It is a challenge to separate the enantiomers of native chiral amines prone to deleterious silanol interactions. A set of 39 underivatized chiral primary amines was screened for enantiomeric separation. Seven recently introduced commercial chiral columns were tested. They included six polysaccharide based chiral stationary phases (CSP) with bonded derivatives, ChiralPak? IA, IB, IC, ID, IE and IF columns and a cyclofructan derivatized CSP, Larihc? CF6-P column. Both the normal phase (NP) mode with heptane/alcohol mobile phases and the polar organic (PO) mode with acetonitrile/alcohol were evaluated. It was found that the cyclofructan based CSP demonstrated the highest success rate in separating primary amines in the PO mode with only one chiral amine not resolved. It is shown that, when screening the columns, there is no standard optimal condition;an excellent mobile phase composition for one column may be poorly suited to another one. Although butylamine was a good mobile phase additive for the polysaccharide columns in both PO and NP modes, it was detrimental to the enantio-recognition capability of the cyclofructan column. Triethylamine was the appropriate silanol screening agent for this latter column.

Current trends in chiral analysis of pharmaceutical drugs are focused on faster separations and higher separation efficiencies. Core-shell or superficially porous particles (SPP) based chiral stationary phases (CSPs) provide reduced analysis times while maintaining high column efficiencies and sensitivity. In this study, mobile phase conditions suitable for chiral analyses with electrospray ionization LC-MS were systematically investigated using vancomycin as a representative CSP. The performance of a 2.7 μm SPP based vancomycin CSP (SPP-V) 10 cm × 0.21 cm column was compared to that of a corresponding 5 μm fully porous particles based analogue column. The results demonstrated that the SPP-V column provides higher efficiencies, 2–5 time greater sensitivity and shorter analysis time for a set of 22 basic pharma-ceutical drugs. The SPP-V was successfully applied for the analysis of the degradation products of racemic citalopram whose enantiomers could be selectively identified by MS.

Purpose: Prostate cancer (PCa) screening can lead to potential over-diagnosis/over-treatment of indolent cancers. There is a need to optimize practices to better risk-stratify patients. We examined initial longitudinal outcomes of mid-life men with an elevated baseline prostate-specific antigen (PSA) following initiation of a novel screening program within a system-wide network. Materials and Methods: We assessed our primary care network patients ages 40 to 49 years with a PSA measured following implementation of an electronic health record screening algorithm from 2/2/2017–2/21/2018. The multidisciplinary algorithm was developed taking factors including age, race, family history, and PSA into consideration to provide a personalized approach to urology referral to be used with shared decision-making. Outcomes of men with PSA ≥1.5 ng/mL were evaluated through 7/2021. Statistical analyses identified factors associated with PCa detection. Clinically significant PCa (csPCa) was defined as Gleason Grade Group (GGG) ≥2 or GGG1 with PSA ≥10 ng/mL. Results: The study cohort contained 564 patients, with 330 (58.5%) referred to urology for elevated PSA. Forty-nine (8.7%) underwent biopsy; of these, 20 (40.8%) returned with PCa. Eleven (2.0% of total cohort and 55% of PCa diagnoses) had csPCa. Early referral timing (odds ratio [OR], 4.58) and higher PSA (OR, 1.07) were significantly associated with PCa at biopsy on multivariable analysis (both p<0.05), while other risk factors were not. Referred patients had higher mean PSAs (2.97 vs. 1.98, p=0.001). Conclusions Preliminary outcomes following implementation of a multidisciplinary screening algorithm identified PCa in a small, important percentage of men in their forties. These results provide insight into baseline PSA measurement to provide early risk stratification and detection of csPCa in patients with otherwise extended life expectancy. Further follow-up is needed to possibly determine the prognostic significance of such mid-life screening and optimize primary care physician-urologist coordination.