramatic increase in sensitivity and resolution [20]. Improved ion optics, mass analysers, and detectors have enabled LC–MS systems to detect analytes at picogram and femtogram levels, facilitating trace molecule identification in complex matrices. This increased sensitivity has significantly benefited various applications, including drug metabolite analysis and environmental contaminant detection [21].
4. Impact of LC–MS on Life Sciences
LC–MS has revolutionized life sciences by providing highly sensitive, selective and high‐throughput analytical capabilities. It has become an indispensable tool in diverse biological research fields, enabling a deeper understanding of biochemical pathways, disease mechanisms and biomolecular interactions [22]. One of its most significant contributions is in omics‐based sciences, where it has enhanced the ability to study proteins, metabolites, and nucleic acids with clear details. Proteomics, metabolomics and genomics have particularly benefited from LC–MS advancements, allowing for the precise quantification of biomolecules, structural characterization and the identification of novel biomarkers for disease diagnosis and prognosis [23].
In drug discovery and development, LC–MS has drastically improved the efficiency and accuracy of pharmaceutical research. It facilitates the identification of lead compounds, assessment of pharmacokinetics (PKs), metabolic profiling, and drug metabolism and pharmacokinetics (DMPK) studies [24]. By enabling rapid and comprehensive screening of drug candidates, LC–MS has accelerated the development of personalized medicine, paving the way for patient‐specific therapeutic strategies based on metabolic and proteomic profiling [25]. Moreover, advancements in ultra‐high‐performance liquid chromatography–mass spectrometry (UHPLC–MS) have further expanded the capabilities of pharmaceutical and biomedical research. UHPLC–MS offers significantly reduced analysis times (2–5 min per sample), allowing for high‐throughput screening, combinatorial synthesis monitoring and real‐time metabolic studies. This makes it particularly attractive for applications in continuous drug development pipelines, pharmacovigilance and toxicology studies, where large datasets need to be processed efficiently without compromising accuracy [6]. The ability of LC–MS to operate in 24/7 routine workflows enhances the reliability of research outcomes while ensuring faster drug development cycles. Beyond pharmaceuticals, LC–MS is increasingly applied in clinical diagnostics, environmental monitoring, food safety and forensic science. It plays a key role in detecting biomarkers of disease, identifying contaminants in food and water and analysing forensic evidence with high specificity. With continuous advancements in high‐resolution mass spectrometry (HRMS), ion mobility spectrometry (IMS) and machine learning (ML)‐based data analysis, LC–MS is expected to further transform life sciences by providing deeper insights into complex biological and chemical systems [26].
5. Applications for LC–MS in Forensics
Contemporary criminal investigations and legal proceedings heavily rely on forensic science [27]. Its significance lies in its capacity to provide impartial, factual evidence for determining guilt or innocence and illuminating the facts surrounding a crime. Due to its precision, sensitivity and adaptability, LC–MS has emerged as a transformative technique in forensic investigation (Figure 3). There is a wide range of applications for LC–MS in forensics [28]. This section provides a general overview of the critical role played by LC–MS in forensic investigation, including identifying biomarkers and detecting hazardous compounds and illegal drugs. It is an essential tool for forensic scientists who try to defend the law and make sense of challenging criminal situations because of its accuracy, sensitivity and adaptability.
FIGURE 3.

Application of LC–MS in applied and biological fields. LC–MS, liquid chromatography–mass spectrometry.
It is impossible to stress how crucial forensic analysis is to criminal investigations as it provides a solid scientific framework for evaluating evidence [29]. The LC–MS has shown to be an excellent resource in this situation. Its capacity to accurately separate and identify chemicals is crucial in helping to solve crimes and bring offenders to justice [30]. Recently, LC–MS, LC–MS/MS is increasingly used in the determinations of drug concentrations in biological samples obtained from PK or toxicological studies owing to its versatility for high‐throughput. In clinical and forensic toxicology studies, the analytes which have to be determined are unknown. Therefore, the first step, before quantification, is to screen for and identify any compounds of interest [31]. High‐throughput procedures in analytical toxicology mean that numerous relevant intoxicants can be screened for simultaneously using one single procedure. LC–MS and LC–MS/MS are becoming increasingly routine pieces of apparatus, especially for blood and plasma/serum analysis [31].
Regarding locating drugs, LC–MS is superior to more traditional detection techniques. Due to its incredible sensitivity, it can identify minuscule levels of compounds, which help locate narcotics, poisons or other illegal substances at crime scenes. The use of LC–MS in forensic investigations goes beyond the simple identification of substances; it also helps determine the substances’ source, purity and concentration.
5.1. Applications for LC–MS on Drug Abuse
Drug analysis is one of the primary uses for LC–MS in forensics [32]. Fundamental components of forensic toxicology include the identification and measurement of illegal substances [30]. In this area, LC–MS has unmatched capabilities. It can recognize many medicines, including those with identical molecular properties or those found in intricate matrices. Frequently, LC–MS/MS plays a vital role in PKs and pharmacodynamics (PD) studies [33]. In toxicology, LC–MS or MS/MS is so frequently used because first it can be used for non‐volatile and heat‐labile compounds, unlike gas chromatography–mass spectrometry (GC–MS). Another very important and advantageous factor in the use of LC–MS/MS compared to GC–MS is that it is possible to avoid processes of derivatization of the analytes in order to make them volatile and/or analysable by GC [33]. LC–MS/MS, in addition to its common role for analysing lawful drugs and illicit drugs, can also detect metabolites that come from phase I or II metabolisms. This characteristic differs from other instruments and represents the main advantage related to the use of LC–MS/MS in PK and PD studies or for pharmacotoxicological purposes [33]. Merone et al. used LC–MS/MS to develop a rapid screening method to assess more than 739 licit and illicit substances [34]. Drug testing and forensic toxicology both greatly benefit from LC–MS [30]. Whether evaluating compounds found at crime scenes or detecting narcotics in biological samples like blood, urine or hair, LC–MS excels at producing exact findings. As a result, forensic experts may reliably confirm the presence of certain drugs and their amounts, assisting in identifying the role of substances in criminal actions. Its capacity to distinguish between identical compounds ensures this (Figure 1). LC–MS/MS method was developed for the direct analysis of 17 drugs in oral fluids including cocaine, benzoylecgonine (BEG), cocaethylene, Δ‐9‐tetrahydrocannabinol (Δ‐9‐THC), buprenorphine, 6‐acetylmorphine (6AM), morphine, codeine, methadone, 2‐ethylidene‐1,5‐dimethyl‐3,3‐diphenylpyrrolidine (EDDP), amphetamine, methamphetamine, 3,4‐methylenedioxymethamphetamine (MDMA), methylenedioxyamphetamine (MDA), 3,4‐methylenedioxy‐N‐ethylamphetamine (MDE), ketamine and N‐methyl‐1‐(1,3‐benzodioxol‐5‐yl)‐2‐butanamine (MBDB) [35]. LC–MS method was validated to quantify 30 synthetic cathinones appearing in the illicit market in postmortem blood, including N‐ethylpentylone and eutylone [36]. Moreover, a UPLC–MS/MS method was developed for the detection and quantification of 84 drugs and pharmaceuticals, including antipsychotics and antidepressants, some of the most important groups of drugs of abuse: opiates, cocaine, cannabinoids, amphetamines, benzodiazepines and new psychoactive substances in postmortem blood [37]. Additionally, in another study that compared LC–MS–MS and enzyme‐linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) in the detection of illicit drugs with toxicological impact in urine samples, the results revealed that LC–MS is a sensitive and cost‐effective alternative tool to ELISA screening methods for urine specimens [38]. Examples of applications of LC–MS analysis in drug abuse detection in biological samples were listed in Table 1.
