Recent Advances in Capillary Electrophoresis-Mass Spectrometry for Diverse Pharmaceutical Analysis

Introduction

The pharmaceutical industry continually strives to develop innovative analytical techniques that can meet the ever-increasing demands for sensitivity, selectivity, and efficiency in drug analysis. Among the myriad of analytical tools available, Capillary Electrophoresis-Mass Spectrometry (CE-MS) has emerged as a powerful and versatile technique, combining the high separation efficiency of capillary electrophoresis with the exceptional sensitivity and specificity of mass spectrometry [1]. This hyphenated technique has gained significant traction in recent years, offering unique advantages in the analysis of pharmaceuticals, biologics, and their metabolites [2]. Capillary electrophoresis, first introduced in the early 1980s, has established itself as a robust separation technique based on the differential migration of charged species under the influence of an electric field [3]. The coupling of CE with MS [4], initially reported in 1987 has undergone remarkable advancements, both in instrumentation and methodologies, positioning itself as an indispensable tool in the pharmaceutical research [5].

The pharmaceutical industry faces numerous analytical challenges, including the characterization of complex drug molecules, detection of trace-level impurities, and elucidation of metabolic pathways [6]. Traditional analytical techniques such as High-Performance Liquid Chromatography (HPLC) and Gas Chromatography (GC) coupled with MS have long been the traditional approaches in this field. However, CE-MS offers several unique advantages that complement and, in some cases, surpass these conventional methods [7]. One of the primary strengths of CE-MS lies in its ability to separate and analyze charged species with exceptional efficiency and resolution[8]. This characteristic is particularly valuable in the analysis of ionizable pharmaceuticals, peptides, and proteins, which constitute a significant portion of modern drug candidates[9]. Moreover, the minimal sample and solvent requirements of CE align well with the growing emphasis on green analytical chemistry, making it an environmentally friendly alternative to traditional chromatographic techniques [10].

Recent years have witnessed significant technological advancements in CE-MS, enhancing its applicability in pharmaceutical analysis. Improvements in interface design have addressed the historical challenges of coupling CE with MS, leading to more robust and sensitive systems[11]. The development of novel capillary coatings and background electrolytes has expanded the range of analytes that can be effectively separated and detected [12, 13]. CE-MS is used across various stages of drug development and quality control. It has proven particularly valuable in the analysis of small molecule drugs, offering high-resolution separations of structural isomers and chiral compounds [14]. In the rapidly growing field of biopharmaceuticals, CE-MS has emerged as a powerful tool for characterizing complex protein therapeutics, including monoclonal antibodies and their biosimilars [15]. The technique’s ability to provide detailed information on post-translational modifications and higher-order structures has made it indispensable in ensuring the quality and safety of biologic drugs [16].

Apart from drug analysis, CE-MS has also shown its potential in metabolomics and biomarker discovery [17]. Its capacity to separate and identify a wide range of metabolites in biological matrices has contributed significantly to our understanding of drug metabolism and pharmacokinetics [18]. Additionally, the technique has shown promise in the field of personalized medicine, enabling the detection of disease-specific biomarkers and aiding in the development of targeted therapies [19]. The continuous improvements in instrumentation, coupled with innovative methodologies, are pushing the boundaries of what can be achieved in terms of sensitivity, selectivity, and throughput [20]. This review article aims to provide a comprehensive overview of the recent advances in CE-MS for pharmaceutical analysis.

2. Principles of Capillary Electrophoresis-Mass Spectrometry

Capillary Electrophoresis-Mass Spectrometry (CE-MS) combines the high-resolution separation capabilities of capillary electrophoresis with the sensitive and specific detection offered by mass spectrometry [21]. The fundamental principle of CE is based on the differential migration of charged analytes in a narrow-bore capillary under the influence of an applied electric field [22].

In CE, separation occurs due to differences in the electrophoretic mobility of ions, which is determined by their charge-to-size ratio [23]. The electroosmotic flow (EOF), generated by the applied electric field, plays a crucial role in the overall migration of analytes [24]. The EOF can be manipulated by altering the capillary surface chemistry or adjusting the buffer composition, allowing for optimization of separation parameters [25].

