Hormone Testing Accuracy: A Comparative Analysis of Serum, Saliva, and Urine Methodologies for Biomedical Research

Abstract

This article provides a comprehensive analysis of the comparative accuracy, clinical applications, and methodological considerations of serum, saliva, and urine testing for hormone assessment. Targeting researchers, scientists, and drug development professionals, it examines the foundational principles of each matrix, their specific methodological applications in research settings, troubleshooting for common analytical challenges, and validation data from comparative studies. The synthesis of current evidence highlights that testing method selection should be guided by the specific biological question, as each matrix offers distinct advantages: serum for peptide hormones and baseline levels, saliva for free, bioavailable hormone fluctuations, and urine for comprehensive metabolic profiling and long-term hormone burden.

Foundations of Hormone Testing: Understanding the Core Biological Matrices

Fundamental Principles of Hormone Testing Matrices

The selection of a biological matrix for hormone testing is a critical decision in research and clinical diagnostics, fundamentally shaping the type and interpretation of the data obtained. Serum, saliva, and urine each provide unique windows into endocrine function, reflecting different physiological compartments and bioactive fractions of hormones. Understanding the biochemical principles underlying each matrix is essential for designing robust studies and accurately interpreting hormone profiles.

Steroid hormones, due to their lipophilic nature, face a challenge in aqueous environments like blood and urine. To remain soluble, they must either bind to carrier proteins or undergo conjugation into water-soluble forms [1]. This fundamental property directly dictates what each matrix measures. Serum testing typically quantifies total hormone levels, including both protein-bound and free fractions, providing a broad overview of circulating hormones [1]. In contrast, saliva contains primarily the free, unbound fraction of steroids that have passively diffused from the bloodstream through acinar cells, representing the biologically active hormones available for tissue uptake [2] [3] [4]. Urine analysis captures metabolized hormone conjugates that are being eliminated from the body, offering a cumulative picture of hormone production and clearance over several hours [5].

The temporal resolution of each method varies significantly. Serum provides a snapshot of hormone levels at a single point in time, while saliva can capture dynamic, short-term fluctuations, making it ideal for assessing diurnal rhythms like the cortisol awakening response [5] [4]. Urine integrates hormone exposure over a longer period, typically representing the hours since the last void, though timed collections (e.g., 24-hour) can provide a comprehensive daily profile [6] [7]. These physiological differences directly influence the appropriate applications for each matrix in both research and clinical settings.

Comparative Analysis of Testing Methodologies

Technical Specifications and Performance Metrics

Direct comparison of the three hormone testing matrices reveals distinct advantages and limitations dictated by their inherent biological characteristics. The following table synthesizes key performance metrics and technical considerations based on current research and clinical applications.

Table 1: Comprehensive Comparison of Hormone Testing Matrices

Parameter	Serum/Plasma	Saliva	Urine
Hormone Fraction Measured	Total (free + protein-bound)	Free, bioavailable fraction	Metabolized conjugates (phase I & II)
Invasiveness of Collection	High (venipuncture required)	Low (non-invasive)	Low to moderate (non-invasive)
Temporal Resolution	Single point-in-time snapshot	Short-term (minutes)	Integrated (hours since last void)
Ideal for Diurnal Rhythm Assessment	Limited (requires multiple draws)	Excellent (facilitates multiple collections)	Good (with multiple timed spots)
Sample Stability	Requires refrigeration/freezing; limited stability	Stable at room temperature for weeks; freeze-thaw cycles well-tolerated [2]	Dried samples stable at room temperature for months [6] [7]
Cost Considerations	Higher (clinical staff, processing equipment)	48% less than blood collection [2]	Moderate (varies by collection method)
Key Analytical Challenges	Requires skilled phlebotomist; affected by binding protein concentrations	Potential blood contamination; collection device compatibility critical [2]	Requires creatinine normalization; volume collection accuracy
Metabolic Pathway Information	Limited	Limited	Comprehensive (multiple metabolites measurable)

Analytical Validation and Reliability Data

Substantial research has established the analytical validity of different testing methodologies. For saliva testing, studies have demonstrated excellent correlation with serum free hormone levels, with representative patterns of salivary estradiol and progesterone effectively mapping the normal menstrual cycle [2]. Salivary hormone assessments have shown strong agreement with serum measurements for testosterone, estrogen, and progesterone, particularly reflecting the biologically active, free fraction of hormones [4].

Urine testing validation studies have yielded equally robust results. Recent research comparing dried urine to liquid urine measurements for reproductive hormones found intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) greater than 0.90, indicating excellent agreement [6] [7]. Comparison between a novel 4-spot urine collection method and traditional 24-hour urine collection showed excellent agreement (ICC > 0.9) for 14 of 17 urine metabolites and good agreement for the others (ICC 0.78 to 0.85) with no systematic differences between collection methods [6] [7].

Mass spectrometry technologies have significantly advanced matrix analysis capabilities. Liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) for water-soluble compounds and gas chromatography tandem mass spectrometry (GC-MS/MS) for non-polar compounds are now routinely used to measure arrays of steroid hormones with high sensitivity, accuracy with small volumes, and ability to evaluate multiple analytes simultaneously [6] [7]. These technological advances have improved the resolution of closely related hormone structures and expanded the number of metabolites that can be quantified from small sample volumes.

Experimental Protocols and Methodologies

Standardized Collection Protocols

Proper sample collection is paramount for data integrity across all matrices. Standardized protocols have been developed and validated for each method:

Saliva Collection Protocol: For accurate steroid hormone assessment, researchers typically employ passive drool into a polypropylene tube or use manufacturer-validated collection devices [2] [3]. Cotton-based swabs should be avoided for steroid hormones other than cortisol due to potential interference from plant sterols present in cotton, which can cross-react in immunoassays [2]. Participants should avoid vigorous tooth-brushing, eating, or drinking for at least 30 minutes prior to collection to prevent blood contamination that can skew results [2]. For diurnal rhythm assessment, four collections throughout the day are standard: upon waking, 30 minutes after waking, before dinner, and at bedtime [5] [4].

Dried Urine Collection Protocol: The validated 4-spot collection method involves saturating a 2 × 3 inch filter paper (Whatman Body Fluid Collection Paper or equivalent) with urine at four time points: first morning void, 2 hours after awakening, afternoon (approximately 4 PM), and before bed (10 PM) [6] [7]. The saturated paper is air-dried at room temperature for 24 hours, then can be stored with desiccant at room temperature until analysis. Studies have demonstrated analyte stability in dried urine at room temperature for up to 84 days [7]. This method effectively captures hormonal fluctuations throughout the waking day while dramatically improving patient compliance compared to 24-hour liquid collections.

Serum Collection Protocol: Blood is typically collected via venipuncture into serum separator tubes, allowed to clot for 30 minutes, then centrifuged to separate serum. Samples should be aliquoted and frozen at -80°C if not analyzed immediately. Timing of collection should be standardized, particularly for hormones with diurnal variation, with morning collections (between 7-9 AM) recommended for baseline assessments.

Analytical Workflows

The analytical workflow for each matrix differs significantly based on the nature of the sample and the hormones being quantified:

Diagram 1: Analytical workflows for different hormone testing matrices showing distinct processing pathways from sample collection to final measurement.