TABLE 1.
Applications of liquid chromatography–mass spectrometry (LC–MS) analysis in drug abuse and fluid analysis.
| Sample type | Drug | LC–MS interface/MS analyser | Refs. |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dried blood spot | Carbamazepine, lamotrigine, valproic acid | ESI+/Triple quad MS | [46] |
| Dried blood spot | Fluoxetine, norfluoxetine | ESI+/Triple quad MS | [47] |
| Plasma | Buprenorphine, norbuprenorphine, naloxone | ESI+/5500 Triple quad MS | [48] |
| Human plasma, human urine | 12 metabolites | ESI+/5500 Triple quad MS | [49] |
| Postmortem human blood | 30 cathinones | Jet stream electrospray ionization+/Triple quad MS | [36] |
| Postmortem blood | 84 drugs of abuse and pharmaceuticals | ESI+/−/TQD | [37] |
| Human urine | 88 drugs and illicit drugs | ESI+/Triple quad MS | [38] |
| Postmortem human blood, postmortem muscle tissue | 29 drugs and metabolites | ESI+/Triple quad, tandem MS | [45] |
| Oral fluid | 17 drugs of abuse | ESI+/Triple quad MS | [35] |
Recently, the use of LC–MS in doping control has become an essential tool in modern sports analytics. LC–MS is now used as a powerful tool for the detection of performance‐enhancing drug, their metabolites and masking agents in biological matrices such as urine, blood and hair [39]. Recent advancements in HRMS and LC–MS/MS have significantly improved doping detection capabilities by lowering detection limits and enabling metabolite profiling [40]. LC–MS offers high sensitivity, selectivity and the ability to analyse a wide range of prohibited substances [41], including anabolic steroids (testosterone and nandrolone), stimulants (amphetamines and ephedrine), peptide hormones (erythropoietin and human growth hormone), β2‐agonists (clenbuterol and salbutamol) and diuretics or masking agents (furosemide and probenecid) [42].
5.2. Applications for LC–MS on Blood, Oral and Urine Sample Analysis
LC–MS is crucial for evaluating blood and urine samples in forensic and therapeutic contexts and its usefulness in drug detection [43]. Biomarker studies are necessary for comprehending physiological states, diagnosing illnesses and determining exposure to toxins or illicit substances [44]. Forensic pathologists and toxicologists depend on LC–MS's capacity to recognize metabolites and poisons in body fluids [43]. It enables the identification of specific molecules connected to drug use, toxicity or illness. Drug or toxin metabolites are crucial indicators in forensic investigations because they can persist in the body long after metabolizing the parent chemicals. Additionally, poisons that cannot be detected by conventional testing methods can be analysed using LC–MS. Hansen et al. have developed and validated a UPLC–MS/MS method for the quantification of 29 drugs and metabolites with toxicological effects in postmortem blood and muscle tissue [45]. A fast LC–MS/MS method was developed for the quantification of carbamazepine, lamotrigine and valproic acid based on dried blood spot sampling and revealed linearity in therapeutically relevant concentration ranges and compatible with unknown volume sampling and expected hematocrit range of the patient group [46]. Moreover, LC–MS analysis method was developed and validated by da Silva et al. to a simultaneous determination of the antidepressant's fluoxetine and norfluoxetine in dried blood spots revealing linearity range 10–750 ng mL−1 and accuracy in the range of 97.98%–110.44% and 100.25%–105.8% [47]. Liu et al. developed and validated a simple, sensitive and rapid LC–ESI–MS/MS method for a simultaneous quantification of naloxone, buprenorphine and its metabolite norbuprenorphine in human plasma [48]. Moreover, blood and urine samples were used for a simultaneous detection and quantification of 12 metabolites (sulfocysteine, guanidinoacetate, creatine, pipecolic acid, Δ1‐piperideine‐6‐carboxylate [P6C], proline, Δ1‐pyrroline‐5‐carboxylate [P5C], and the B6‐vitamers) using LC–MS/MS method for the differential diagnosis of inherited metabolic epilepsies [49].
6. Applications for LC–MS in Environmental Sciences
This subsection explores the crucial function of LC–MS in environmental risk assessment. Persistent organic pollutants (POPs) concentrations in environmental samples are precisely measured by LC–MS, which helps in assessing the potential risk that these pollutants pose to ecosystems and human populations (Table 2). These analyses are critical in influencing policy choices, directing pollution prevention efforts and encouraging environment‐friendly activities. Environmental evaluation and monitoring are crucial components of ethical resource management. LC–MS has gained increased recognition in this field due to its ability to provide accurate and reliable analytical data across several environmental matrices [50]. Scientists and environmentalists may detect and quantify a range of substances using LC–MS to understand environmental changes and their effects better. LC–MS is crucial in guaranteeing the security and quality of essential resources [51]. The health of both people and the environment is significantly impacted by the quality of soil and water, which are crucial elements of the Earth's ecosystems. It can detect contaminants and pollutants, from organic molecules to heavy metals, even at low levels. LC–MS's sensitivity and specificity are essential for precisely identifying and measuring these compounds [52]. Additionally, by thoroughly assessing pollutants in water and soil samples, LC–MS supports environmental impact assessments [53]. Making educated judgments on land use, pollution mitigation, and cleanup techniques requires this knowledge. By providing knowledge on the causes and degree of contamination, LC–MS aids in the creation of practical solutions to restore and safeguard our natural habitats. Chemicals known as POPs pose severe threats to ecosystems and public health because they are resistant to degradation and continue to exist in the environment. Pesticides, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) and dioxins are among the POPs that may be easily identified and measured using LC–MS [54]. LC–MS/MS method was developed and validated for the determination of 21 antibacterial substances in natural and organic liquid fertilizers by the analysis of 62 samples of natural and organic liquid fertilizers, showing that over 24% of the tested samples were contaminated with antibiotics, mainly from the group of tetracyclines and fluoroquinolones [55]. LC–MS/MS technique was used as a simple and sensitive analytical method for the simultaneous determination of 311 active substances of pesticides in agricultural soils using and GC–MS techniques [56]. UHPLC–MS/MS analytical method was developed for the identification of 52 pharmaceutical products and to monitor their presence in drinking water [57]. LC–MS/MS was used for the determination of fungicide residues in soil and detection of its environmental risk assessment [58]. LC–MS has transformed environmental sciences by enabling pollutant detection, analysis and management in environmental matrices. In order to safeguard the ecosystems on our planet and ensure a sustainable future, its applications in the study of soil and water, as well as in the identification and quantification of POPs, have become essential.