Figure 1. Capillary Electrophoresis Analyte Separation

The coupling of CE to MS presents unique challenges due to the low flow rates in CE and the need for a stable electrical connection [26]. Various interfaces have been developed to address these issues, with the most common being electrospray ionization (ESI) [27]. In ESI-CE-MS, the CE effluent is sprayed into fine droplets, which undergo desolvation to produce gas-phase ions for mass analysis [28]. One of the key advantages of CE-MS is its ability to analyze a wide range of compounds, from small molecules to large biomolecules, with minimal sample preparation [29]. The high separation efficiency of CE, combined with the mass-to-charge ratio information provided by MS, enables the resolution and identification of complex mixtures with high specificity [30].

3. Instrumentation and Technical Advancements

Recent years have witnessed significant advancements in CE-MS instrumentation, enhancing its applicability in pharmaceutical analysis [31]. These improvements have focused on increasing sensitivity, improving robustness, and expanding the range of analyzable compounds.

3.1 Interface Design: The development of more efficient interfaces has been a major focus of CE-MS research. The sheathless interface, which eliminates the need for a sheath liquid, has gained popularity due to its improved sensitivity and reduced ion suppression [32]. Porous tip interfaces have shown promise in enhancing ionization efficiency and stability [33]. Additionally, novel multi-segment injection techniques have been introduced to improve sample loading capacity [34].

3.2 Capillary Technology: Advancements in capillary technology have significantly improved separation performance. The introduction of porous layer open tubular (PLOT) columns has enhanced the separation of small molecules [35]. Monolithic columns, offering high permeability and surface area, have shown excellent performance in the analysis of large biomolecules [36]. Surface-modified capillaries with various coatings have been developed to minimize analyte adsorption and control EOF [37].

3.3 Mass Analyzers: The integration of CE with high-resolution mass analyzers has greatly expanded the technique’s capabilities. Time-of-flight (TOF) and Orbitrap analyzers provide high mass accuracy and resolution, enabling precise molecular formula determination and structural elucidation [38]. Ion mobility spectrometry (IMS) coupled with CE-MS adds dimension of separation based on molecular shape, enhancing the analysis of complex mixtures [39].

3.4 Microfluidic Devices: The miniaturization of CE-MS systems through microfluidic devices has gained attention. These chip-based platforms offer advantages such as reduced sample and reagent consumption, faster analysis times, and potential for integration of multiple analytical steps [40]. Microfluidic CE-MS has shown particular promise in high-throughput screening applications [41].

3.5 Data Processing and Analysis: Advances in data processing algorithms and software have significantly improved the interpretation of CE-MS data. Machine learning approaches have been applied to automate peak identification and quantification [42]. Additionally, the development of comprehensive databases and spectral libraries has facilitated the identification of unknown compounds in complex samples [43].

3.6 Sample Preparation: The integration of online sample preparation techniques with CE-MS has streamlined analytical workflows. Solid-phase extraction (SPE) coupled directly to CE-MS has been demonstrated for the analysis of trace-level analytes in complex matrices [44]. In-capillary derivatization techniques have also been developed to enhance the detection of specific analyte classes [45].

These technological advancements have collectively contributed to the increased adoption of CE-MS in pharmaceutical analysis. The improved sensitivity, selectivity, and efficiency offered by modern CE-MS systems have enabled the analysis of increasingly complex pharmaceutical samples, from small molecule drugs to large biopharmaceuticals [46].

Figure 2. Recent advances in CE-MS instrumentation

4. Sample Preparation Techniques

Sample preparation is a critical step in CE-MS analysis, significantly influencing the quality and reliability of results. For pharmaceutical samples, the primary goals of sample preparation are to remove interfering matrix components, concentrate analytes of interest, and ensure compatibility with the CE-MS system [47].