Research Applications and Matrix Selection Guidelines

Optimal Matrix Selection for Research Objectives

Choosing the appropriate hormone testing matrix depends fundamentally on the research question, study population, and practical constraints. The following table outlines evidence-based guidelines for matrix selection based on common research scenarios:

Table 2: Matrix Selection Guidelines for Specific Research Applications

Research Application	Recommended Matrix	Rationale	Key Considerations
Adrenal Rhythm Analysis	Saliva	Captures free cortisol dynamics; enables frequent sampling with minimal stress interference [5] [4]	4+ timepoints recommended; awakening response requires immediate post-waking samples
Estrogen Metabolism Pathways	Urine	Quantifies 2-OH, 4-OH, and 16-OH estrogen metabolites; assesses methylation capacity [5]	4-spot collection provides representative daily profile; creatinine normalization required
Male Hypogonadism Assessment	Serum	Standardized reference ranges; clinical acceptance [8]	Total testosterone may misrepresent bioavailable fraction in altered SHBG states
Large Epidemiological Studies	Saliva or Dried Urine	Room temperature stability; reduced collection burden; postal delivery feasible [2] [6] [7]	Saliva preferred for free hormones; urine for metabolite pathways
Hormone Replacement Therapy Monitoring	Serum or Saliva	Serum for total hormones; saliva for bioavailable fraction [9]	Avoid saliva for sublingual/troche therapies (local contamination) [9]
Menstrual Cycle Mapping	Saliva or Urine	Daily sampling feasible; reflects tissue availability (saliva) or cumulative production (urine) [2] [10]	Serum impractical for frequent sampling; established salivary patterns exist [2]

Research Reagent Solutions and Essential Materials

Successful hormone testing requires specific reagents and materials optimized for each matrix. The following table details essential research solutions and their applications:

Table 3: Essential Research Reagent Solutions for Hormone Testing

Reagent/Material	Function	Matrix Applications	Technical Considerations
Polypropylene Collection Tubes	Sample receptacle	Saliva	Prevents steroid adsorption; polyethylene tubes should be avoided [2]
Whatman Body Fluid Collection Paper	Filter paper for dried samples	Urine	Standardized dimensions (2 × 3 inches); consistent saturation volume [6] [7]
Helix Pomatia Digestive Juice	Enzymatic hydrolysis	Urine	Contains sulfatase and glucuronidase activities; cleaves conjugates to free hormones [6] [10]
C18 Solid Phase Extraction (SPE) Columns	Sample cleanup and concentration	Urine, Serum	Removes interfering substances; improves MS/MS sensitivity [6] [10]
BSTFA + TMCS Derivatization Reagent	Silylation for volatility	Urine (GC-MS/MS)	Enhorses volatility and detection; critical for estrogen and progesterone metabolites [10]
Mass Spectrometry Internal Standards	Isotope-labeled analogs (e.g., d3-estradiol, d9-testosterone)	All matrices	Corrects for extraction efficiency and matrix effects; essential for quantification [6] [10]
Creatinine Assay Reagents	Normalization standard	Urine	Controls for urine concentration variability; essential for spot urine samples [6] [7]

Integration of Multi-Matrix Approaches in Research

Sophisticated research designs increasingly incorporate multiple matrices to obtain a comprehensive understanding of endocrine function. This integrated approach recognizes that each matrix provides unique, non-overlapping data that collectively paint a more complete picture of hormonal status [5]. Saliva reflects real-time, bioavailable hormone levels at the tissue level, while urine reveals how hormones are metabolized and excreted, offering insights into enzymatic pathway activity [5].

This multi-matrix approach is particularly valuable in complex clinical scenarios where symptoms persist despite unremarkable conventional testing. For example, in cases of suspected estrogen dominance, salivary testing can assess the balance of bioavailable estradiol and progesterone throughout the day, while urinary metabolite profiling can identify potential alterations in 2-, 4-, or 16-hydroxylation pathways that may increase carcinogenic risk [5]. Similarly, in adrenal research, combining salivary cortisol rhythms with urinary cortisol metabolites provides information about both production patterns and clearance rates [5].

The integration of mass spectrometry technologies has been particularly transformative for multi-matrix analyses, enabling consistent measurement of multiple analytes across different matrices using standardized instrumentation [6] [7]. This technological consistency improves the comparability of results obtained from different biological samples. Furthermore, the development of validated dried matrix collection methods has practical advantages for field research and large-scale studies where immediate freezing is impractical [6] [7] [10].

Diagram 2: Hormone pathway from production to elimination showing strategic assessment points for multi-matrix testing approaches.

The comparative analysis of serum, saliva, and urine matrices for hormone testing reveals that each offers distinct advantages and limitations, making them complementary rather than competitive methodologies. Serum remains the gold standard for total hormone assessment with established clinical reference ranges. Saliva provides unique access to the biologically active free fraction of hormones with superior utility for dynamic rhythm assessment. Urine offers comprehensive metabolic profiling that reflects systemic hormone production and clearance patterns.

The evolution of mass spectrometry technologies and standardized collection protocols has significantly improved the reliability and accessibility of all three matrices. Emerging research demonstrates excellent agreement between traditional and novel collection methods, particularly for dried urine techniques that enhance participant compliance in research settings. Future directions in hormone testing will likely involve greater integration of multi-matrix approaches, leveraging the unique strengths of each method to provide a more comprehensive understanding of endocrine function in both basic research and clinical applications.

In endocrine research and drug development, the choice of biological matrix is a critical determinant of the hormonal information obtained. Serum, saliva, and urine represent the three primary matrices for hormone testing, each providing distinct and non-overlapping insights into endocrine function. Serum testing primarily measures total hormone levels, including protein-bound and free fractions, and has traditionally been considered the clinical gold standard [11]. Saliva captures the free, biologically active fraction of steroids that have passively diffused from the bloodstream, reflecting tissue-available hormone concentrations [3] [12]. In contrast, urine contains metabolized hormone derivatives and conjugates, offering a cumulative window into hormone production, metabolism, and clearance pathways over several hours [5] [6]. This objective comparison guide delineates the specific measurements, experimental methodologies, and comparative accuracy of each matrix, providing researchers and drug development professionals with a scientific framework for matrix selection based on study objectives.

Biological and Physiological Foundations

The physiological basis for what is measured in each matrix stems from the metabolism and transport of steroid hormones in the body. The following diagram illustrates the journey of steroid hormones from synthesis to their endpoint in each testing matrix.

In serum, hormones circulate bound to carrier proteins like sex hormone-binding globulin (SHBG) and albumin, which render them metabolically inactive [3] [11]. Only a small fraction (∼5-10%) remains unbound and biologically active, free to diffuse into target tissues and salivary glands [11]. This free fraction passively diffuses into saliva, making salivary concentrations representative of the biologically active hormone pool [3] [12]. Hormones are subsequently metabolized in the liver through Phase I and Phase II pathways, converted into various metabolites, conjugated for solubility, and ultimately excreted in urine, which thus provides a comprehensive metabolic profile rather than a snapshot of circulating levels [5].