TABLE 2.
Applications for liquid chromatography–mass spectrometry (LC–MS) in environmental sciences and food safety.
| Application | Substance | Matrix | Methodology | Results | Refs. |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Environmental monitoring | POPs | Water, soil, air | LC–MS, LC–MS/MS | Detection of low concentrations of POPs such as pesticides, PCBs, and dioxins | [50, 54] |
| Antibacterial residues in fertilizers | Antibiotics (tetracyclines, fluoroquinolones) | Organic and natural liquid fertilizers | LC–MS/MS | Over 24% of samples contaminated with antibiotics | [55] |
| Pesticide residues in agricultural soil | Pesticides | Agricultural soils | LC–MS/MS, GC–MS | Simultaneous determination of 311 pesticide residues | [56] |
| Pharmaceutical contamination in water | Pharmaceutical products (e.g. painkillers) | Drinking water | UHPLC–MS/MS | Detection of 52 pharmaceutical products in drinking water | [57] |
| Fungicide residues in soil | Fungicides | Soil | LC–MS/MS | Determination of fungicide residues and assessment of environmental risks | [58] |
| Food safety | Caffeine | Beverages (Iced tea, coffee, energy drinks) | LC–MS/MS | Detection limits: 0.04 mg L−1 for caffeine in various beverages | [62] |
| Herbicide residue in beverages | Diquat | Water and beverages (e.g. iced tea, soft drinks) | LC–MS/MS | Recovery: 85.9%–115%, RSD: 3%–8% | [63] |
| Food additives | Plasticizers (e.g. phthalates, sebacates) | Food products | LC–MS/MS | Detection of 60 additives with low limits of quantification in the µg kg−1 range | [64] |
| Polyethylene terephthalate (PET) film characterization | Virgin vs. recycled PET films | Food packaging materials | LC–MS | Differentiation of virgin and recycled PET materials | [65] |
| Veterinary drug residues | Antibiotics, anti‐inflammatory agents, tetracyclines | Milk, meat, eggs, baby foods, infant formula, etc. | LC–MS/MS | Detection of 152 veterinary drug residues with ≥94% probability of detection | [67] |
| Porcine gelatin markers | Porcine gelatin | Confectionery products | LC–MS/MS | Detection limit: 0.09% to |
Abbreviations: PCBs, polychlorinated biphenyls; POPs, Persistent organic pollutants; RSD, relative standard deviation; UHPLC–MS, ultra‐high‐performance liquid chromatography–mass spectrometry.
7. Applications of LC–MS in Analysis of Food Additives and Beverages
LC–MS contributes to regulatory compliance, consumer protection and overall food and beverage industry improvement through these applications (Table 2). Ensuring the safety and quality of food and beverages is paramount for both consumers and regulatory agencies [2]. LC–MS has emerged as a powerful analytical tool for detecting, identifying, and quantifying food additives, preservatives, sweeteners and veterinary drug residues in various food matrices [59]. Through these applications, LC–MS contributes significantly to regulatory enforcement, consumer protection and overall advancements in the food and beverage industry. One of the critical applications of LC–MS in the food sector is the analysis of food additives and preservatives. LC–MS provides high sensitivity and specificity in detecting synthetic additives, antioxidants and stabilizers, ensuring compliance with regulatory limits [60]. LC–MS enables precisely identifying and quantifying these substances, ensuring that their usage in food products complies with regulatory limits [61]. Additionally, LC–MS plays a pivotal role in detecting food fraud and adulteration, safeguarding consumer trust and product integrity [61]. LC–MS/MS method was developed to assess the caffeine levels in soft beverages (iced tea, ice coffee and energy drinks) available in Istanbul, Turkey with a limit of quantification and a limit of detection values for caffeine analysis that was 0.13 and 0.04 mg L−1, respectively [62]. A new simple, fast and sensitive LC–MS/MS method was developed for the determination of diquat in water and beverages with an average recovery ranging from 85.9% to115% and associated relative standard deviation (RSD %) within the range 3–8 [63]. LC–MS/MS technique was used for the determination of 60 food additives mainly plasticizer, including 28 phthalates and 32 further compounds such as sebacates, adipates, citrates and fatty acid amides, revealing good reproducibility and high precision with limits of quantification in the low µg kg−1 food range [64]. Recently, LC–MS analysis was used for the chemical characterization of virgin and recycled polyethylene terephthalate films in food and beverages [65]. The use of veterinary medications in animal husbandry brings up concerning drug residues in foods obtained from animals [66]. In order to make sure that animal products entering the food supply chain are safe for human consumption, LC–MS provides a dependable method for monitoring and measuring these residues [66]. The food business can prove compliance with regulatory requirements and, more crucially, reassure customers of the safety of the food items that they buy by using LC–MS methodologies. LC–MS is critical to upholding food and beverages’ quality, safety and integrity. LC–MS/MS method was optimized to screen 152 veterinary drug residues, including 105 antibiotic residues, anti‐inflammatory and antiparasitic agents, 23 beta‐lactams, 14 aminoglycosides and 10 tetracyclines in a wide variety of food commodities, including milk‐based ingredients and related products (e.g., milk fractions, infant formula, infant cereals and baby foods), meat‐ and fish‐based ingredients and related products (fresh, powdered, cooked, infant cereals and baby foods), and other ingredients based on eggs, animal fat and animal byproducts with probability of detection at the STC ≥94% [67]. Moreover, LC–MS/MS was used for the identification of porcine gelatin markers in confectionery products with detection limit ranging from 0.09% to 0.89% [68].