Liquid-liquid extraction (LLE) and solid-phase extraction (SPE) remain popular techniques for sample clean-up and pre-concentration. Recent advancements include the development of novel sorbent materials for SPE, such as molecularly imprinted polymers (MIPs) and magnetic nanoparticles, offering improved selectivity and extraction efficiency [48]. Microextraction techniques have gained traction due to their minimal solvent usage and potential for automation. Single-drop microextraction (SDME) and dispersive liquid-liquid microextraction (DLLME) have been successfully applied to the extraction of pharmaceuticals from complex matrices [49]. For biological samples, protein precipitation and ultrafiltration are commonly employed to remove high molecular weight interferents. Dialysis and electromembrane extraction have shown promise for the selective extraction of ionizable analytes [50].

5. Applications in Pharmaceutical Analysis

5.1. Small Molecule Drug Analysis

CE-MS has proven to be a powerful tool for the analysis of small-molecule drugs, offering high-resolution separations and accurate mass measurements. The technique excels in the analysis of ionizable compounds, making it particularly suitable for many pharmaceutical entities [51]. Chiral separations are the main application area, with CE-MS demonstrating superior performance in resolving enantiomers compared to traditional chromatographic methods. The use of cyclodextrins and other chiral selectors in the background electrolyte enables efficient enantioseparation [52]. CE-MS has also been applied to stability testing and forced degradation studies of small molecule drugs. The high separation efficiency allows for the resolution of closely related degradation products, while MS provides structural information for their identification [53].

5.2. Biopharmaceutical Analysis

The analysis of biopharmaceuticals, including proteins, peptides, and oligonucleotides, has become a major application area for CE-MS. The technique offers several advantages over traditional methods, including high resolution, minimal sample consumption, and the ability to maintain native protein conformations [54]. For monoclonal antibodies (mAbs), CE-MS has been used to characterize charge variants, glycoforms, and other post-translational modifications. Capillary zone electrophoresis (CZE) coupled with high-resolution MS has enabled the detailed characterization of mAb heterogeneity [55].

In the analysis of therapeutic peptides, CE-MS has demonstrated excellent performance in separating and identifying closely related impurities and degradation products. The technique has been successfully applied to the quality control of synthetic peptides and the characterization of complex peptide mixtures [56].

5.3. Impurity Profiling and Quality Control

CE-MS plays a crucial role in impurity profiling and quality control of pharmaceutical products. The high separation efficiency of CE, combined with the specificity of MS detection, allows for the identification and quantification of trace-level impurities [57]. In the analysis of genotoxic impurities, CE-MS has shown superior sensitivity compared to conventional methods. The technique has been successfully applied to the detection of alkyl sulfonates, alkyl halides, and other potentially genotoxic compounds at parts-per-million levels [58]. For the analysis of extractables and leachables in pharmaceutical packaging, CE-MS offers the advantage of being able to separate and identify both neutral and charged species. This capability is particularly valuable for comprehensive impurity profiling [59].

5.4. Metabolomics and Biomarker Discovery

CE-MS has emerged as a powerful tool in metabolomics and biomarker discovery, complementing traditional LC-MS approaches. The technique’s ability to separate and detect a wide range of polar and charged metabolites makes it particularly suited for comprehensive metabolome analysis [60]. In targeted metabolomics, CE-MS has been applied to the quantification of specific metabolite panels, such as amino acids, organic acids, and nucleotides. The high separation efficiency of CE allows for the resolution of isomeric metabolites that may be challenging to separate by LC [61]. For untargeted metabolomics and biomarker discovery, CE-MS offers the advantage of detecting metabolites across a wide range of molecular weights and physicochemical properties. The technique has been successfully used to identify novel biomarkers in various disease states, including cancer, diabetes, and neurological disorders [62].

In pharmacometabolomics, CE-MS has been employed to study drug metabolism and to identify potential biomarkers of drug efficacy and toxicity. The ability to analyze both parent drugs and their metabolites in a single run makes CE-MS an attractive option for comprehensive pharmacokinetic studies [63].