Comparative Analysis of Testing Matrices

What Each Matrix Measures: A Detailed Comparison

Table 1: Comprehensive Comparison of Hormone Testing Matrices

Aspect	Serum/Plasma	Saliva	Urine
Hormone Fraction Measured	Total hormones (free + protein-bound) [11]	Free, bioavailable fraction only [3] [12]	Metabolized and conjugated hormones [10] [5]
Primary Clinical/Research Utility	Diagnosis of endocrine disorders, total hormone status	Biologically active hormone levels, circadian rhythm assessment [5] [12]	Hormone production, metabolism, and clearance pathways [5] [6]
Key Hormones Analyzed	Total testosterone, estradiol, progesterone, cortisol [13] [14]	Free cortisol, testosterone, DHEA, estradiol, progesterone [3] [12]	Estrogen metabolites (2-OH, 4-OH, 16-OH), androgen metabolites, cortisol metabolites [5] [6]
Collection Method	Phlebotomy (invasive, clinical setting)	Passive drool (non-invasive, at-home) [3] [12]	Spot or 24-hour collection (at-home) [10] [6]
Temporal Representation	Single point-in-time snapshot	Multiple time points for diurnal rhythm [5] [12]	Cumulative over several hours (24-hr) or representative (4-spot) [6]
Strengths	Gold standard for total hormones, wide acceptance	Reflects tissue-available hormones, stress-free collection [12]	Comprehensive metabolic map, non-invasive [5]
Limitations	Does not differentiate free from bound hormone	Not suitable for all hormone types (e.g., thyroid) [12]	Does not reflect real-time, bioavailable hormone levels [5]

Quantitative Data and Analytical Performance

Table 2: Analytical Performance and Methodological Data from Key Studies

Study Reference	Matrix	Technology	Analytes	Key Performance Data
Ann Clin Lab Sci, 2025 [13]	Serum	LC-MS/MS	Testosterone	AMR: 2.9-2330.4 ng/dL; Mean bias: 0.4%; Total CVs: 2.4-4.7%
BMC Res Notes, 2021 [6]	Dried Urine	GC-MS/MS, LC-MS/MS	17 reproductive hormones	ICC vs. liquid urine: >0.90; ICC 4-spot vs. 24-hr: >0.90 for 14/17 analytes
Anal Bioanal Chem, 2025 [15]	Saliva	SPE USI-LC-MS/MS	Testosterone, Cortisol, etc.	LOD: 1.1-3.0 pg/mL; Intra-plate CV: <7%; Recovery: ~77%
BMC Chem, 2019 [10]	Dried Urine	GC-MS/MS	Estradiol, Progesterone metabolites	ICC for dried vs. liquid urine: >0.95; ICC for 4-spot vs. 24-hr: >0.95

AMR = Analytical Measurement Range; CV = Coefficient of Variation; ICC = Intraclass Correlation Coefficient; LOD = Limit of Detection

Experimental Protocols and Methodologies

High-Throughput Serum Hormone Analysis via LC-MS/MS

A 2025 method for analyzing 9 steroids from serum exemplifies modern automated approaches [14]. The protocol uses 100 µL of serum aliquoted into a 96-well plate. After adding an internal standard mixture, proteins are dissociated with 0.4% formic acid. The automated liquid handler then uses Supel Swift HLB DPX Tips for dispersive solid-phase extraction (dSPE). The bind-wash-elute steps are completed in approximately 20 minutes for 96 samples. Analysis is performed via LC-MS/MS with an Ascentis Express C18 column (10 cm × 3 mm, 2.7 µm) for optimal separation of isobars like DHEA and testosterone. The method demonstrates excellent correlation (R² = 0.9974) with certified reference materials and a slightly higher recovery compared to established methods, as shown in Table 2 [14].

Salivary Free Hormone Quantification Using SPE LC-MS/MS

A 2025 study developed a high-throughput method for salivary steroids using 200 µL of saliva and Oasis HLB µElution SPE in a 96-well format [15]. This protocol is designed specifically for the low concentrations and complex matrix of saliva. After SPE cleanup, the extracts are analyzed using UniSpray ionization (USI) LC-MS/MS, which provides a 2.0-2.8-fold higher response compared to standard electrospray ionization (ESI). This enhanced sensitivity is crucial for detecting low-level steroids in saliva, with method detection limits ranging between 1.1 and 3.0 pg/mL. The method achieved optimal recovery (77%) and minimal matrix effects (33%), making it suitable for large-scale studies [15].

Urinary Hormone Metabolite Profiling with GC-MS/MS

For urinary hormone metabolites, a 2021 study validated a method using dried urine on filter paper [6]. The "4-spot" collection method involves saturating filter paper with urine at four times during the day: first morning, 2 hours post-awakening, afternoon, and before bed. The equivalent of 600 µL of urine is extracted from the filter paper using ammonium acetate buffer. The key step involves enzymatic hydrolysis with Helix pomatia enzymes to cleave glucuronide and sulfate conjugates, releasing the free forms for analysis. The extracts are then derivatized and analyzed by GC-MS/MS, which provides high resolution for closely related metabolite structures. This method showed excellent agreement (ICC > 0.90) with both liquid urine and 24-hour collections for most of the 17 reproductive hormones analyzed [6] [10].

Essential Research Reagent Solutions

Table 3: Key Reagents and Materials for Hormone Analysis

Reagent/Material	Function/Application	Example from Literature
Supel Swift HLB DPX Tips	Automated dSPE for serum/plasma; hydrophilic-lipophilic balanced co-polymer for steroid extraction [14]	Serum sample prep for 9 steroids; recovery 65-86% [14]
Oasis HLB µElution Plates	SPE for saliva; micro-elution format ideal for low sample volumes and high sensitivity [15]	Salivary steroid extraction; 96-well format for high-throughput [15]
Helix Pomatia Enzymes	Hydrolysis of glucuronide/sulfate conjugates in urine to free forms for analysis [6]	Urinary hormone deconjugation prior to GC-MS/MS analysis [6]
Whatman Body Fluid Collection Paper	Matrix for dried urine/plasma/saliva samples; stable at room temperature for transport [10] [6]	Dried urine collection for hormone metabolites; stable up to 84 days at room temp [6]
LC-MS/MS Systems (e.g., Agilent/SCIEX)	Gold-standard quantification with high sensitivity and specificity for steroids [13] [15]	Serum testosterone certification by CDC HoSt program [13]
GC-MS/MS Systems (e.g., Agilent)	Analysis of non-polar, derivatized metabolites; high resolution for isomers [10] [6]	Urinary estrogen and progesterone metabolite profiling [10]

Method Selection Workflow

The following decision pathway provides a systematic approach for researchers to select the appropriate testing matrix based on their specific study objectives and analytical requirements.

Serum, saliva, and urine matrices each provide distinct and valuable insights into endocrine function, with the optimal choice being fundamentally dictated by the research question. Serum remains the gold standard for assessing total hormone concentrations and diagnosing classical endocrine disorders. Saliva offers unique access to the free, biologically active fraction of hormones, enabling stress-free collection for circadian rhythm studies and assessment of tissue-available hormone levels. Urine provides a comprehensive window into hormone metabolism and clearance, capturing metabolite profiles that reflect systemic hormone production and enzymatic processing.

Future methodological developments are likely to focus on increased standardization and harmonization of assays across matrices, particularly for saliva and urine [11]. The integration of multi-matrix testing in research protocols provides the most comprehensive picture of endocrine function, linking total hormone levels, bioavailable fractions, and metabolic fate in a single analytical framework. The continued advancement of mass spectrometry techniques, point-of-care biosensors, and standardized collection methods will further solidify the role of each matrix in precise endocrine phenotyping for research and drug development.

