PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 14595853

Entropy evaluation using the kinetic method: is it feasible?

Abstract

The kinetic method is one of the most widely used experimental techniques for the measurement of thermochemical parameters by mass spectrometry. Recently it has been realized that it can also be used to determine reaction entropies, but the validity of this approach has not been established. This Perspective evaluates kinetic method plots in cases where there is a significant entropy difference between the competing fragmentation channels (i.e. between sample and reference compounds in the dissociating cluster ion). The concept underlying this study is to calculate mass spectra theoretically, based on known thermochemical parameters and as a function of experimental conditions. This can be done accurately using the RRKM-based MassKinetics software. The resulting mass spectra are then interpreted by the kinetic method, yielding DeltaH and DeltaS values. These values are, in turn, compared with the true values used to generate the calculated mass spectra. The results show that the reaction entropy difference between sample and reference has a very large influence on kinetic method plots. This should always be considered when studying energy-dependent mass spectra (using metastable ions or low- or high-energy collision-induced dissociation (CID)), even if only DeltaH is to be determined. Kinetic method plots are not strictly linear and this becomes a serious issue in the case of small molecules showing a large entropy effect. In such cases, results obtained at a low degree of excitation are more accurate. Energy and entropy effects can be evaluated in a relatively straightforward manner: first, the apparent Gibbs energy (DeltaG(app)) and effective temperature (T(eff)) are determined from kinetic method plots (intercept and slope, respectively), obtained from experiments using various degrees of excitation. Second, the resulting DeltaG(app) is plotted against T(eff), the slope yielding DeltaS while the intercept (extrapolation to zero temperature) yields DeltaH. This data evaluation yields more accurate results than alternative methods used in the literature. The resulting DeltaH values are fairly accurate, with errors, in most cases, <4 kJ mol(-1). On the other hand, DeltaS is systematically underestimated by 20-40%. Empirically scaling DeltaS values determined by the kinetic method by 1.35 results in a DeltaS value within 20% (or 10 J mol(-1) K(-1)) of the theoretical value.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

László Drahos, Károly Vékey. 2003. Entropy evaluation using the kinetic method: is it feasible?. https://doi.org/10.1002/jms.538

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↗