8. Applications for LC–MS in Biopharmaceuticals
Monoclonal antibodies are pivotal in treating infectious diseases, autoimmune ailments and cancer [69]. LC–MS presents a sophisticated analytical arsenal for this domain. Leveraging the LC–MS framework alongside MS empowers the comprehensive assessment of antibody medications [70]. It facilitates the detection of post‐translational modifications, such as glycosylation and phosphorylation, which can significantly impact drug efficacy and safety [70]. In biological pharmaceuticals, ensuring that the purity and integrity of antibody drugs is paramount, and LC–MS plays a pivotal role [71]. It furnishes quantitative and qualitative insights into the constituents of antibody drugs, thereby facilitating compliance with regulatory mandates and the dependable production of top‐tier therapeutics [72]. Glycoproteins, a specialized category of biopharmaceuticals, present distinctive analytical complexities due to their diverse glycan structures [73, 74]. LC–MS emerges as the go‐to choose for glycoprotein scrutiny, enabling the precise identification and quantification of glycan components—an imperative aspect for comprehending these biologics’ therapeutic potential and immunogenicity [75]. Additionally, LC–MS‐guided glycan profiling contributes to the development of safer and more efficacious biotherapeutics [76]. UHPLC–MS/MS method was developed for a fast determination of immunogenic synthetic peptide in a conjugate with bovine serum albumin as a carrier protein formulated with a vaccine adjuvant [77]. Native LC–MS has been reported for a rapid assessment of molecular mass and deep characterization of the heterogeneity of complex, recombinantly produced therapeutic proteins [78]. Recent advances in LC–MS‐based characterization of protein‐based biotherapeutics mastering were reviewed by Graf et al. [79]. By scrutinizing glycan profiles across various production batches or conditions, researchers can fine‐tune glycosylation patterns in biopharmaceuticals, ensuring consistent product quality and mitigating the risk of adverse reactions [76]. LC–MS has transformed biopharmaceuticals, offering exacting and adaptable tools for analysing antibody drugs, glycoproteins and other protein‐based therapeutics. Its role in quality assurance, structural elucidation and optimization of biological drugs is pivotal in advancing innovative and efficacious treatments (Figure 3).
9. Applications of LC–MS in Pharmaceuticals
The pharmaceutical sector significantly relies on LC–MS for drug discovery, analysis and quality control to assure the safety and effectiveness of medicines. This section examines the crucial function of LC–MS in this field, including pharmaceutical quality assurance and regulatory compliance. As lipids play vital roles in biological systems, lipidomics, a fast‐developing field, is essential in drug discovery [80]. As a result of the complete lipid profile made possible by LC–MS, lipid‐related disorders and therapeutic development are better understood [81]. This section explores LC–MS's uses in lipidomics while stressing its value for pharmaceutical research. The measurement of phospholipids is crucial for pharmaceutical research as they are critical parts of cell membranes [82]. LC–MS offers sensitive and precise techniques for measuring phospholipids to formulate lipid‐based drugs and comprehend how phospholipids affect drug delivery [82].
Enantiomers of chiral medications frequently occur and have various pharmacological properties [83]. Enantiomers are separated and quantified using LC–MS, facilitating the creation of safer and more potent medications. The function of chiral drug analysis and the significance of LC–MS in drug development are covered in this section. The creation of effective chiral LC–MS techniques is a difficult challenge [51]. Chiral LC–MS is important to the study and development of pharmaceuticals. An enantioselective method was developed for quantifying amphetamine‐type chiral illicit drugs (CIDs) in wastewater and surface water using solid‐phase extraction and quantified via LC–MS/MS [84]. A chiral LC–MS/MS method was developed and validated for the separation and quantification of four synthetic cathinones in human whole blood as differentiation of their (R)‐ and (S)‐enantiomers is relevant in clinical and forensic toxicology [85].
Pharmaceutical development is crucially dependent on PKs and bioavailability. To study drug absorption, distribution, metabolism and excretion (ADME), LC–MS analyses the concentration of drugs and metabolites in biological matrices [86]. This section emphasizes the use of LC–MS in bioavailability and PK research. LC–MS is essential for determining drug levels in patient samples in both preclinical and clinical trials [87]. By enabling drug efficacy and safety evaluation, it aids in the decision‐making process for medication development. This subsection examines the many applications of LC–MS in the clinical phases of pharmaceutical research. The assessment of PKs and bioavailability of D4‐cystine was employed by LC–MS/MS to generate calibration curves for the determination of levels of D4‐cystine and endogenous cystine in mice [88]. LC–MS/MS method was developed and validated for the quantification of 5‐Amino‐1‐methyl quinolinium in rat plasma and urine samples to test its PK and oral bioavailability [89].
10. Innovations in LC–MS
Recent developments in LC–MS technology have significantly expanded its application potential, opening new avenues in various scientific domains. This section explores the latest innovations and emerging trends in LC–MS, highlighting its transformative potential and future prospects. LC–MS has evolved considerably in response to the ever‐changing landscape of analytical instrumentation, with recent advancements elevating its performance and broadening its range of applications. Recent developments have elevated LC–MS to new levels and improved its adaptability and capabilities. Recently, several hyphenated techniques were developed by combining IMS and nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy which are complementary analytical methods integrated with LC–MS [7]. This contact improves analytical skills and widens the range of possible applications. HRMS equipment has changed LC–MS by improving mass accuracy and sensitivity [90]. HRMS enabled the identification of substances with higher certainty and to detect and quantify them at lower quantities [91]. Although TOF mass analysers have a lower mass resolution than Fourier transform (FT) mass analysers (FTICR), they virtually have no upper m/z limit and are thus particularly useful to identify singly charged ions of high molecular weight. Their fast response/scan rate is also advantageous for applications requiring short acquisition times, for example in UPLC‐ and LC–HRMS analysis. Orbitrap and TOF instruments typically produce a mass accuracy of 2–5 ppm, which is sufficient to assign molecular formulae to candidate molecules [33]. However, the mass accuracy of TOF analysers can vary depending on the specific variant used. For example, reflectron TOF generally offers higher mass accuracy due to its extended ion flight path and improved energy focusing, whereas linear TOF tends to have lower mass accuracy. Q‐TOF instruments, which combine quadrupole and TOF capabilities, provide enhanced resolution and accuracy compared to standard TOF configurations. However, it becomes more difficult to identify a compound as the m/z of the ion increases, as more possible elemental compositions will fall within a certain mass error, making the elemental composition assignment more difficult. Although HRMS was originally used in drug metabolism and metabolite identification studies due to its superior qualitative performance, it is nowadays increasingly used to perform reliable and sensitive quantitative analyses [92]. The sensitivity of HRMS is currently often comparable or superior to that of traditional QQQ instruments, due to the possibility to construct EICs with narrow mass extraction windows. This was, for example, demonstrated for the analysis of protease inhibitors, tyrosine kinase inhibitors, steroids and metanephrines in plasma samples comparing a new Orbitrap with a recent QQQ [93]. LC–MS systems have become more compact and portable, making them accessible for on‐site analysis and fieldwork. It is particularly beneficial in applications such as environmental monitoring and food safety [2]. Automation and advanced data processing techniques have optimized workflows for the LC–MS. Rapid data interpretation and predictive analysis are made possible by artificial intelligence (AI) and ML [2]. The interpretation of LC–MS‐driven data is a significant issue, particularly given the variety of metabolite classes identified by LC–MS, specially in the plant kingdom, in contrast to the automated GC–MS analytical workflow, which has been refined for decades [2]. When utilized appropriately, a number of computational methods that have been developed to improve the annotation of the observed metabolites with varying degrees of certainty could be of great use [2].