Hormones, the body's chemical messengers, originate from endocrine glands and travel through the bloodstream to target organs, but their journey doesn't end there. These molecules undergo complex transport, metabolism, and excretion processes that ultimately make them detectable in alternative biological matrices like saliva and urine. Understanding the biological pathways hormones take from blood to these alternative mediums is fundamental to interpreting diagnostic test results and selecting the appropriate methodology for specific research or clinical applications. The comparative accuracy of saliva, serum, and urine testing methods depends entirely on these underlying physiological processes, which differ significantly between hormone classes based on their chemical properties and bioavailability.

This guide examines the transit mechanisms for various hormones, compares testing method performance based on current research, and details experimental protocols to inform researchers, scientists, and drug development professionals in their methodological selections.

Biological Transport Mechanisms

Fundamental Hormone Classification and Properties

Hormones are primarily classified by their chemical structure and solubility, which dictate their transport mechanisms in blood and their passage into saliva and urine [16] [17].

Table 1: Hormone Classification by Chemical Structure and Properties

Hormone Class	Chemical Nature	Solubility	Transport in Blood	Representative Hormones
Lipid-Soluble	Steroids derived from cholesterol	Lipid-Soluble	Bound to transport proteins (globulins, albumin)	Cortisol, Estradiol, Testosterone, Progesterone [16] [17]
Water-Soluble	Proteins, Peptides, Amines	Water-Soluble	Circulate freely in plasma (some bound to albumin)	Insulin, FSH, LH, ADH, Epinephrine [16]

The distinction in solubility is critical. Water-soluble hormones circulate freely but cannot passively cross cell membranes, while lipid-soluble hormones require protein carriers in the blood but can diffuse through lipid membranes [16].

Hormone Transit from Blood to Saliva

The passage of hormones from blood into saliva is a selective process governed primarily by passive diffusion and influenced by the hormone's free concentration in plasma [18].

Figure 1: Biological Pathway of Hormone Transit from Blood to Saliva.

For steroid hormones, approximately 95-99% are bound to carrier proteins like sex hormone-binding globulin (SHBG) or albumin in the blood, making them too large to passively diffuse into saliva [18]. Only the free, unbound fraction (1-5%) is biologically active and can pass through the acinar cells of the salivary glands via passive diffusion to become the hormone measured in saliva [18]. Consequently, salivary concentrations represent the bioavailable hormone fraction that is free to interact with target tissue receptors. Notably, hormone transport involves a tissue-mediated enhanced dissociation from binding proteins at the capillary level, which varies between organs and regulates hormone delivery efficiency [19].

Hormone Transit from Blood to Urine

Hormone excretion into urine is a multi-step process involving hepatic metabolism, renal filtration, and tubular secretion [20] [17].

Figure 2: Biological Pathway of Hormone Transit from Blood to Urine.

Hormones are first metabolized in the liver, where they undergo enzymatic transformations (Phase I) and are conjugated with molecules like glucuronic acid to become water-soluble (Phase II) [20] [21]. These conjugated metabolites are then released back into the bloodstream. In the kidneys, these water-soluble metabolites are efficiently filtered from the plasma at the glomerulus and excreted into the urine [17]. Some hormones and their metabolites may also undergo active secretion by the renal tubules. A 24-hour urine collection captures the integrated total of these excreted metabolites, providing a picture of hormone production and metabolism over a full day [21].

Comparative Analysis of Testing Methodologies

Performance Comparison of Serum, Saliva, and Urine Testing

The biological basis of hormone transit directly impacts what each test matrix can measure. The table below summarizes the key comparative characteristics.

Table 2: Comprehensive Comparison of Hormone Testing Methods

Characteristic	Serum/Plasma Testing	Saliva Testing	Urine Testing (24-hour)
What is Measured	Total hormone levels (free + protein-bound); Free hormone for some assays [21]	Free, bioavailable hormone fraction [18] [21]	Metabolites of hormone metabolism; integrated daily output [21]
Primary Clinical Utility	Standard for peptide hormones (FSH, LH, insulin); establishing baselines [21]	Assessing bioavailable steroid hormones (e.g., cortisol rhythm, sex hormones) [18] [21]	Comprehensive view of hormone production, metabolism, and clearance [21]
Key Advantages	Widely accepted, gold standard for many hormones; insurance compatibility [21]	Reflects biologically active fraction; non-invasive; ideal for circadian rhythm (cortisol) [18]	Provides a metabolic profile; not affected by short-term fluctuations [21]
Key Limitations	Mostly measures total hormone, not distinguishing free from bound; single time-point snapshot [21]	Sensitive to collection contamination (e.g., toothpaste, blood); not ideal for peptide hormones [21]	Collection process is cumbersome; measures metabolites, not native hormone [21]
Data on Correlation/Accuracy	Reference standard. A 2022 study showed TAP device (serum) R²=0.99 vs. venipuncture [22]	Salivary cortisol linked to metabolic markers (HbA1c, lipids) where serum cortisol was not [18]	N/A (Provides different, metabolic information rather than direct correlation)
Ideal For	Peptide hormones, thyroid testing, diagnosis of classic endocrine disorders [21] [17]	Assessing adrenal rhythm, monitoring hormone replacement therapy (free hormones) [18] [21]	Evaluating estrogen metabolism pathways, assessing overall hormone production [20] [21]

Experimental Data on Method Concordance

Recent technological advances have introduced new collection methods for serum-based testing. A 2022 head-to-head study compared the performance of two at-home blood collection devices for Anti-Müllerian Hormone (AMH) against traditional venipuncture [22].

Table 3: Performance Metrics of At-Home Blood Collection Devices vs. Venipuncture for AMH Testing

Metric	TAP II Device (Serum)	ADx 100 Card (Dried Blood Spot)
R-squared (R²) with Venipuncture	0.99 (95% CI: 0.99, >0.99) [22]	0.87 (95% CI: 0.80, 0.94) [22]
Sensitivity	100% [22]	100% [22]
Specificity	100% [22]	88% [22]
Patient-Reported Pain (Scale 0-10)	0.75 [22]	2.73 [22]
Net Promoter Score (NPS)	+72 [22]	-48 [22]

The study concluded that the TAP II device, which collects a microneedle-derived serum sample, was non-inferior to venipuncture and superior to the dried blood spot (ADx card) method in terms of correlation and false positives, while also offering a significantly better patient experience [22].

Detailed Experimental Protocols

Protocol: Validation of Salivary vs. Serum Cortisol Biomarkers

A study investigating the link between cortisol and metabolic status provides a robust protocol for comparing saliva and serum diagnostics [18].

Objective: To determine whether salivary or serum cortisol concentrations are more strongly associated with metabolic biomarkers (HbA1c, triglycerides, HDL cholesterol) in healthy young women [18].

Methodology:

• Sample Collection: Paired serum and saliva samples were collected from participants. Saliva samples were collected using appropriate collection devices to avoid contamination.
• Sample Processing: Saliva samples were centrifuged to precipitate mucins and other particulates, and the clear supernatant was used for analysis.
• Hormone Assay: Cortisol levels in both serum and saliva were quantified using high-sensitivity luminescence immunoassays or ELISA. The assays included a built-in enzymatic signal amplification system to ensure the detection of low hormone concentrations.
• Metabolic Biomarker Analysis: Blood was analyzed for HbA1c, triglycerides, and HDL cholesterol using standard clinical chemistry techniques.
• Statistical Analysis: Associations between cortisol levels (from both matrices) and metabolic factors were evaluated using correlation and regression analyses.

