Pressurized liquid extraction followed by liquid chromatography coupled to a fluorescence detector and atmospheric pressure chemical ionization mass spectrometry for the determination of benzo(a)pyrene metabolites in liver tissue of an animal model of colon cancer.

Since metabolism is implicated in the carcinogenesis of toxicants, an efficient extraction method together with an analytical method is warranted to quantify tissue burdens of a carcinogen and/or its metabolites. Therefore, the aim of this study was to validate a pressurized liquid extraction (PLE) method for measuring metabolites of benzo(a)pyrene [B(a)P; a food-borne carcinogen] from tissue samples. The sample extraction was performed separately by PLE and liquid-liquid extraction (LLE). PLE followed by high-performance liquid chromatography coupled to online fluorescence detector (HPLC-FLD) was used to quantify separated analytes; and by ultra-high-performance liquid chromatography (UHPLC) coupled to atmospheric pressure chemical ionization tandem mass spectrometry (UHPLC-APCI-MS/MS) were used for confirmation purposes. The UHPLC-MS/MS was set-up in the atmospheric pressure chemical ionization (APCI) positive interface with selective reaction monitoring (SRM). The analytical performance characteristics of the PLE technique was assessed at different temperatures, pressure, number of cycles and solvent types. A methanol + chloroform + water mixture (30:15:10, v/v/v) yielded greater recoveries at an extraction temperature range of 60-80°C, pressure of 10 MPa and an extraction time of 10 min. The PLE method was validated by the analysis of spiked tissue samples and measuring recoveries and limits of quantitation for the analytes of interest using HPLC-FLD equipment. The optimized PLE-HPLC-FLD method was used to quantify the concentrations of B(a)P metabolites in liver samples obtained from a colon cancer animal model. Overall, PLE performed better in terms of extraction efficiency, recovery of B(a)P metabolites and shortened sample preparation time when compared with the classic LLE method.