Article

Optimizing organ transplant care with advanced mass spectrometry

Tobias Franz, Lydia Keckeis
Published on July 8, 2025 | 4 min read
optimizing-organ-care

Key takeaways

  • Traditional mass spectrometry has been confined to specialized environments, creating challenges for broader clinical application
  • With increased automation and standardization, modern laboratories are playing an essential role in monitoring the immunosuppressant drugs essential for organ transplant care
  • Liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry has become the gold standard for therapeutic drug monitoring of immunosuppressant drugs

One of the most critical aspects of organ transplant care is managing the immune system’s response to prevent organ rejection in recipients.1 Immunosuppressant drugs (ISDs) help reduce acute rejection rates and prolong transplant survival, but ISDs have a narrow therapeutic window, and improper dosing can lead to significant consequences.2 Physicians must grapple with the possibility of therapeutic failure, which can lead to organ injury and rejection of the transplanted organ, or other serious side effects. This includes drug-induced organ toxicity and increased risks for infections and malignancies.1, 3, 4

Standing in the background of acute patient care, but in the forefront of innovation, modern laboratories play an essential role in monitoring ISD concentrations in blood, enabling healthcare professionals to prescribe the optimal dose of drugs that will save patients’ lives. This technology, liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS), has become the gold standard for therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) of ISDs for post-transplant care.5 Well-standardized LC-MS/MS provides superior analytical accuracy with high sensitivity and specificity, which is crucial for the prompt drug dose adjustments that can mean the difference for patients between life and death.5-7

Mass spectrometry’s role in optimizing ISD dosing

In the realm of organ transplantation, ISDs such as tacrolimus, cyclosporine, sirolimus, everolimus, and mycophenolate mofetil are used to suppress the immune system.1 Physicians often combine these agents based on their different mechanisms of action to cater to each patient’s unique needs, taking into account drug-drug interactions, pre-existing diseases, and organ rejection risks. This personalized approach, facilitated by TDM with ISD dosing, helps achieve the optimal balance between preventing organ rejection and minimizing adverse effects.1, 9

It therefore goes without saying that accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity are paramount in measuring ISD concentrations. LC-MS/MS offers the highest level of specificity and the ability to separate and identify multiple ISDs used simultaneously in transplant regimens, even when there are minimal or very small amounts of ISDs within the bloodstream. 10, 11  Furthermore, LC-MS/MS offers a departure from previous methods that may suffer from interference (when other substances affect the accuracy of the measurement). This also includes cross-reactivity issues (when ISDs are confused with structurally similar compounds), which can lead to inaccurate dosing, resulting in potential harm to patients due to either insufficient immunosuppression (causing organ rejection) or excessive immunosuppression (causing toxicity and other side effects).12

Traceability and consistency for long-term transplant care

Given that ISDs are prescribed for long-term therapy as part of post transplant care, consistent and reproducible results across time and institutions are crucial.2 Despite its scientific superiority, traditional mass spectrometry has for too long been confined to specialized environments. Often operating in siloed laboratory spaces, it is usually managed by specialized (or dedicated) personnel using a patchwork of instruments from various vendors, requiring labour-intensive and manual workflows.2,8,15

This fragmentation has created major challenges for broader clinical application, and its impact on patient care and patient experience has been quite limited. Even if LC-MS/MS provides precise results, if these results aren’t comparable between labs, it severely limits their reliability, which is of particular importance for patients receiving long-term therapy across multiple care centers.2, 3, 10 Lack of standardization, appropriate reference materials, and compliance with GLP guidelines exacerbates the variability within and between labs. Thankfully for organ transplant care, there has been a recent push to standardize and develop reference method procedures to improve traceability and consistency for LC-MS/MS results across laboratories.13, 14

Future directions in ISD monitoring

The importance of mass spectrometry in monitoring ISDs cannot be overstated. Combined with advancements in automation and standardization, mass spectrometry will greatly enhance the quality and workflow of result generation, solidifying the essential role of LC-MS/MS for TDM of immunosuppressant drugs. 11, 14-16

In fact, the adoption of standardized LC-MS/MS as the new gold standard across healthcare systems marks a significant milestone in the decades-long effort to improve transplant care. Reducing variability in test results enhances the reliability of long-term post-transplant management, which ultimately supports more consistent patient care and strengthens trust in the healthcare system.