Key Finding: The results demonstrated a significant association between salivary cortisol concentration and increased HbA1c and lipid levels, whereas serum cortisol concentrations showed no such association, highlighting the potential clinical relevance of measuring bioavailable hormone in saliva [18].

Protocol: Head-to-Head Comparison of Blood Collection Devices

The 2022 AMH study provides a detailed protocol for comparing the accuracy of novel blood collection devices against the gold standard [22].

Objective: To evaluate the concordance of serum AMH levels obtained via standard venipuncture, the TAP II device, and the ADx 100 card in women of reproductive age [22].

Study Design: A prospective, head-to-head-to-head, within-person crossover comparison trial (N=41) [22].

Procedure:

• Participant Enrollment: Healthy women aged 20-39 were recruited. Each subject served as their own control.
• Blood Collection: During a single visit, blood was drawn from each participant using three modalities sequentially:
  • Venipuncture: Performed by a professional phlebotomist.
  • TAP II Device: A self-administered device that uses a microneedle array to collect serum from capillaries in the arm.
  • ADx 100 Card: A self-administered dried blood spot card requiring a finger-prick lancet.
• Sample Handling: One TAP sample per woman was shipped via UPS to simulate real-world mailing conditions. All other samples (remaining TAP, ADx card, and venipuncture vial) were hand-delivered to the lab within 6 hours.
• Laboratory Analysis: All samples were processed at an independent, CLIA-certified laboratory (BioAgilytix) using the Roche Elecsys AMH immunoassay.
• Data Analysis: Concordance was evaluated using R-squared values, sensitivity, specificity, and 95% confidence intervals. Patient preference was assessed via self-reported pain scales and Net Promoter Score (NPS).

The Scientist's Toolkit: Essential Research Reagents and Materials

Table 4: Key Reagents and Materials for Hormone Testing Research

Item	Function/Application	Examples/Notes
High-Sensitivity Immunoassays	Quantifying low concentrations of hormones in saliva and diluted urine samples.	Luminescence immunoassays; ELISA with enzymatic signal amplification [18].
Saliva Collection Device	Non-invasive collection of saliva supernatant while minimizing contamination.	Devices often include a cotton swab or saliva tube; must not interfere with assays [18].
Dried Blood Spot (DBS) Card	Collection and stabilization of whole blood samples from a finger-prick for transport.	ADx 100 card requires precise blood application and can suffer from lower accuracy [22].
At-Home Serum Collector	Enables remote collection of microliter volumes of serum for standard immunoassays.	TAP II device uses a microneedle array; shows high correlation with venipuncture [22].
Transport Proteins	Used in assay development to understand binding dynamics and free hormone measurement.	Albumin and Sex Hormone-Binding Globulin (SHBG) [19] [17].
Reference Standards	Calibrate instruments and create standard curves for accurate quantification.	Purified hormones (e.g., cortisol, estradiol, testosterone) of known concentration [22].
Enzymes for Metabolic Studies	Study hormone metabolism pathways (e.g., Phase I/II in the liver).	Beta-glucuronidase, produced by gut bacteria, can deconjugate hormones, affecting recycling [20].
CLPP	CLPP	Chemical Reagent
UyCT2	UyCT2	Chemical Reagent

Key Advantages and Inherent Limitations of Each Testing Medium

Hormone testing is a cornerstone of endocrine research and clinical diagnostics, yet the choice of biological medium—serum, saliva, or urine—profoundly influences analytical outcomes and interpretive validity. Each matrix offers a unique window into endocrine function, capturing different physiological compartments and temporal dynamics. Serum provides total hormone concentrations, saliva reflects bioavailable fractions, and urine reveals metabolic endpoints. Understanding the technical capabilities and constraints of each medium is essential for designing robust studies, interpreting data accurately, and advancing hormonal science. This comparative analysis examines the fundamental characteristics, methodological considerations, and evidence-based applications of each testing medium to guide researchers in selecting optimal approaches for specific investigative contexts.

Comparative Analysis of Testing Media

The selection of a testing medium dictates the specific hormonal information accessible to researchers. The table below summarizes the core analytical characteristics, advantages, and limitations of serum, saliva, and urine for hormone assessment.

Table 1: Fundamental Characteristics of Hormone Testing Media

Testing Medium	Analytical Focus	Key Advantages	Inherent Limitations
Serum (Blood) [23] [24]	Total hormone concentration (free + protein-bound)	• Gold standard for diagnostic disorders like hypogonadism [24]• Can measure non-steroidal hormones (e.g., FSH, LH, TSH) [23]• High analytical precision and accuracy [24]	• Single-point snapshot, missing diurnal rhythms [24]• Invasive collection requiring phlebotomy [24]• Does not distinguish bioactive free fraction from protein-bound [4]
Saliva [5] [4]	Free, bioavailable hormone fraction	• Non-invasive, stress-free, home-collection [5] [4]• Ideal for circadian rhythm studies (e.g., cortisol) [5] [4]• Reflects tissue-available hormones [5] [2]	• Lower hormone concentrations require highly sensitive assays [2]• Potential for blood contamination from vigorous brushing [2]• Does not provide data on hormone metabolism or metabolites [5]
Urine(24-hour & Dried) [5] [25] [6]	Hormone metabolites & conjugation pathways	• Comprehensive metabolic map (Phase I/II detox pathways) [5] [25]• Non-invasive; dried urine stable at room temperature [6]• Integrates hormone production over several hours [5]	• Does not capture real-time, free hormone availability [5]• Cumbersome collection for 24-hour method [25] [6]• Results reflect renal function and hydration status [25]

Experimental Data and Methodological Protocols

Robust experimental data validates the utility of each testing medium and informs protocol development for hormonal research.

Comparative Validation of Urine Methodologies

A 2021 prospective observational study directly compared reproductive hormone measurements between traditional 24-hour liquid urine collection and a four-spot dried urine method, analyzing 17 steroid hormones via mass spectrometry [6].

Table 2: Analytical Agreement Between Urine Collection Methods for Reproductive Hormones

Analyte Category	Representative Hormones	Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC)	Clinical Interpretation
Estrogens	Estrone (E1), Estradiol (E2), Estriol (E3)	> 0.90 [6]	Excellent agreement
Estrogen Metabolites	2-OHE1, 4-OHE1, 16α-OHE1	> 0.90 [6]	Excellent agreement
Androgens	Testosterone, Androsterone, Etiocholanolone	> 0.90 [6]	Excellent agreement
Progesterone Metabolite	Pregnanediol (PdG)	> 0.90 [6]	Excellent agreement
Other Metabolites	6-Hydroxymelatoninsulfate	0.78 - 0.85 [6]	Good agreement

Experimental Protocol: Dried Urine vs. 24-Hour Urine Collection [6]

• Population: 26 healthy adult volunteers.
• Dried Urine Collection: Participants saturated filter paper (Whatman Body Fluid Collection Paper) at four time points: first morning, 2 hours post-awakening, afternoon (~4 PM), and before bed (~10 PM). Filter paper was air-dried at room temperature for 24 hours.
• 24-Hour Urine Collection: All urine was collected into a single container with 1g boric acid as a preservative and kept refrigerated.
• Sample Analysis: Liquid urine aliquots and dried urine extracts (using 2mL of 100mM ammonium acetate, pH 5.9) were subjected to enzymatic deconjugation with Helix pomatia digestive juice. Hormones were extracted via C18 solid-phase extraction and ethyl acetate, then derivatized and analyzed by GC-MS/MS.
• Data Normalization: Dried urine analyte values were normalized to urine creatinine.

