Elucidating important factors and corresponding method optimization for sensitive detection of small peptide drugs in human urine by solid‐phase extraction and UPLC‐HRMS: The influence of MS scan modes, protein precipitants, and ammonium formate

Abstract Small peptide hormones are widely used in sports as performance‐enhancing substances, making it crucial to develop sensitive analytical methods for their detection in doping control analysis. Various factors significantly affect analytical sensitivity, such as the selection of ultra‐performance liquid chromatography (UPLC) mobile phase, high‐resolution mass spectrometry (HRMS) scanning modes, and extraction solvents for pretreatment. Herein, comparative study approach was utilized to investigate the sensitivity of each peptide analyte under both full scan and parallel reaction monitoring (PRM) modes of HRMS and assess the effects of some protein precipitants as a part of extraction solvents on solid‐phase extraction (SPE). The results showed that full scan should be selected as the primary scan mode of HRMS, and the combination with PRM mode could effectively compensate for the limitations of full scan, and the addition of protein precipitants would adversely affect the detection of certain small peptide analytes. Meanwhile, influences of ammonium formate in reverse UPLC mobile phase on the charge state distribution of small peptides were investigated and elucidated. Based on these findings, a sensitive and reliable UPLC‐HRMS analytical method combining full scan and PRM mode was validated for screening and confirmation of 63 small peptide analytes after SPE, with limits of detection (LODs) ranging between 0.010 and 0.473 ng/ml and limits of identification (LOIs) ranging between 0.015 and 1.512 ng/ml. Additionally, suggestions were provided for the detection of [Arg8]‐vasopressin, dermorphin, and its analogues.