We're unable to sign you in at this time. Please try again in a few minutes.
We were able to sign you in, but your subscription(s) could not be found. Please try again in a few minutes.
There may be a problem with your account. Please contact the AMA Service Center to resolve this issue.
Contact the AMA Service Center:
Telephone: 1 (800) 262-2350 or 1 (312) 670-7827  *   Email: subscriptions@jamanetwork.com
Error Message ......
Original Investigation |

Concentration Accuracy of Compounded Mitomycin C for Ophthalmic Surgery

Robert M. Kinast, MD1; Kiran K. Akula, PhD2; Steve L. Mansberger, MD, MPH1; Gordon T. Barker, MS1; Stuart K. Gardiner, PhD1; Emily Whitson, BA1; Andrea E. DeBarber, PhD3
[+] Author Affiliations
1Devers Eye Institute, Legacy Health, Portland, Oregon
2RS Dow Neurobiology Laboratories, Legacy Research Institute, Portland, Oregon
3Oregon Health and Science University, Portland
JAMA Ophthalmol. 2016;134(2):191-195. doi:10.1001/jamaophthalmol.2015.4970.
Text Size: A A A
Published online

Importance  Ophthalmologists rely on accurate concentrations of mitomycin C (MMC) to prevent scarring with trabeculectomy surgery. To our knowledge, the concentration accuracy and variability of compounded MMC are unknown.

Objective  To determine whether the measured concentration differs from the expected concentration of 0.4 mg/mL of MMC used in ophthalmic surgery.

Design, Setting, and Participants  Laboratory experimental investigation conducted in July 2013. We acquired 60 samples of 0.4 mg/mL of MMC from a spectrum of common compounding and storage techniques (refrigeration, freezing, and immediately compounded dry powder) and a variety of pharmacies (an academic hospital, a community hospital, and an independent Pharmacy Compounding Accreditation Board–accredited pharmacy). We used C18 reversed-phase high-performance liquid chromatography to measure the MMC concentration of all samples. We used pure MMC (Medisca Inc) to generate calibration curves and sulfanilamide as an internal standard.

Main Outcomes and Measures  We calculated MMC concentration using a calibration curve (range, 0.3-0.5 mg/mL) generated by dividing MMC peak area by internal standard peak area and plotting the area ratio against the calibrant concentrations. We compared the measured concentration against the expected 0.4 mg/mL concentration for all samples.

Results  Measurement of MMC using the high-performance liquid chromatography method demonstrated acceptable accuracy (92%-100%), precision (2%-6% coefficient of variation), and linearity (mean correlation coefficient of r2 = 0.99). The measured MMC concentration determined using the high-performance liquid chromatography method for all samples was 12.5% lower than the expected 0.4 mg/mL value (mean [SD], 0.35 [0.04] mg/mL; 95% CI, 0.34-0.36; P < .001) with a wide concentration range between 0.26 and 0.46 mg/mL.

Conclusions and Relevance  Common compounding and storage techniques for MMC resulted in a lower accuracy and wider range of concentration than expected. These differences in concentration may result from compounding techniques and/or MMC degradation. Variability in MMC concentration could cause inconsistency in glaucoma surgical results, but the clinical relevance of such findings on glaucoma surgery outcomes remains unknown.

Figures in this Article


Place holder to copy figure label and caption
Figure 1.
Representative High-Performance Liquid Chromatrography of Mitomycin C Sample

Peaks are analytes demonstrating absorbance at 210nM: sulphanilamide internal standard (4.8 minutes), unknown minor degradants (7.3 and 10.7 minutes), cis-hydroxymitosene (11.7 minutes), trans-hydroxymitosene (17.1 minutes), and mitomycin C (28.9 minutes). The expanded region, indicated by the dashed lines, shows 4 through 20 minutes.

Graphic Jump Location
Place holder to copy figure label and caption
Figure 2.
Box Plots of Measured Concentrations of Expected 0.4 mg/mL of Mitomycin C Using a Variety of Storage Techniques and Sources

Shaded box areas indicate 25th and 75th percentiles. Error bars show concentration ranges of the 60 samples (12 samples per storage method).

Graphic Jump Location




Also Meets CME requirements for:
Browse CME for all U.S. States
Accreditation Information
The American Medical Association is accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education to provide continuing medical education for physicians. The AMA designates this journal-based CME activity for a maximum of 1 AMA PRA Category 1 CreditTM per course. Physicians should claim only the credit commensurate with the extent of their participation in the activity. Physicians who complete the CME course and score at least 80% correct on the quiz are eligible for AMA PRA Category 1 CreditTM.
Note: You must get at least of the answers correct to pass this quiz.
Please click the checkbox indicating that you have read the full article in order to submit your answers.
Your answers have been saved for later.
You have not filled in all the answers to complete this quiz
The following questions were not answered:
Sorry, you have unsuccessfully completed this CME quiz with a score of
The following questions were not answered correctly:
Commitment to Change (optional):
Indicate what change(s) you will implement in your practice, if any, based on this CME course.
Your quiz results:
The filled radio buttons indicate your responses. The preferred responses are highlighted
For CME Course: A Proposed Model for Initial Assessment and Management of Acute Heart Failure Syndromes
Indicate what changes(s) you will implement in your practice, if any, based on this CME course.


Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

0 Citations

Sign in

Purchase Options

• Buy this article
• Subscribe to the journal
• Rent this article ?

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging & repositioning the boxes below.

Articles Related By Topic
Related Collections
PubMed Articles