Recently, IMS and data‐independent acquisition approaches have been used to support LC–MS advancement by enhancing the separation capacity and reproducibility of complex biological analyses. The utility of high‐resolution IMS in untargeted metabolomics was demonstrated to enhance confidence in metabolite annotation and isomer differentiation [94]. Among data‐independent acquisition approaches, sequential window acquisition of all theoretical mass spectra (SWATH‐MS) provide a systematic and unbiased acquisition of all detectable precursor ions, enabling comprehensive and reproducible quantitation of analytes in complex matrices [95]. The work done by Gillet et al. demonstrated a SWATH‐MS as a powerful tool to improve biomarker discovery and enhance large‐scale clinical proteomics [95]. The dual application of IMS with data‐independent acquisition can offer deeper insights into complex biological systems with greater analytical confidence in LC–MS workflows.
Moreover, the application of AI and ML is rapidly applied to LC–MS data analysis for complex datasets processing and interpretation. ML can reduce dimensionality, improve biomarker discovery and support robust statistical modelling in metabolomics studies [96, 97, 98]. Moreover, deep learning is emerged to improve feature detection accuracy in untargeted metabolomics workflows [99]. As LC–MS datasets continue to grow in complexity and scale, AI‐driven approaches offer promising solutions for data integration, automation and improved analytical throughput.
11. Summary and Outlook
The significance of LC–MS in biology and life sciences cannot be overstated. With its unparalleled precision, sensitivity and versatility, this technology has revolutionized both academic research and professional applications. In the years ahead, LC–MS is poised to further transform these fields, playing a crucial role in addressing emerging challenges such as pharmaceutical innovation and environmental sustainability. As LC–MS technology continues to advance, it will unlock new frontiers for scientific discovery and commercial applications, empowering researchers to push the boundaries of human knowledge. Its exceptional reliability, exquisite sensitivity and remarkable adaptability have cemented its status as an indispensable analytical tool across diverse domains. With each breakthrough, LC–MS reaffirms its pivotal role in driving innovation. As technology matures and novel applications emerge, it will remain at the forefront of scientific inquiry, fostering groundbreaking discoveries that benefit society. The biological sciences have already witnessed the profound impact of LC–MS, and its potential for the future is boundless.
Conflicts of Interest
The author declares no conflicts of interest.
Acknowledgements
The author has nothing to report.
Funding: The author received no specific funding for this work.
Data Availability Statement
The author has nothing to report.
References
- 1. Lu X., Zhao X., Bai C., Zhao C., Lu G., and Xu G., “LC–MS‐Based Metabonomics Analysis,” Journal of Chromatography B 866 (2008): 64–76. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2. Farag M. A., Baky M. H., von Bergen M., and Hegazi N. M., “The Use of Omics in Monitoring Food Gut Microbiota Interaction Outcomes: A Review of Novel Trends and Technologies,” Current Opinion in Food Science 52 (2023): 101064. [Google Scholar]
- 3. Serag A., Baky M. H., Döll S., and Farag M. A., “UHPLC‐MS Metabolome Based Classification of Umbelliferous Fruit Taxa: A Prospect for Phyto‐Equivalency of Its Different Accessions and in Response to Roasting,” RSC Advances 10 (2020): 76–85. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4. Díaz‐Cruz M. S. and Barceló D., “Recent Advances in LC‐MS Residue Analysis of Veterinary Medicines in the Terrestrial Environment,” Trends in Analytical Chemistry 26 (2007): 637–646. [Google Scholar]
- 5. Polettini A., Applications of LC‐MS in Toxicology (Pharmaceutical Press, 2006). [Google Scholar]
- 6. Beccaria M. and Cabooter D., “Current Developments in LC‐MS for Pharmaceutical Analysis,” Analyst 145 (2020): 1129–1157. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7. Letertre M. P., Dervilly G., and Giraudeau P., “Combined Nuclear Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy and Mass Spectrometry Approaches for Metabolomics,” Analytical Chemistry 93 (2020): 500–518. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8. Smith B. J. and Martins‐de‐Souza D., “Biological Applications for LC‐MS‐Based Proteomics,” in Separation Techniques Applied to Omics Sciences: From Principles to Relevant Applications (Springer, 2021), 17–29. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9. Pullen F., “The Fascinating History of the Development of LC-MS; A Personal Perspective,” Chromatography Today 3, 2010. 4–6. [Google Scholar]
- 10. de Koster C. G. and Schoenmakers P. J., “History of Liquid Chromatography—Mass Spectrometry couplings,” in Hyphenations of Capillary Chromatography With Mass Spectrometry (Elsevier, 2020), 279–295. [Google Scholar]
- 11. Schierbeek H., van den Akker C. H., Fay L. B., and van Goudoever J. B., “High‐Precision Mass Spectrometric Analysis Using Stable Isotopes in Studies of Children,” Mass Spectrometry Reviews 31 (2012): 312–330. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12. Jemal M. and Xia Y.‐Q., “LC‐MS Development Strategies for Quantitative Bioanalysis,” Current Drug Metabolism 7 (2006): 491–502. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13. Lim C.‐K. and Lord G., “Current Developments in LC‐MS for Pharmaceutical Analysis,” Biological Pharmaceutical Bulletin 25 (2002): 547–557. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 14. Barceló D. and Petrovic M., “Challenges and Achievements of LC‐MS in Environmental Analysis: 25 Years On,” Trends in Analytical Chemistry 26 (2007): 2–11. [Google Scholar]
- 15. Bylda C., Thiele R., Kobold U., and Volmer D. A., “Recent Advances in Sample Preparation Techniques to Overcome Difficulties Encountered During Quantitative Analysis of Small Molecules From Biofluids Using LC‐MS/MS,” Analyst 139 (2014): 2265–2276. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 16. Gadepalli S. G., Deme P., Kuncha M., and Sistla R., “Simultaneous Determination of Amlodipine, Valsartan and Hydrochlorothiazide by LC–ESI‐MS/MS and Its Application to Pharmacokinetics in Rats,” Journal of Pharmaceutical Analysis 4 (2014): 399–406. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 17. Lin L., Lin H., Zhang M., et al., “Types, Principle, and Characteristics of Tandem High‐Resolution Mass Spectrometry and Its Applications,” RSC Advances 5 (2015): 107623–107636. [Google Scholar]
