Concentration Accuracy of Compounded Mitomycin C for Ophthalmic Surgery.
Robert M Kinast, Kiran K Akula, Steve L Mansberger, Gordon T Barker, Stuart K Gardiner, Emily Whitson, Andrea E DeBarber
Summary
Common compounding and storage techniques for MMC resulted in a lower accuracy and wider range of concentration than expected.
Abstract
IMPORTANCE
Ophthalmologists rely on accurate concentrations of mitomycin C (MMC) to prevent scarring with trabeculectomy surgery. To our knowledge, the concentration accuracy and variability of compounded MMC are unknown.
OBJECTIVE
To determine whether the measured concentration differs from the expected concentration of 0.4 mg/mL of MMC used in ophthalmic surgery. DESIGN, SETTING,
AND PARTICIPANTS
Laboratory experimental investigation conducted in July 2013. We acquired 60 samples of 0.4 mg/mL of MMC from a spectrum of common compounding and storage techniques (refrigeration, freezing, and immediately compounded dry powder) and a variety of pharmacies (an academic hospital, a community hospital, and an independent Pharmacy Compounding Accreditation Board-accredited pharmacy). We used C18 reversed-phase high-performance liquid chromatography to measure the MMC concentration of all samples. We used pure MMC (Medisca Inc) to generate calibration curves and sulfanilamide as an internal standard.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES
We calculated MMC concentration using a calibration curve (range, 0.3-0.5 mg/mL) generated by dividing MMC peak area by internal standard peak area and plotting the area ratio against the calibrant concentrations. We compared the measured concentration against the expected 0.4 mg/mL concentration for all samples.
RESULTS
Measurement of MMC using the high-performance liquid chromatography method demonstrated acceptable accuracy (92%-100%), precision (2%-6% coefficient of variation), and linearity (mean correlation coefficient of r2 = 0.99). The measured MMC concentration determined using the high-performance liquid chromatography method for all samples was 12.5% lower than the expected 0.4 mg/mL value (mean [SD], 0.35 [0.04] mg/mL; 95% CI, 0.34-0.36; P < .001) with a wide concentration range between 0.26 and 0.46 mg/mL.
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
Common compounding and storage techniques for MMC resulted in a lower accuracy and wider range of concentration than expected. These differences in concentration may result from compounding techniques and/or MMC degradation. Variability in MMC concentration could cause inconsistency in glaucoma surgical results, but the clinical relevance of such findings on glaucoma surgery outcomes remains unknown.
More by Robert M Kinast
View full profile →Glaucoma Specialist Optic Disc Margin, Rim Margin, and Rim Width Discordance in Glaucoma and Glaucoma Suspect Eyes.
Intraocular Pressure and Medication Burden With Cataract Surgery Alone, or Cataract Surgery Combined With Trabecular Bypass or Goniotomy.
Glaucoma Specialist Detection of Optical Coherence Tomography Suspicious Rim Tissue in Glaucoma and Glaucoma Suspect Eyes.
Top Research in Glaucoma Surgery
Browse all →Treatment Outcomes in the Primary Tube Versus Trabeculectomy Study after 1 Year of Follow-up.
Efficacy, Safety, and Risk Factors for Failure of Standalone Ab Interno Gelatin Microstent Implantation versus Standalone Trabeculectomy.
Prospective, Randomized, Controlled Pivotal Trial of an Ab Interno Implanted Trabecular Micro-Bypass in Primary Open-Angle Glaucoma and Cataract: Two-Year Results.
Discussion
Comments and discussion will appear here in a future update.