Analytical Chemistry Lesson of the Day – Linearity in Method Validation and Quality Assurance

In analytical chemistry, the quantity of interest is often estimated from a calibration line.  A technique or instrument generates the analytical response for the quantity of interest, so a calibration line is constructed from generating multiple responses from multiple standard samples of known quantities.  Linearity refers to how well a plot of the analytical response versus the quantity of interest follows a straight line.  If this relationship holds, then an analytical response can be generated from a sample containing an unknown quantity, and the calibration line can be used to estimate the unknown quantity with a confidence interval.

Note that this concept of “linear” is different from the “linear” in “linear regression” in statistics.

This is the the second blog post in a series of Chemistry Lessons of the Day on method validation in analytical chemistry.  Read the previous post on specificity, and stay tuned for future posts!

Advertisements

Analytical Chemistry Lesson of the Day – Method Validation in Quality Assurance

When developing any method in analytical chemistry, it must meet several criteria to ensure that it accomplishes its intended objective at or above an acceptable standard.  This process is called method validation, and it has the following criteria* in the pharmaceutical industry:

  • specificity
  • linearity
  • accuracy
  • precision
  • range
  • limit of detection
  • limit of quantitation
  • robustness**

As I will note in future Chemistry Lessons of the Day, these words are used differently between statistics and chemistry.

*These criteria are taken from Page 723 of the 6th edition of “Quantitative Chemical Analysis” by Daniel C. Harris (2003).

**The Food and Drug Administration does not list robustness as a typical characteristic of method validation.  (See Section B on Page 7 of its “Guidance for Industry Analytical Procedures and Methods Validation for Drugs and Biologics“.)  However, it does mention robustness several times as an important characteristic that “should be evaluated” during the “early stages of method development”.