Saliva Assay Validation and Protocol

Saliva testing requires stringent protocols to ensure reliability, focusing on free, bioavailable steroid hormones that diffuse passively from blood into saliva [5] [4].

Key Experimental Considerations for Saliva [2]:

• Collection Device: Must be validated for specific analytes. Polypropylene tubes are recommended; polyethylene tubes can adsorb steroids, and cotton swabs may contain plant sterols that cross-react in immunoassays.
• Sample Contamination: Vigorous tooth brushing leading to gingival bleeding can skew results; subjects should avoid this before sampling.
• Assay Sensitivity: ELISA assays must demonstrate high sensitivity with inter-assay CV <15% and intra-assay CV <10%. Correlation with mass spectrometry, the reference method, is ideal for validation.

Visualizing Testing Pathways and Workflows

The following diagrams illustrate the physiological basis for hormone detection in each medium and a validated experimental workflow for comparative method validation.

Figure 1: Physiological Pathways to Hormone Detection in Different Media. Serum measures total hormones, saliva captures the free bioavailable fraction, and urine contains metabolized and conjugated hormone products.

Figure 2: Experimental Workflow for Comparative Urine Method Validation. This protocol demonstrated excellent agreement (ICC > 0.90) for most reproductive hormones between 24-hour liquid and four-spot dried urine collections [6].

Essential Research Reagents and Materials

The following toolkit details critical reagents and materials required for implementing the hormone testing methodologies discussed.

Table 3: Research Reagent Solutions for Hormone Testing

Reagent / Material	Specification / Function	Application Context
Mass Spectrometry Systems [25] [26] [6]	GC-MS/MS and LC-MS/MS for high-sensitivity, specific multi-analyte profiling; minimizes cross-reactivity vs. immunoassays.	Quantitative analysis of steroid hormone panels in serum, saliva, and urine [25] [26].
Enzymatic Hydrolysis Reagents [6]	Helix pomatia digestive juice (sulfatase/glucuronidase activity) in acetate buffer (pH ~5.2); hydrolyzes conjugates for metabolite measurement.	Releasing free steroids from glucuronide/sulfate conjugates in urine prior to extraction and MS analysis [6].
Solid-Phase Extraction (SPE) [6]	C18 columns; isolate and purify steroid hormones from biological matrix pre-derivatization or MS injection.	Sample preparation for urine and serum extracts to remove interfering substances [6].
Derivatization Reagents [6]	Bis(trimethylsilyl)trifluoroacetamide (BSTFA); enhances volatility and detection for GC-MS.	Derivatizing hydroxyl and ketone groups on steroid molecules for GC-MS analysis [6].
Specialized Collection Devices [2] [6]	• Validated saliva swabs (analyte-specific)• Filter paper (Whatman) for dried urine• Borosilicate tubes with boric acid (24-h urine).	Standardized, non-invasive sample collection; ensures analyte stability and recovery [2] [6].

Serum, saliva, and urine testing media provide complementary rather than competing insights into endocrine function. Serum remains the reference for total hormone concentration and specific clinical diagnoses, while saliva excels in capturing circadian rhythms of bioavailable hormones. Urine, particularly with modern dried methods, offers an unparalleled view of hormonal metabolism and enzymatic pathways. The choice of medium must be hypothesis-driven, aligning analytical capabilities with specific research questions. As mass spectrometry advances and standardized protocols evolve, integrated multi-matrix approaches will likely provide the most comprehensive understanding of endocrine dynamics, pushing the frontiers of research and personalized medicine.

Methodological Applications: Selecting the Right Test for Your Research Objective

The accurate measurement of hormone levels is fundamental to both clinical diagnostics and research in endocrinology. Three primary biological matrices—serum, saliva, and urine—are utilized for hormone assessment, each with distinct advantages and limitations. Serum testing, established as the conventional standard in medical laboratories, is particularly indispensable for evaluating peptide hormones and establishing baseline physiological levels [21]. Saliva testing offers measurement of free, bioavailable hormones through non-invasive collection, while urine testing provides a comprehensive view of hormone metabolites over a longer period [27] [18]. Understanding the technological basis, appropriate applications, and limitations of each method is crucial for researchers and clinicians seeking to generate reliable, interpretable data in hormone-related studies.

The comparative accuracy of these testing methods remains a active area of investigation, with the optimal choice dependent on the specific research question, hormone class of interest, and required temporal resolution. Serum testing maintains its preeminence for peptide hormone analysis due to the presence of these molecules in circulation and the established validation of immunoassays for their detection in this matrix [21]. In contrast, steroid hormone assessment may benefit from alternative matrices that better reflect free hormone concentrations or metabolic clearance. This guide provides a detailed, evidence-based comparison of these methodologies, with particular emphasis on the validated protocols and technical considerations for serum-based hormone assessment.

Comparative Analysis of Testing Methodologies

Technical Specifications Across Biological Matrices

Table 1: Comparison of Hormone Testing Methodologies by Biological Matrix

Parameter	Serum/Plasma	Saliva	Urine
Best For	Peptide hormones (LH, FSH, IGF-1), establishing baselines [21]	Free steroid hormones (e.g., cortisol, estradiol), diurnal rhythm [21] [18]	Hormone metabolites, estrogen metabolism, 24-hour production [27] [28]
Technology	Immunoassays (Chemiluminescent, ELISA), LC-MS/MS [29]	Immunoassays (Luminescence, ELISA) [18]	LC-MS/MS, GC-MS/MS [27] [6]
Hormone Form Measured	Total hormone (bound + free); "free" for some (e.g., testosterone) [27]	Free, bioavailable hormone only [27] [18]	Free and conjugated hormones; provides a true measure of bioavailable hormone [27]
Temporal Perspective	Single point in time ("snapshot") [27]	Single point in time or multiple points for diurnal curves (e.g., cortisol) [21]	Full-day perspective (24-hour collection) or multiple spots [27] [6]
Metabolite Measurement	No (except for specialized tests like Testosterone Metabolites) [27]	No [27]	Yes, provides a clearer picture of hormone balance and metabolism [27] [28]
Collection	Invasive (venipuncture), requires a clinic visit [18]	Non-invasive, can be done at home [27] [18]	Non-invasive, 24-hour collection can be cumbersome [6]

Experimental Data and Validation Studies

Quantitative validation studies reinforce the technical comparisons outlined above. A 2021 prospective observational study examining reproductive hormones demonstrated that dried urine testing, which utilizes LC-MS/MS and GC-MS/MS technology, showed excellent agreement with traditional liquid urine measurements, with intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) exceeding 0.90 for most hormones [6]. Furthermore, the study validated that a collection of four spot dried urines could effectively replace a more burdensome 24-hour collection, showing excellent agreement (ICC > 0.9) for 14 of 17 urine metabolites and good agreement (ICC 0.78-0.85) for the others [6].

For serum cytokines, a study profiling 27 analytes in healthy subjects found that individual variations were greater than the variations observed in samples from the same donor taken one week apart. This finding underscores that for clinical trials, using a serum sample from each subject as their own baseline is a more sensitive control than relying on a separate control cohort [30]. Regarding saliva, research has shown significant associations between salivary cortisol and metabolic markers like HbA1c and triglycerides, whereas blood cortisol concentrations showed no such correlation, highlighting the potential biological relevance of the free hormone fraction measured in saliva [18].