6. Coupling Techniques and Interfaces

The successful integration of CE with MS relies heavily on effective coupling strategies and interfaces. The primary challenge in CE-MS coupling is maintaining a stable electrical connection for CE while simultaneously providing a suitable ion source for MS [64]. Electrospray ionization (ESI) remains the most widely used interface for CE-MS. Sheath-flow interfaces, which introduce a coaxial liquid flow around the CE capillary, have been widely adopted due to their stability and ease of implementation. Recent advancements in sheath-flow interfaces include the development of ultra-low flow rate systems, which improve sensitivity by reducing sample dilution [65]. Sheathless interfaces have gained popularity due to their potential for higher sensitivity. These interfaces directly connect the CE capillary to the MS, eliminating the need for additional liquid flow. Porous tip interfaces, which use a porous section at the capillary outlet to establish electrical contact, have shown promising results in terms of stability and sensitivity [66]. Junction-at-the-tip interfaces represent a hybrid approach, combining elements of both sheath-flow and sheathless designs. These interfaces offer improved stability compared to traditional sheathless designs while maintaining high sensitivity [67].

7. Data Analysis and Interpretation

The complex nature of CE-MS data necessitates sophisticated data analysis and interpretation strategies. Recent advancements in this area have focused on improving data processing efficiency and enhancing the extraction of meaningful information from large datasets [68]. Peak detection and alignment algorithms have been refined to handle the high-resolution data generated by modern CE-MS systems. Machine learning approaches, including artificial neural networks and support vector machines, have been applied to automate peak identification and quantification [69]. For untargeted analysis, multivariate statistical methods such as principal component analysis (PCA) and partial least squares discriminant analysis (PLS-DA) are commonly employed to identify significant features in complex datasets. These techniques have proven particularly valuable in metabolomics and biomarker discovery applications [70].

The integration of CE-MS data with other omics datasets has become increasingly important in systems biology approaches. Pathway analysis tools and network visualization software have been adapted to incorporate CE-MS data, enabling a more comprehensive understanding of biological systems [71].

Conclusion

Capillary Electrophoresis-Mass Spectrometry has emerged as a powerful analytical technique in pharmaceutical analysis, offering unique advantages in terms of separation efficiency, sensitivity, and versatility. Advancements in instrumentation, coupling strategies, and data analysis have significantly expanded the applicability of CE-MS across various stages of drug development and quality control. The technique’s ability to analyze a wide range of compounds, from small molecules to large biomolecules, positions it as a valuable complement to traditional chromatographic methods

Acknowledgment: The authors would like to extend their gratitude and profound thanks to Mr. Prakash Nathaniel Kumar Sarella, Associate Professor, Aditya College of Pharmacy, Aditya University for providing support and help for the enrichment of this work

References:

1. Mokaddem M, Gareil P, Belgaied JE, Varenne A. A new insight into suction and dilution effects in capillary electrophoresis coupled to mass spectrometry via an electrospray ionization interface. Part I-Suction effect. Electrophoresis. 2008;29(10):1957-1964.
2. Ramautar R, Somsen GW, de Jong GJ. CE-MS for metabolomics: Developments and applications in the period 2012-2014. Electrophoresis. 2015;36(1):212-224.
3. Jorgenson JW, Lukacs KD. Zone electrophoresis in open-tubular glass capillaries. Anal Chem. 1981;53(8):1298-1302.
4. Olivares JA, Nguyen NT, Yonker CR, Smith RD. On-line mass spectrometric detection for capillary zone electrophoresis. Anal Chem. 1987;59(8):1230-1232.
5. Kleparnik K. Recent advances in the combination of capillary electrophoresis with mass spectrometry: From element to single-cell analysis. Electrophoresis. 2013;34(1):70-85.
6. Siddiqui MR, AlOthman ZA, Rahman N. Analytical techniques in pharmaceutical analysis: A review. Arab J Chem. 2017;10:S1409-S1421.
7. Bonvin G, Schappler J, Rudaz S. Capillary electrophoresis-electrospray ionization-mass spectrometry interfaces: Fundamental concepts and technical developments. J Chromatogr A. 2012;1267:17-31.
8. Breadmore MC, Sänger-van de Griend CE, Majors RE. Capillary Electrophoresis: Methods and Protocols. Humana Press; 2019.
9. Haselberg R, de Jong GJ, Somsen GW. Capillary electrophoresis–mass spectrometry for the analysis of intact proteins. J Chromatogr A. 2007;1159(1-2):81-109.
10. Breadmore MC. Capillary and microchip electrophoresis: Challenging the common conceptions. J Chromatogr A. 2012;1221:42-55.
11. Zhong X, Zhang Z, Jiang S, Li L. Recent advances in coupling capillary electrophoresis-based separation techniques to ESI and MALDI-MS. Electrophoresis. 2014;35(9):1214-1225.
12. Štěpánová S, Kašička V. Recent applications of capillary electromigration methods to separation and analysis of proteins. Anal Chim Acta. 2016;933:23-42.
13. Righetti PG, Candiano G. Recent advances in electrophoretic techniques for the characterization of protein biomolecules: A poker of aces. J Chromatogr A. 2011;1218(49):8727-8737.
14. Sänger-van de Griend CE. Capillary electrophoresis in the pharmaceutical industry: Challenges in method development and validation. Electrophoresis. 2019;40(18-19):2361-2374.
15. Righetti PG, Candiano G, Citterio A, Boschetti E. Combinatorial peptide ligand libraries as a new tool for deeper exploration of the proteome: Principles, protocols and applications. Anal Bioanal Chem. 2011;401(10):3103-3113.
16. Haselberg R, de Jong GJ, Somsen GW. CE-MS for the analysis of intact proteins 2010-2012. Electrophoresis. 2013;34(1):99-112.
17. Ramautar R, Somsen GW, de Jong GJ. CE-MS in metabolomics. Electrophoresis. 2009;30(1):276-291.
18. Ramautar R, Demirci A, de Jong GJ. Capillary electrophoresis in metabolomics. TrAC Trends Anal Chem. 2006;25(5):455-466.
19. Kuehnbaum NL, Britz-McKibbin P. New advances in separation science for metabolomics: Resolving chemical diversity in a post-genomic era. Chem Rev. 2013;113(4):2437-2468.
20. Pantučková P, Gebauer P, Boček P, Křivánková L. Recent advances in CE-MS: Synergy of wet chemistry and instrumentation innovations. Electrophoresis. 2011;32(1):43-51.
21. Hernández-Borges J, D’Orazio G, Aturki Z, Fanali S. Nano-liquid chromatography analysis of dansylated biogenic amines in wines. J Chromatogr A. 2007;1147(2):192-199.
22. Altria KD. Capillary electrophoresis guidebook: Principles, operation, and applications. Humana Press; 1996.
23. Friedl W, Reijenga JC, Kenndler E. Ionic strength and charge number correction for mobilities of multivalent organic anions in capillary electrophoresis. J Chromatogr A. 1995;709(1):163-170.
24. Lucy CA, MacDonald AM, Gulcev MD. Non-covalent capillary coatings for protein separations in capillary electrophoresis. J Chromatogr A. 2008;1184(1-2):81-105.