- 18. Zhang Y. and Zhang R., “Recent Advances in Analytical Methods for the Therapeutic Drug Monitoring of Immunosuppressive Drugs,” Drug Testing Analysis 10 (2018): 81–94. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 19. Taylor P. J., Tai C.‐H., Franklin M. E., and Pillans P. I., “The Current Role of Liquid Chromatography‐Tandem Mass Spectrometry in Therapeutic Drug Monitoring of Immunosuppressant and Antiretroviral Drugs,” Clinical Biochemistry 44 (2011): 14–20. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 20. Ganzera M. and Sturm S., “Recent Advances on HPLC/MS in Medicinal Plant Analysis—An Update Covering 2011–2016,” Journal of Pharmaceutical Biomedical Analysis 147 (2018): 211–233. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 21. Mary Celin S., Sharma B., Bhanot P., Kalsi A., Sahai S., and Tanwar R. K.., “Trends in Environmental Monitoring of High Explosives Present in Soil/Sediment/Groundwater Using LC‐MS/MS,” Mass Spectrometry Reviews 42 (2023) 1727–1771. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 22. Shi W., Yuan X., Cui K., et al., “LC‐MS/MS Based Metabolomics Reveal Candidate Biomarkers and Metabolic Changes in Different Buffalo Species,” Animals 11 (2021) 560. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 23. Gilbert‐López B., Valdés A., Acunha T., García‐Cañas V., Simó C., and Cifuentes A., “Foodomics: LC and LC‐MS‐Based Omics Strategies in Food Science and Nutrition,” in Liquid Chromatography, (Elsevier, 2017), 267–299. [Google Scholar]
- 24. Mustafa G., Arif R., Atta A., Sharif S., and Jamil A., “Bioactive Compounds From Medicinal Plants and Their Importance in Drug Discovery in Pakistan,” Matrix Science Pharma 1 (2017): 17–26. [Google Scholar]
- 25. Saibaba S., Kumar M. S., and Pandiyan P. S., “Mini Review on LC/MS Techniques,” World Journal of Pharmacy Pharmaceutical Science 5 (2016): 2381–2395. [Google Scholar]
- 26. Fayek N. M., Baky M. H., Li Z., Khalifa I., Capanoglu E., and Farag M. A., “Metabolome Classification of Olive by‐Products From Different Oil Presses Providing Insights Into Its Potential Health Benefits and Valorization as Analyzed via Multiplex MS‐Based Techniques Coupled to Chemometrics,” Phytochemical Analysis (2024), 10.1002/pca.3385. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 27. Lin D.‐L., Wang S.‐M., Wu C.‐H., Chen B.‐G., and Liu R. H., “Chemical Derivatization for Forensic Drug Analysis by GC‐and LC‐MS,” Forensic Science Review 28 (2016): 17–35. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 28. Oberacher H. and Arnhard K., “Compound Identification in Forensic Toxicological Analysis With Untargeted LC–MS‐Based Techniques,” Bioanalysis 7 (2015): 2825–2840. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 29. Satish S., Phadke G., and Rawtani D., “Future Aspects of Modern Forensic Tools and Devices,” in Modern Forensic Tools Devices: Trends in Criminal Investigation, (Wiley, 2023), 393–413. [Google Scholar]
- 30. Oberacher H. and Arnhard K. J. B., “Compound Identification in Forensic Toxicological Analysis With Untargeted LC–MS‐Based Techniques,” Bioanalysis 7 (2015) 2825–2840. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 31. Maurer H. H., “Multi‐Analyte Procedures for Screening for and Quantification of Drugs in Blood, Plasma, or Serum by Liquid Chromatography‐Single Stage or Tandem Mass Spectrometry (LC‐MS or LC‐MS/MS) Relevant to Clinical and Forensic Toxicology,” Clinical Biochemistry 38 (2005): 310–318. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 32. Mercolini L. and Protti M., “Biosampling Strategies for Emerging Drugs of Abuse: Towards the Future of Toxicological and Forensic Analysis,” Journal of Pharmaceutical Biomedical Analysis 130 (2016): 202–219. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 33. D'Ovidio C., Locatelli M., Perrucci M., et al., “LC‐MS/MS Application in Pharmacotoxicological Field: Current State and New Applications,” Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) 28 (2023): 2127. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 34. Merone G., Tartaglia A., Rossi S., et al., “Fast LC–MS/MS Screening Method for the Evaluation of Drugs, Illicit Drugs, and Other Compounds in Biological Matrices,” Talanta Open 5 (2022) 100105. [Google Scholar]
- 35. Bassotti E., Merone G. M., D'Urso A., et al., “A New LC‐MS/MS Confirmation Method for the Determination of 17 Drugs of Abuse in Oral Fluid and Its Application to Real Samples,” Forensic Science International 312 (2020): 110330. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 36. Lau T., Concheiro M., and Cooper G., “Determination of 30 Synthetic Cathinones in Postmortem Blood Using LC‐MS‐MS,” Journal of Analytical Toxicology 44 (2020): 679–687. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 37. Orfanidis A., Gika H. G., Theodoridis G., Mastrogianni O., and Raikos N., “A UHPLC‐MS‐MS Method for the Determination of 84 Drugs of Abuse and Pharmaceuticals in Blood,” Journal of Analytical Toxicology 45 (2021): 28–43. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 38. Kahl K. W., Seither J. Z., and Reidy L. J., “LC‐MS‐MS vs ELISA: Validation of a Comprehensive Urine Toxicology Screen by LC‐MS‐MS and a Comparison of 100 Forensic Specimens,” Journal of Analytical Toxicology 43 (2019): 734–745. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 39. Thevis M. and Schanzer W., “Mass Spectrometry in Doping Control Analysis,” Current Organic Chemistry 9 (2005): 825–848. [Google Scholar]
- 40. Thomas A. and Thevis M., “Recent Advances in Mass Spectrometry for the Detection of Doping,” Expert Review of Proteomics 21 (2024): 27–39. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 41. Politi L., Groppi A., and Polettini A., “Applications of Liquid Chromatography—Mass Spectrometry in Doping Control,” Journal of Analytical Toxicology 29 (2005): 1–14. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 42. Hintikka L., Development of Mass Spectrometric Methods for Analysis of Anabolic Androgenic Steroids (Helsinki, Finland: University of Helsinki, 2018). [Google Scholar]
- 43. Fisichella M., Odoardi S., and Strano‐Rossi S., “High‐Throughput Dispersive Liquid/Liquid Microextraction (DLLME) Method for the Rapid Determination of Drugs of Abuse, Benzodiazepines and Other Psychotropic Medications in Blood Samples by Liquid Chromatography–Tandem Mass Spectrometry (LC‐MS/MS) and Application to Forensic Cases,” Microchemical Journal 123 (2015): 33–41. [Google Scholar]