Email Icon

Get our latest insights

Join our community and stay up to date with the latest laboratory innovations and insights.

Subscribe now

Contributors

Tobias Franz headshot

Tobias Franz, PhD

International Business Leader for SWA Systems and Mass Spectrometry at Roche Diagnostics
Tobias Franz is International Business Leader for SWA Systems and Mass Spectrometry at Roche Diagnostics International. He is responsible for the global strategy, portfolio, marketing and commercialization of SWA Systems solutions including the cobas Mass Spec system and assay menu. Tobias holds a diploma and PhD in Biology from the Technical University of Munich and has 20 years of experience in healthcare and diagnostics with a focus on innovating diagnostics for the benefit of customers and patients.
Lydia Keckeis headshot

Lydia Keckeis, MSc

Global Medical Affairs Lead Mass Spec TDM at Roche Diagnostics International Ltd in Rotkreuz, Switzerland
Lydia Keckeis leads global medical strategies, including evidence generation, scientific communication, and expert engagement. With a Master’s in Biomedical Sciences and certifications in Clinical Pharmacology and Medical Affairs, she brings over 15 years of experience across clinical research, laboratory medicine, and diagnostics. Lydia’s strong foundation in applied sciences and industry expertise enables her to bridge clinical needs with innovative solutions. She is passionate about improving patient care through optimized diagnostic and patient management pathways, and through the meaningful implementation of advanced technologies in routine clinical practice.

Explore articles from our community

Join our community

Drive healthcare innovation with access to critical perspectives and exclusive events.

Healthcare Transformers delivers insights on the emerging trends shaping modern healthcare: digital health, patient experience, value-based care, and data security. Partnering with global experts and innovators, we tackle the industry's toughest challenges and explore actionable solutions.

Subscribe to our newsletter today to get invaluable perspectives delivered straight to your inbox.

References

  1. Nelson J et al. (2022), Pharmacotherapy 42(8), 599-633. Paper available from https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35810342/ [Accessed June 2025]
  2. Seger C et al. (2016). Ther Drug Monit 38(2), 170–189. Paper available from https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26982493/  [Accessed June 2025]
  3. Gelder T et al. (2017). Transpl Rev 31(3),151–157. Paper available from https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28279567/ [Accessed June 2025]
  4. Pilch NA et al. (2021). Pharmacotherapy 41(1), 119-131. Paper available from https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33131123/ [Accessed June 2025]
  5. Zhang Y and  Zhang R. (2018). Drug Test Anal 10(1), 81-94. Paper available from https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28851030/ [Accessed June 2025]
  6. Seger C et al. (2023). Clin Chem Lab Med 61(11), 1890-1901. Paper available from https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36622091/ [Accessed June 2025]
  7. Field MJ et al. (2000). Institute of Medicine (US) Committee on Medicare Coverage Extensions. Paper available from https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK225251/ [Accessed June 2025]
  8. Seger C (2012). Wien Med Wochenschr 162(21–22), 499–504. Paper available from https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23129542/  [Accessed June 2025]
  9. Tasdogan BE et al. (2019). Euroasian J Hepatogastroenterol 9(2), 96-101. Paper available from https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7047305/ [Accessed June 2025]
  10. Brunet M et al. (2019). Ther Drug Monit 41(3), 261–307. Paper available from https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31045868/ [Accessed June 2025] 
  11. Seyfinejad B et al. (2021). J Pharm Biomed Anal 205, 114315. Paper available from https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34399192/ [Accessed June 2025]
  12. McShane AJ et al. (2016). Clin Chim Acta 454, 1–5. Paper available from https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26721314/ [Accessed June 2025]
  13. Masuda S et al. (2025). Ther Drug Monit. 47(1), 4–31. Paper available from https://journals.lww.com/drug-monitoring/abstract/2025/02000/everolimus_personalized_therapy__second_consensus.2.aspx  [Accessed June 2025]
  14. Taibon J et al. (2020). Clin Biochem 82, 73-84. Paper available from https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31770523/ [Accessed June 2025]
  15. Vogeser M et al.(2024). J Mass Spectrom Adv Clin Lab 34, 44. Paper available from https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39584148/ [Accessed June 2025]
  16. Greaves R (2024). Clin Chem Lab Med 62(7), 1249-1251. Paper available from   https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38711415/ [Accessed June 2025]