25. Huhn C, Ramautar R, Wuhrer M, Somsen GW. Relevance and use of capillary coatings in capillary electrophoresis-mass spectrometry. Anal Bioanal Chem. 2010;396(1):297-314.
26. Maxwell EJ, Chen DD. Twenty years of interface development for capillary electrophoresis-electrospray ionization-mass spectrometry. Anal Chim Acta. 2008;627(1):25-33.
27. Pantučková P, Gebauer P, Boček P, Křivánková L. Recent advances in CE-MS: Synergy of wet chemistry and instrumentation innovations. Electrophoresis. 2011;32(1):43-51.
28. Kebarle P, Verkerk UH. Electrospray: from ions in solution to ions in the gas phase, what we know now. Mass Spectrom Rev. 2009;28(6):898-917.
29. Ramautar R, Somsen GW, de Jong GJ. CE-MS for metabolomics: Developments and applications in the period 2012-2014. Electrophoresis. 2015;36(1):212-224.
30. Soga T, Ohashi Y, Ueno Y, Naraoka H, Tomita M, Nishioka T. Quantitative metabolome analysis using capillary electrophoresis mass spectrometry. J Proteome Res. 2003;2(5):488-494.
31. Breadmore MC, Wuethrich A, Li F, Phung SC, Kalsoom U, Cabot JM, Tehranirokh M, Shallan AI, Abdul Keyon AS, See HH, Dawod M. Recent advances in enhancing the sensitivity of electrophoresis and electrochromatography in capillaries and microchips (2014–2016). Electrophoresis. 2017;38(1):33-59.
32. Moini M. Simplifying CE-MS operation. 2. Interfacing low-flow separation techniques to mass spectrometry using a porous tip. Anal Chem. 2007;79(11):4241-4246.
33. Wilm M, Mann M. Analytical properties of the nanoelectrospray ion source. Anal Chem. 1996;68(1):1-8.
34. Busnel JM, Schoenmaker B, Ramautar R, Carrasco-Pancorbo A, Ratnayake C, Feitelson JS, Chapman JD, Deelder AM, Mayboroda OA. High capacity capillary electrophoresis-electrospray ionization mass spectrometry: coupling a porous sheathless interface with transient-isotachophoresis. Anal Chem. 2010;82(22):9476-9483.
35. Yue G, Luo Q, Zhang J, Wu SL, Karger BL. Ultratrace LC/MS proteomic analysis using 10-μm-i.d. porous layer open tubular poly(styrene−divinylbenzene) capillary columns. Anal Chem. 2007;79(3):938-946.
36. Svec F. Porous polymer monoliths: amazingly wide variety of techniques enabling their preparation. J Chromatogr A. 2010;1217(6):902-924.
37. Lucy CA, MacDonald AM, Gulcev MD. Non-covalent capillary coatings for protein separations in capillary electrophoresis. J Chromatogr A. 2008;1184(1-2):81-105.
38. Haselberg R, de Jong GJ, Somsen GW. Capillary electrophoresis–mass spectrometry for the analysis of intact proteins 2007–2010. Electrophoresis. 2011;32(1):66-82.
39. May JC, McLean JA. Ion mobility-mass spectrometry: time-dispersive instrumentation. Anal Chem. 2015;87(3):1422-1436.
40. Ewing AG, Wallingford RA, Olefirowicz TM. Capillary electrophoresis. Anal Chem. 1989;61(4):292A-303A.
41. Ramautar R, Somsen GW, de Jong GJ. CE-MS for metabolomics: Developments and applications in the period 2012-2014. Electrophoresis. 2015;36(1):212-224.
42. Sugimoto M, Kawakami M, Robert M, Soga T, Tomita M. Bioinformatics tools for mass spectroscopy-based metabolomic data processing and analysis. Curr Bioinform. 2012;7(1):96-108.
43. Kind T, Fiehn O. Advances in structure elucidation of small molecules using mass spectrometry. Bioanal Rev. 2010;2(1):23-60.
44. Ramautar R, Somsen GW, de Jong GJ. CE-MS in metabolomics. Electrophoresis. 2009;30(1):276-291.
45. Soga T, Heiger DN. Amino acid analysis by capillary electrophoresis electrospray ionization mass spectrometry. Anal Chem. 2000;72(6):1236-1241.
46. Haselberg R, de Jong GJ, Somsen GW. Capillary electrophoresis–mass spectrometry for the analysis of intact proteins 2007–2010. Electrophoresis. 2011;32(1):66-82.
47. Chen Y, Shou M, Hemstrom P. Isolation and purification of pharmaceutical peptides using high‐performance capillary electrophoresis. Electrophoresis. 2013;34(9-10):1352-1367.
48. Turiel E, Martín-Esteban A. Molecularly imprinted polymers for sample preparation: a review. Anal Chim Acta. 2010;668(2):87-99.