- 44. Castillo‐Peinado L. and de Castro M. L., “Present and Foreseeable Future of Metabolomics in Forensic Analysis,” Analytica Chimica Acta 925 (2016): 1–15. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 45. Hansen S. L., Nielsen M. K. K., Linnet K., and Rasmussen B. S., “Simple Implementation of Muscle Tissue Into Routine Workflow of Blood Analysis in Forensic Cases—A Validated Method for Quantification of 29 Drugs in Postmortem Blood and Muscle Samples by UHPLC‐MS/MS,” Forensic Science International 325 (2021): 110901. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 46. Linder C., Andersson M., Wide K., Beck O., and Pohanka A., “A LC‐MS/MS Method for Therapeutic Drug Monitoring of Carbamazepine, Lamotrigine and Valproic Acid in DBS,” Bioanalysis 7 (2015): 2031–2039. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 47. da Silva A. C. C., Raasch J. R., Vargas T. G., et al., “Simultaneous Determination of Fluoxetine and Norfluoxetine in Dried Blood Spots Using High‐Performance Liquid Chromatography‐Tandem Mass Spectrometry,” Clinical Biochemistry 52 (2018): 85–93. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 48. Liu Y., Li X., Xu A., Nasser A. F., and Heidbreder C., “Simultaneous Determination of Buprenorphine, Norbuprenorphine and Naloxone in Human Plasma by Liquid Chromatography/Tandem Mass Spectrometry,” Journal of Pharmaceutical and Biomedical Analysis 120 (2016): 142–152. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 49. Mathis D., Beese K., Rüegg C., Plecko B., and Hersberger M., “LC‐MS/MS Method for the Differential Diagnosis of Treatable Early Onset Inherited Metabolic Epilepsies,” Journal of Inherited Metabolic Disease 43 (2020): 1102–1111. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 50. Panda D., Dash B. P., Manickam S., and Boczkaj G., “Recent Advancements in LC‐MS Based Analysis of Biotoxins: Present and Future Challenges,” Mass Spectrometry Reviews 41 (2022): 766–803. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 51. Petrie B., Muñoz M. D. C., and Martín J., “Stereoselective LC–MS/MS Methodologies for Environmental Analysis of Chiral Pesticides,” Trends in Analytical Chemistry 110 (2019): 249–258. [Google Scholar]
- 52. Kumar P., Dinesh S., and Rini R., “LCMS—A Review and a Recent Update,” Journal of Pharmacy & Pharmaceutical Sciences [Computer File] 5 (2016): 377–391. [Google Scholar]
- 53. Santos I. C., Hildenbrand Z. L., and Schug K. A., “A Review of Analytical Methods for Characterizing the Potential Environmental Impacts of Unconventional Oil and Gas Development,” Analytical Chemistry 91 (2018): 689–703. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 54. Baroudi F., Al‐Alam J., Chimjarn S., Delhomme O., Fajloun Z., and Millet M., “Conifers as Environmental Biomonitors: A Multi‐Residue Method for the Concomitant Quantification of Pesticides, Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons and Polychlorinated Biphenyls by LC‐MS/MS and GC–MS/MS,” Microchemical Journal 154 (2020): 104593. [Google Scholar]
- 55. Patyra E., Osiński Z., and Kwiatek K., “The Identification and Quantification of 21 Antibacterial Substances by LC‐MS/MS in Natural and Organic Liquid Fertilizer Samples,” Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) 29 (2024): 1644. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 56. Tsiantas P., Bempelou E., Doula M., and Karasali H., “Validation and Simultaneous Monitoring of 311 Pesticide Residues in Loamy Sand Agricultural Soils by LC‐MS/MS and GC‐MS/MS, Combined With QuEChERS‐Based Extraction,” Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) 28 (2023): 4268. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 57. Molnarova L., Halesova T., Vaclavikova M., and Bosakova Z., “Monitoring Pharmaceuticals and Personal Care Products in Drinking Water Samples by the LC‐MS/MS Method to Estimate Their Potential Health Risk,” Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) 28 (2023): 5899. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 58. Polat B. and Tiryaki O., “Determination of Fungicide Residues in Soil Using QuEChERS Coupled With LC‐MS/MS, and Environmental Risk Assessment,” Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 195 (2023): 986. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 59. Baky M. H., Badawy M. T., Bakr A. F., Hegazi N. M., Abdellatif A., and Farag M. A., “Metabolome‐Based Profiling of African Baobab Fruit (Adansonia digitata L.) Using a Multiplex Approach of MS and NMR Techniques in Relation to Its Biological Activity,” RSC Advances 11 (2021): 39680–39695. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 60. Chaleckis R., Meister I., Zhang P., and Wheelock C. E., “Challenges, Progress and Promises of Metabolite Annotation for LC–MS‐Based Metabolomics,” Current Opinion in Biotechnology 55 (2019): 44–50. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 61. Li S., Tian Y., Jiang P., Lin Y., Liu X., and Yang H., “Recent Advances in the Application of Metabolomics for Food Safety Control and Food Quality Analyses,” Critical Reviews in Food Science Nutrition 61 (2021): 1448–1469. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 62. Yüksel B., Öncü T., and Şen N., “Assessing Caffeine Levels in Soft Beverages Available in Istanbul, Turkey: An LC‐MS/MS Application in Food Toxicology,” Toxicologie Analytique Et Clinique 35 (2023): 33–43. [Google Scholar]
- 63. Wageed M., Mahdy H. M., Kalaba M. H., Kelany M. A., and Soliman M., “Development of LC‐MS/MS Analytical Method for the Rapid Determination of Diquat in Water and Beverages,” Food Chemistry 438 (2024): 137869. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 64. Kuklya A., Poelke B., Michna K., et al., “A Multi‐Technique Approach for the Quantification of 60 Plasticizers and Selected Additives Using GC‐ and LC‐MS/MS and Its Application for Beverages in the BfR MEAL Study,” Food Chemistry 446 (2024): 138874. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 65. Bhattarai B., Kusano Y., Cederberg T. L., Jensen L. K., Granby K., and Pedersen G. A., “Chemical Characterization of virgin and Recycled Polyethylene Terephthalate Films Used for Food Contact Applications,” European Food Research Technology 250 (2024): 533–545. [Google Scholar]
- 66. Mainero Rocca L., Gentili A., Perez‐Fernandez V., and Tomai P., “Veterinary Drugs Residues: A Review of the Latest Analytical Research on Sample Preparation and LC‐MS Based Methods,” Food Additives Contaminants: Part A 34 (2017): 766–784. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 67. Desmarchelier A., Bessaire T., Savoy M. C., et al., “Screening of 152 Veterinary Drug Residues in Animal Source Foods by LC‐MS/MS, Multilaboratory Validation Study: Final Action 2020.04,” Journal of AOAC International 107 (2024): 617–631. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 68. Dewi K. R., Kusnandar F., Yuliana N. D., et al., “Application of LC‐MS/MS Coupled With Various Digestion Methods for the Identification of Porcine Gelatin Markers in Confectionery Matrices,” Indonesian Journal of Halal Research 5 (2023): 53–66. [Google Scholar]
