3
Repeatability: According to the SMPR and taking into account the studied mitragynine
concentration ranges, RSDr values should be ≤3 which is not the case of those given through
the KRA-02 method.
3. Is there information demonstrating that the method performs within the SMPR Method
Performance Requirements using the Reference Materials stated in the SMPR? If no, then
specify the what is missing and how this impacts demonstration of performance of the method.
A reference material (Mitragynine purchased from Chromadex and qualified using certified
reference material from Cerilliant) was used for method recovery investigation. As indicated
above, two of the three obtained values (105.2, 106.0 and 100.9) were out of the range
indicated by the SMPR table (95-105 %).
4. Is there information demonstrating that the method performs within the SMPR Method
Performance Requirements table specifications for all analytes in the SMPR applicability
statement? If no, please specify what is missing and whether or not the method’s applicability
should be modified.
For the 3 recovery given values, one (100.9 %) fit well in the range indicated in the SMPR table.
IV. GENERAL SUBMISSION PACKAGE:
1. Based on the supporting information, were there any additional steps in the evaluation of the
method that indicated the need for any additional precautionary statements in the method?
The method could be assayed with a MS detection method
2. Does the method contain system suitability tests or controls as specified by the SMPR? If no,
please indicate if there is a need for such tests or controls and which ones.
The method does not contain system suitability tests or controls as specified by the SMPR
which should be done.
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.
The following general comment is given in the conclusion section “The performance
characteristics are within acceptable ranges according to AOAC Internatinal guidelines for
dietary supplements” but no information demonstrating that the method system suitability
tests and controls as specified in the SMPR worked appropriately and as expected is given.
4. Based on the supporting information, is the method written clearly and concisely? If no, please
specify the needed revisions.
The proposed KRA-02 is given such as a poster not a manuscript. Few details regarding the
sample preparation, extraction, results and discussion are given.
5. Based on the supporting information, what are pros/strengths of the method?
Pros/strengths: Simplicity