49. Rezaee M, Assadi Y, Milani Hosseini MR, Aghaee E, Ahmadi F, Berijani S. Determination of organic compounds in water using dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction. J Chromatogr A. 2006;1116(1-2):1-9.
50. Pedersen-Bjergaard S, Rasmussen KE. Electrokinetic migration across artificial liquid membranes: new concept for rapid sample preparation of biological fluids. J Chromatogr A. 2006;1109(2):183-190.
51. Sänger-van de Griend CE. Capillary electrophoresis in the pharmaceutical industry: Challenges in method development and validation. Electrophoresis. 2019;40(18-19):2361-2374.
52. Chankvetadze B. Capillary electrophoresis in chiral analysis. John Wiley & Sons; 2022.
53. Bojko B, Pawliszyn J. In vivo and ex vivo SPME: a low invasive sampling and sample preparation tool in clinical bioanalysis. Bioanalysis. 2014;6(9):1227-1239.
54. Haselberg R, de Jong GJ, Somsen GW. Capillary electrophoresis–mass spectrometry for the analysis of intact proteins 2007–2010. Electrophoresis. 2011;32(1):66-82.
55. Gahoual R, Burr A, Busnel JM, Kuhn L, Hammann P, Beck A, François YN, Leize-Wagner E. Rapid and multi-level characterization of trastuzumab using sheathless capillary electrophoresis-tandem mass spectrometry. MAbs. 2013;5(3):479-490.
56. Dawod M, Arvin NE, Kennedy RT. Recent advances in protein analysis by capillary and microchip electrophoresis. Analyst. 2017;142(11):1847-1866.
57. Pioch M, Bunz SC, Neusüß C. Capillary electrophoresis/mass spectrometry relevant to pharmaceutical and biotechnological applications. Electrophoresis. 2012;33(11):1517-1530.
58. Sun M, Sanderson PE, Zheng W. Drug bioanalytical methods using capillary electrophoresis coupled to mass spectrometry: Opportunities and challenges. J Chromatogr A. 2022;1663:462759.
59. Hernández F, Sancho JV, Ibáñez M, Abad E, Portolés T, Mattioli L. Current use of high-resolution mass spectrometry in the environmental sciences. Anal Bioanal Chem. 2012;403(5):1251-1264.
60. Ramautar R, Somsen GW, de Jong GJ. CE-MS for metabolomics: Developments and applications in the period 2012-2014. Electrophoresis. 2015;36(1):212-224.
61. Soga T, Ohashi Y, Ueno Y, Naraoka H, Tomita M, Nishioka T. Quantitative metabolome analysis using capillary electrophoresis mass spectrometry. J Proteome Res. 2003;2(5):488-494.
62. Ramautar R, Somsen GW, de Jong GJ. CE-MS in metabolomics. Electrophoresis. 2009;30(1):276-291.
63. Ramautar R, Somsen GW, de Jong GJ. CE-MS for metabolomics: Developments and applications in the period 2012-2014. Electrophoresis. 2015;36(1):212-224.
64. Maxwell EJ, Chen DD. Twenty years of interface development for capillary electrophoresis-electrospray ionization-mass spectrometry. Anal Chim Acta. 2008;627(1):25-33.
65. Wojcik R, Dada OO, Sadilek M, Dovichi NJ. Simplified capillary electrophoresis nanospray sheath-flow interface for high efficiency and sensitive peptide analysis. Rapid Commun Mass Spectrom. 2010;24(17):2554-2560.
66. Moini M. Simplifying CE-MS operation. 2. Interfacing low-flow separation techniques to mass spectrometry using a porous tip. Anal Chem. 2007;79(11):4241-4246.
67. Sun L, Zhu G, Zhang Z, Mou S, Dovichi NJ. Third-generation electrokinetically pumped sheath-flow nanospray interface with improved stability and sensitivity for automated capillary zone electrophoresis–mass spectrometry analysis of complex proteome digests. J Proteome Res. 2015;14(5):2312-2321.
68. Sugimoto M, Kawakami M, Robert M, Soga T, Tomita M. Bioinformatics tools for mass spectroscopy-based metabolomic data processing and analysis. Curr Bioinform. 2012;7(1):96-108.
69. Liebler DC, Zimmerman LJ. Targeted quantitation of proteins by mass spectrometry. Biochemistry. 2013;52(22):3797-3806.
70. Trygg J, Holmes E, Lundstedt T. Chemometrics in metabonomics. J Proteome Res. 2007;6(2):469-479.
71. Kohl SM, Klein MS, Hochrein J, Oefner PJ, Spang R, Gronwald W. State-of-the art data normalization methods improve NMR-based metabolomic analysis. Metabolomics. 2012;8(1):146-160.