PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 11140761

Working without accumulation membrane in flow field-flow fractionation.

Abstract

Nonideal interaction of sample with the separation device is a difficulty found in chromatographic methods as well as in field-flow fractionation. However, in field-flow fractionation (FFF), greater flexibility in the choice of carrier solution composition is possible, thus reducing the need of a wide choice of surface chemistry when nonideal sample interaction is to be minimized. The use of an ultrafiltration membrane as the surface for the accumulation wall is common practice in flow field-flow fractionation. Typical membranes in use are laminates of a skin membrane onto a backing material such as woven polyester. At this point, only a limited choice of membrane chemistries is available. Many membranes have been developed for protein applications as membranes are widely used in the pharmaceutical industries. While these membranes work well for protein applications, flow field-flow fractionation is applicable to polymeric particulate as well as protein samples. Thus, sample interaction with the membrane surface is possible with nonprotein applications and these interactions can induce significant secondary effects on retention ratio and affect instrumental reliability. Also, the woven texture of membranes may detrimentally affect the FFF separation. For these reasons, the study of flow field-flow fractionation using a flat, smooth surface of controlled chemistry is of relevance. We present here the results of a new, membraneless channel that uses a bare frit as the accumulation wall and that is intended for analysis of micrometer-sized particles only. Selectivity results are comparable to those obtained with the membrane, while relative sample recovery indicates that the best quantitative performance can be obtained without the membrane. Moreover, neither sample immobilization nor losses through the frit occur when operating membraneless. On the other hand, first experimental evidence of a certain level of frit surface activity suggests that optimization of experimental conditions is required.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

P Reschiglian, D Melucci, A Zattoni, L Malló, M Hansen, A Kummerow, M Miller. 2000-12-15. Working without accumulation membrane in flow field-flow fractionation.. https://doi.org/10.1021/ac000608q

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Effectiveness of high-dose versus standard-dose influenza vaccines against hospitalisation according to frailty risk: a prespecified analysis of the randomised trial DANFLU-2.

BACKGROUND: Frailty is a major risk factor for influenza-related complications and can influence vaccine effectiveness. We aimed to assess the relative vaccine effectiveness (rVE) of high-dose (HD-IIV) versus standard-dose inactivated influenza vaccine (SD-IIV) in older adults aged 65 years or older according to frailty risk. METHODS: This study was a prespecified analysis of DANFLU-2, an open-label, individually randomised trial, conducted in Denmark during three consecutive influenza seasons (2022-23, 2023-24, and 2024-25). Adults aged 65 years or older were randomised (1:1) to the HD-IIV or SD-IIV group. The primary endpoint was hospitalisation for influenza or pneumonia. Frailty was defined according to the validated Hospital Frailty Risk Score (HFRS) based on ICD-10 codes within 10 years before randomisation. Participants were stratified into three HFRS categories, namely low (<5 points), intermediate (5-15 points), and high (>15 points) frailty risk. The rVE of HD-IIV versus SD-IIV against the primary endpoint was assessed across prespecified HFRS categories and treating HFRS as a continuous variable. Pearson's chi-square test was used to compare safety events across frailty risk groups and randomisation groups. FINDINGS: Among 332&#x2009;438 randomised participants (mean age 73&#xb7;7 years [SD 5&#xb7;8]; 161&#x2009;538 [48&#xb7;6%] were female), 276&#x2009;173 (83&#xb7;1%) had low frailty risk, 52&#x2009;395 (15&#xb7;8%) had intermediate frailty risk, and 3861 (1&#xb7;2%) had high frailty risk. The primary endpoint of hospitalisation for influenza or pneumonia occurred in 1424 (0&#xb7;5%) of 276&#x2009;173 participants with low frailty risk, 761 (1&#xb7;5%) of 52&#x2009;395 with intermediate frailty risk, and 163 (4&#xb7;2%) of 3861 with high frailty risk (relative risk [RR] for intermediate vs low frailty risk 2&#xb7;8 [95% CI 2&#xb7;6-3&#xb7;1]; RR for high vs low frailty risk 8&#xb7;2 [7&#xb7;0-9&#xb7;6]). HFRS as a continuous variable significantly modified the effect of HD-IIV versus SD-IIV against the primary endpoint with higher rVE estimates with increasing HFRS (pinteraction=0&#xb7;020). The rVE was 0&#xb7;2% (95% CI -10&#xb7;8 to 10&#xb7;2) among those with low frailty risk, 13&#xb7;1% (-0&#xb7;4 to 24&#xb7;8) among those with intermediate frailty risk, and 19&#xb7;9% (-10&#xb7;3 to 42&#xb7;1) among those with high frailty risk. No significant interaction was observed when HFRS was assessed according to the prespecified categorical frailty groups (pinteraction=0&#xb7;17). The proportion of participants with at least one serious adverse event increased across frailty risk groups (13&#x2009;366 [4&#xb7;8%] of 275&#x2009;795 for low frailty risk, 5475 [10&#xb7;5%] of 52&#x2009;315 for intermediate frailty risk, and 777 [20&#xb7;2%] of 3850 for high frailty risk; p<0&#xb7;0001), with similar proportions of serious adverse events in the HD-IIV and SD-IIV groups for each frailty risk group. INTERPRETATION: Among adults aged 65 years or older in Denmark, frailty risk might modify the effects of HD-IIV versus SD-IIV against hospitalisation for influenza or pneumonia, with higher rVE estimates with increasing frailty risk. These findings might support considering high-dose influenza vaccines for frail older adults. However, effect modification was not evident when frailty was assessed using prespecified categorical subgroups, and subgroup-specific estimates were imprecise, with 95% CIs crossing the null. These results should be considered exploratory, warranting further investigation. FUNDING: The DANFLU-2 trial was funded by Sanofi.

Journal Article↗