9 / 151
2. Does the method contain
system suitability tests or
controls as specified by the
SMPR? If not, please indicate
if there is a need for such
tests or controls and which
ones.
Yes
3. Is there information
demonstrating that the
method system suitability
tests and controls as
specified in the SMPR worked
appropriately and as
expected? If no, please
specify.
It is not well detailed.
4. Based on the supporting
information, is the method
written clearly and concisely?
If no, please specify the
needed revisions.
The method is clearly written but there are several information missing.
The proper allergen material (whole allergenic food and roasted peanuts and
hazelnuts) to be used
Recovery studies
Use of QC points
Describe how LOD was calculated and provide a criteria for establishment of MDL (use
of a specific quantifier peptide?
The total analysis time is now specified
5. Based on the supporting
information, what are the
pros/strengths of the
method?
Strengths: The method could be able to monitor traces of all nuts in different food
commodities also including soy that might be an added value to method extension.
6. Based on the supporting
information, what are the
cons/weaknesses of the
method?
Weaknesses: The LODs and LOQs reflect a different type of spike reralized in the food
therefore the LODs achieved are not in agreement with the perormance requirements
detailed in the SMPR document.
The calculation of the recovery is also not in line with what expected.
The protocol is not properly described and experimental steps not well detailed. It is not
clear which was the most sensitive peptide found.
7. Any general comments
about the method?
There are several parts that should be improved and some part of the work carried out.
Do you recommend this
method be adopted as a First
Action and published in the
Official Methods of Analysis
of AOAC INTERNATIONAL?
Please specify rationale.
No; there several experimental details missing and points along the method that must
be improved to meet requirements of SMPR.