Serum Testing: Protocols and Technical Considerations

Methodologies and Instrumentation

Serum hormone testing primarily relies on two core technological platforms: immunoassays and mass spectrometry. Immunoassays, including chemiluminescent and enzyme-linked (ELISA) variants, are the most widely used methods in clinical laboratories due to their high throughput and automation capabilities [29]. These assays function on the principle of antibody-antigen recognition. In a typical noncompetitive sandwich immunoassay used for larger peptide hormones, a capture antibody bound to a solid surface binds the hormone, and a second, labeled signal antibody completes the "sandwich," generating a signal proportional to the hormone concentration [29].

Mass spectrometry, particularly Liquid Chromatography-Tandem Mass Spectrometry (LC-MS/MS), is increasingly regarded as a gold standard for its high sensitivity, specificity, and ability to multiplex—simultaneously measuring multiple analytes. It is especially valuable for distinguishing between structurally similar hormones and metabolites with minimal cross-reactivity [6]. This method is crucial for steroid hormone profiles and specialized testosterone metabolite tests in serum [27].

Common Pitfalls and Interference Mechanisms

Despite its status as a gold standard, serum testing is susceptible to analytical interferences that can compromise result accuracy. Key pitfalls include:

• Hook Effect: This phenomenon occurs in sandwich immunoassays when extremely high concentrations of a hormone (e.g., prolactin in macroprolactinomas) saturate both the capture and signal antibodies, preventing sandwich formation and resulting in a falsely low or normal result [29]. This can be mitigated by sample dilution or using assays with higher antibody concentrations [29].
• Macromolecules: The presence of macroprolactin—a complex of prolactin and IgG—can lead to falsely elevated prolactin readings in immunoassays because the large complex is detected but is biologically inactive. This should be suspected when clinical symptoms do not match lab results [29].
• Heterophile Antibodies: These are human antibodies that can bind to assay antibodies, interfering with the immunoassay and potentially causing either falsely elevated or falsely low results [29].
• Biotin Interference: High doses of biotin (vitamin B7) can interfere with biotin-streptavidin binding systems used in many modern immunoassays, leading to clinically significant inaccuracies [29].

Table 2: Essential Research Reagent Solutions for Serum Hormone Testing

Reagent / Material	Function in Protocol	Key Considerations
Blood Collection Tubes	Collection and preservation of blood sample.	Serum separator tubes (SST) are standard; consider specialty tubes for unstable analytes.
Capture & Signal Antibodies	Core components of immunoassays for specific hormone binding.	Monoclonal antibodies provide high specificity; critical for avoiding cross-reactivity [29].
Chemiluminescent Substrates	Generate measurable light signal in chemiluminescent immunoassays.	Offer high sensitivity and wide dynamic range for detection [29].
LC-MS/MS Mobile Phases & Columns	Separate analytes (chromatography) prior to mass spectrometric detection.	High-purity solvents and specialized columns (e.g., C18) are essential for peak resolution.
Calibrators & Controls	Establish the standard curve and monitor assay performance.	Traceable to international standards; should cover pathological ranges.
Biotin Blocking Reagents	Mitigate interference from endogenous or supplemental biotin.	Added to the sample to neutralize biotin before immunoassay analysis [29].

Serum testing remains the unequivocal method of choice for the assessment of peptide hormones and for establishing baseline levels in both research and clinical settings. Its strengths are rooted in standardized methodologies, extensive validation histories, and its suitability for measuring hormones that are optimally detected in circulation. However, a modern scientific approach recognizes that no single matrix is superior for all applications. Saliva testing provides an invaluable window into free, bioavailable steroid hormones and diurnal rhythms, while urine testing offers a comprehensive picture of hormone metabolism and 24-hour output.

For researchers and drug development professionals, the selection of a testing methodology must be guided by the specific scientific question. The experimental design should account for the hormone class of interest, the required biological context (free vs. total hormone, snapshot vs. integrated profile), and potential analytical interferences inherent to each platform. As technological advancements continue to improve the sensitivity and multiplexing capabilities of platforms like LC-MS/MS, the potential for highly specific, multi-analyte panels from small sample volumes will further refine the accuracy and utility of hormone assessment across all matrices.

Saliva testing has emerged as a critical methodology in endocrine research for investigating bioavailable hormone levels and capturing dynamic physiological patterns. Unlike serum, which measures total hormone concentration (including protein-bound fractions), saliva primarily contains the free, bioavailable fraction of steroid hormones that are readily available to target tissues [24] [31]. This distinction is physiologically significant because only unbound hormones can passively diffuse through capillary walls and cellular membranes to exert biological effects. For researchers and drug development professionals, this capability positions saliva testing as an invaluable tool for non-invasively monitoring hormone activity at the tissue level.

The scientific foundation of salivary hormone assessment rests on the hydrophobic nature of steroid hormones. Because these hormones are lipophilic, they must be bound to carrier proteins in watery mediums like blood. In saliva, which contains minimal proteins, hormones exist predominantly in their unbound, biologically active state [1]. This fundamental difference in matrix composition means that saliva and serum provide complementary yet distinct information: serum reveals total hormone production and transport, while saliva reflects tissue-available hormone activity. Furthermore, the non-invasive nature of saliva collection enables researchers to implement intensive sampling protocols to capture diurnal rhythms and dynamic responses to interventions with minimal participant burden [24].

Comparative Analysis of Hormone Testing Modalities

Methodological Comparisons and Technical Specifications

Table 1: Comparison of Primary Hormone Testing Methodologies

Parameter	Saliva Testing	Serum Testing	Urine Testing
Hormone Fraction Measured	Free, bioavailable hormones [24] [31]	Total hormones (free + protein-bound) [24]	Hormone metabolites [24] [1]
Collection Method	Non-invasive saliva collection into tubes [31]	Phlebotomy [24]	Mid-stream urine collection [24]
Sampling Flexibility	High-frequency sampling feasible [24]	Single time-point snapshots [24]	Timed collections (e.g., 24-hour) [24]
Diurnal Rhythm Assessment	Excellent - multiple daily samples practical [24]	Limited - impractical for frequent draws	Limited to pooled collections [24]
Analytical Strengths	Measures tissue-available hormone levels [31]	Diagnostic gold standard for total hormone levels [24]	Comprehensive metabolite profiling [24]
Methodological Limitations	Not suitable for troche/sublingual therapies [9]	Invasive; stressful for participants	Not reflective of tissue uptake for topical/oral medications [9]
Ideal Research Applications	Diurnal rhythm studies, stress response monitoring, HRT efficacy (topical/oral) [24] [9]	Diagnosing endocrine disorders, hypogonadism assessment [24]	Metabolic pathway analysis, enzyme activity studies [24]

Analytical Performance and Validation Data

Table 2: Experimental Data on Saliva Testing Performance

Analyte	Correlation with Serum	Collection Considerations	Stability Evidence
Cortisol	Moderate correlation with hair cortisol (long-term) [32]	Passive drool optimal; cotton bud methods reliable [33]	LC-MS/MS provides superior validity over immunoassays [32]
Testosterone	Moderate correlation with hair testosterone (r=0.67) [32]	Single morning sample captures peak production [31]	High stability across assays (ICC=0.91) [32]
Progesterone	Moderate correlation with hair progesterone [32]	Cycling women require cycle phase documentation	Higher stability in hair vs. saliva [32]
DHEA	Moderate correlation with hair DHEA (r=0.65) [32]	Levels decline significantly with age [24]	LC-MS/MS recommended for accurate quantification [32]
Estradiol	Accurate detection even at low levels via LC-MS/MS [31]	Extraction process needed to separate from contamination [31]	Immunoassays overestimate low levels; LC-MS/MS preferred [32]