- 69. Casan J., Wong J., Northcott M., and Opat S., “Anti‐CD20 Monoclonal Antibodies: Reviewing a Revolution,” Human Vaccines Immunotherapeutics 14 (2018): 2820–2841. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 70. Zhu X., Huo S., Xue C., An B., and Qu J., “Current LC‐MS‐Based Strategies for Characterization and Quantification of Antibody‐Drug Conjugates,” Journal of Pharmaceutical Analysis 10 (2020): 209–220. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 71. Kang L., Weng N., and Jian W., “LC–MS Bioanalysis of Intact Proteins and Peptides,” Biomedical Chromatography 34 (2020): e4633. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 72. Janin‐Bussat M.‐C., Dillenbourg M., Corvaia N., Beck A., and Klinguer‐Hamour C., “Characterization of Antibody Drug Conjugate Positional Isomers at Cysteine Residues by Peptide Mapping LC–MS Analysis,” Journal of Chromatography B 981 (2015): 9–13. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 73. Tang Y., Tang F., Yang Y., et al., “Real‐Time Analysis on Drug‐Antibody Ratio of Antibody‐Drug Conjugates for Synthesis, Process Optimization, and Quality Control,” Scientific Reports 7 (2017): 7763. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 74. Zhang L., Luo S., and Zhang B., “Glycan Analysis of Therapeutic Glycoproteins,” in MAbs, (Taylor & Francis, 2016), 205–215. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 75. Srinivasan K., Roy S., Washburn N., et al., “A Quantitative Microtiter Assay for Sialylated Glycoform Analyses Using Lectin Complexes,” Journal of Biomolecular Screening 20 (2015): 768–778. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 76. Klein J., Carvalho L., and Zaia J., “Application of Network Smoothing to Glycan LC‐MS Profiling,” Bioinformatics 34 (2018): 3511–3518. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 77. Piestansky J., Barath P., Majerova P., et al., “A Simple and Rapid LC‐MS/MS and CE‐MS/MS Analytical Strategy for the Determination of Therapeutic Peptides in Modern Immunotherapeutics and Biopharmaceutics,” Journal of Pharmaceutical and Biomedical Analysis 189 (2020): 113449. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 78. Füssl F., Strasser L., Carillo S., and Bones J., “Native LC‐MS for Capturing Quality Attributes of Biopharmaceuticals on the Intact Protein Level,” Current Opinion in Biotechnology 71 (2021): 32–40. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 79. Graf T., Heinrich K., Grunert I., et al., “Recent Advances in LC‐MS Based Characterization of Protein‐Based Bio‐Therapeutics—Mastering Analytical Challenges Posed by the Increasing Format Complexity,” Journal of Pharmaceutical and Biomedical Analysis 186 (2020): 113251. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 80. Saito K., “Application of Comprehensive Lipidomics to Biomarker Research on Adverse Drug Reactions,” Drug Metabolism Pharmacokinetics 37 (2021): 100377. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 81. Kostidis S., Sánchez‐López E., and Giera M., “Lipidomics Analysis in Drug Discovery and Development,” Current Opinion in Chemical Biology 72 (2023): 102256. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 82. Khoury S., Pouyet C., Lyan B., and Pujos‐Guillot E., “Evaluation of Oxidized Phospholipids Analysis by LC‐MS/MS,” Analytical Bioanalytical Chemistry 410 (2018): 633–647. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 83. Yang Y. D., Yang B. B., and Li L., “A Nonneglectable Stereochemical Factor in Drug Development: Atropisomerism,” Chirality 34 (2022): 1355–1370. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 84. Wang W., Guo C., Chen L., Qiu Z., Yin X., and Xu J., “Simultaneous Enantioselective Analysis of Illicit Drugs in Wastewater and Surface Water by Chiral LC‐MS/MS: A Pilot Study on a Wastewater Treatment Plant and Its Receiving River,” Environmental Pollution (Barking, Essex: 1987) 273 (2021): 116424. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 85. Aldubayyan A. A., Castrignanò E., Elliott S., and Abbate V., “Development and Validation of a Chiral LC‐MS/MS Method for the Separation and Quantification of Four Synthetic Cathinones in human Whole Blood and Its Application in Stability Analysis,” Talanta 253 (2023): 123986. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 86. Mou S., Huang Y., and Rosenbaum A. I., “ADME Considerations and Bioanalytical Strategies for Pharmacokinetic Assessments of Antibody‐Drug Conjugates,” Antibodies 7 (2018): 41. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 87. Chaudhari K., Wang J., Xu Y., et al., “Determination of Metformin Bio‐Distribution by LC‐MS/MS in Mice Treated With a Clinically Relevant Paradigm,” PLoS ONE 15 (2020): e0234571. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 88. Li S., Lu Z., Jiao L., et al., “Quantitative Determination of D(4)‐Cystine in Mice Using LC‐MS/MS and Its Application to the Assessment of Pharmacokinetics and Bioavailability,” Journal of Pharmaceutical Analysis 11 (2021): 580–587. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 89. Awosemo O., Neelakantan H., Watowich S., et al., “Development & Validation of LC‐MS/MS Assay for 5‐Amino‐1‐Methyl Quinolinium in Rat Plasma: Application to Pharmacokinetic and Oral Bioavailability Studies,” Journal of Pharmaceutical and Biomedical Analysis 204 (2021): 114255. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 90. Aydoğan C., “Recent Advances and Applications in LC‐HRMS for Food and Plant Natural Products: A Critical Review,” Analytical Bioanalytical Chemistry 412 (2020): 1973–1991. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 91. Lucci P., Saurina J., and Núñez O., “Trends in LC‐MS and LC‐HRMS Analysis and Characterization of Polyphenols in Food,” Trends in Analytical Chemistry 88 (2017): 1–24. [Google Scholar]
- 92. Kaufmann A., Butcher P., Maden K., Walker S., and Widmer M., “Quantitative and Confirmative Performance of Liquid Chromatography Coupled to High‐Resolution Mass Spectrometry Compared to Tandem Mass Spectrometry,” Rapid Communications in Mass Spectrometry 25 (2011): 979–992. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 93. Grund B., Marvin L., and Rochat B., “Quantitative Performance of a Quadrupole‐Orbitrap‐MS in Targeted LC–MS Determinations of Small Molecules,” Journal of Pharmaceutical Biomedical Analysis 124 (2016): 48–56. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 94. Paglia G. and Astarita G., “Metabolomics and Lipidomics Using Traveling‐Wave Ion Mobility Mass Spectrometry,” Nature Protocols 12 (2017): 797–813. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 95. Gillet L. C., Navarro P., Tate S., et al., “Targeted Data Extraction of the MS/MS Spectra Generated by Data‐Independent Acquisition: A New Concept for Consistent and Accurate Proteome Analysis,” Molecular Cellular Proteomics 11 (2012): O111.016717. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 96. Broadhurst D., Goodacre R., Reinke S. N., et al., “Guidelines and Considerations for the Use of System Suitability and Quality Control Samples in Mass Spectrometry Assays Applied in Untargeted Clinical Metabolomic Studies,” Metabolomics 14 (2018): 1–17. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 97. Mendez K. M., Broadhurst D. I., and Reinke S. N., “The Application of Artificial Neural Networks in Metabolomics: A Historical Perspective,” Metabolomics 15 (2019): 142. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 98. Mendez K. M., Reinke S. N., and Broadhurst D. I., “A Comparative Evaluation of the Generalised Predictive Ability of Eight Machine Learning Algorithms Across Ten Clinical Metabolomics Data Sets for Binary Classification,” Metabolomics 15 (2019): 1–15. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 99. Sen P., Lamichhane S., Mathema V. B., et al., “Deep Learning Meets Metabolomics: A Methodological Perspective,” Briefings in Bioinformatics 22 (2021) 1531–1542. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Associated Data
This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.
Data Availability Statement
The author has nothing to report.