Experimental Protocols for Salivary Hormone Assessment

Standardized Saliva Collection Methodology

The passive drool method represents the gold standard for unstimulated whole saliva (UWS) collection, best replicating baseline saliva production and composition from both major and minor glands in the rested state [33]. In validated protocols, participants allow saliva to pool in the mouth floor and passively drool through a short straw into a sterile collection tube. For UWS collection, participants should refrain from eating, drinking, or oral hygiene procedures for at least 30 minutes prior to collection to prevent contamination [34]. The approximate percentage contributions from different glands in UWS are 65% submandibular, 20% parotid, 5% sublingual, and 10% from numerous minor glands [33].

For stimulated whole saliva (SWS) collection, participants chew sterile paraffin wax (60 chews per minute, timed using a metronome) [33]. While SWS provides greater sample volume, the stimulation dramatically alters glandular contributions, with greater than 50% coming from the parotid gland versus only 35% from the submandibular [33]. The bud method represents an alternative approach where participants place three sterile cotton buds in the mouth between the cheek and molars (both sides) and under the tongue for 2 minutes [33]. Bud methods show high reliability across measures and are particularly useful when sample volume is limited.

Diurnal Rhythm Assessment Protocol

Comprehensive diurnal cortisol assessment requires multiple collections throughout the day, typically at awakening, 30 minutes post-awakening, before lunch, late afternoon, and before bedtime [24]. Cortisol exhibits significant variation, increasing in the morning, peaking approximately 30 minutes after awakening, and gradually decreasing throughout the day [24]. For multi-day studies, samples should be collected at the same times each day to control for circadian influences. Immediate freezing at -80°C is essential to preserve sample integrity until analysis [33] [32].

Analytical Methodologies: LC-MS/MS Versus Immunoassays

Liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) represents the current gold standard for salivary hormone analysis due to its high specificity and sensitivity, particularly for low-concentration hormones such as estradiol in men and postmenopausal women [31] [32]. LC-MS/MS minimizes cross-reactivity issues common with immunoassays and provides accurate quantification across the full physiological range [32].

Immunoassays, while more cost-effective and requiring less specialized training, suffer from cross-reactivities to other substances and tend to overestimate hormone levels, especially in lower ranges typical of cortisol in both sexes and testosterone in women [32]. For estradiol in saliva, correlations between immunoassays and LC-MS/MS have been reported as low as r = 0.06, highlighting significant methodological concerns [32]. For research requiring precise quantification, LC-MS/MS methodology is strongly recommended.

Diagram 1: Hormone partitioning pathway

The Researcher's Toolkit: Essential Reagents and Materials

Table 3: Essential Research Reagents and Materials for Salivary Hormone Analysis

Item	Specification	Research Application
Saliva Collection Tubes	Plastic tubes, no preservatives	Primary sample collection [31]
Passive Drool Aids	Short straws or funnels	Facilitate transfer to collection tubes [33]
Saliva Stimulants	Sterile paraffin wax or gum	For stimulated whole saliva collection [33]
Cotton Buds	Sterile, synthetic tip preferred	Alternative collection method [33]
LC-MS/MS System	Liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry	Gold standard analytical method [32]
Freezing Storage	-80°C freezer	Sample preservation [33] [32]
Enzyme Immunoassays	Commercial EIA/ELISA kits	Alternative to LC-MS/MS [32]
Centrifuge	Refrigerated capability	Sample processing [33]
OdVP2	OdVP2	Chemical Reagent
ChaC1	ChaC1 Protein (Human, Recombinant)

Diagram 2: Experimental workflow decision tree

Discussion: Research Applications and Methodological Considerations

The strategic implementation of saliva testing in research protocols enables investigation of hormone dynamics that are challenging to assess through serum or urine methodologies. The non-invasive nature of saliva collection facilitates frequent sampling designs essential for capturing pulsatile secretion patterns and circadian rhythms, particularly for cortisol which follows a distinct diurnal pattern that increases in the morning, peaks approximately 30 minutes after awakening, and gradually decreases throughout the day [24]. Alterations to this pattern are associated with various poor health outcomes and stress-related conditions, making this temporal dimension critical for many research questions.

Saliva testing demonstrates particular utility in monitoring hormone replacement therapy (HRT), as it accurately reflects tissue uptake of hormones delivered via topical, oral, vaginal, injectable, and pellet delivery systems [9]. However, researchers must note that saliva testing is not appropriate for troche or sublingual hormone therapies because these delivery methods produce artificially high local concentrations in the salivary glands, creating a false-high determination of whole body exposure [9]. For these delivery methods, blood spot testing provides more accurate assessment of systemic hormone levels.

When designing studies, researchers should consider that hormone levels in saliva can fluctuate from moment-to-moment and are influenced by factors including emotional states, food intake, exercise, and smoking [32]. These potential confounders must be documented and controlled statistically in analytical models. For women's health research, both saliva and hair hormone levels demonstrate moderate stability across ovulatory cycles, though hair progesterone levels show significantly higher stability than respective levels from saliva [32]. This methodological consideration is particularly important for longitudinal studies of cycling women where phase-specific hormone assessment is critical.

Saliva testing represents a sophisticated methodological approach that provides unique insights into bioavailable hormone activity and dynamic endocrine patterns. When deployed with appropriate analytical methodologies (preferably LC-MS/MS) and standardized collection protocols, saliva serves as an invaluable matrix for research investigating tissue-level hormone activity, diurnal rhythm regulation, and response to physiological interventions. While each testing modality—serum, urine, and saliva—offers distinct advantages and limitations, the strategic selection of saliva testing for appropriate research questions enables investigation of endocrine parameters that are inaccessible through other methodological approaches. As salivary bioscience continues to evolve, standardization of collection and analytical protocols will further enhance the reliability and comparability of findings across research domains.

In the comparative analysis of hormone testing methodologies, urinary hormone profiling occupies a distinct and indispensable niche. While serum testing quantifies circulating hormone levels and saliva measures free, bioavailable fractions, urine testing provides a comprehensive window into hormone metabolism and detoxification pathways that other methods cannot capture [5]. This capability makes urine an exceptionally valuable tool for researchers investigating endocrine function, particularly in studies of hormone-dependent conditions, metabolic disorders, and detoxification physiology.

Urine testing measures hormonally derived metabolites, offering an integrated profile of hormone production, utilization, and elimination over a defined collection period [35]. This temporal integration is particularly advantageous for capturing the metabolic fate of hormones after tissue interaction, revealing patterns that single-timepoint measurements often miss. The non-invasive nature of urine collection further facilitates repeated sampling and dynamic monitoring of endocrine responses to experimental interventions or physiological challenges [36].

Comparative Analysis of Hormone Testing Methodologies

Fundamental Differences in What Each Method Measures

The three primary hormone testing methodologies—serum, saliva, and urine—provide complementary but distinct insights into endocrine function. Each approach captures different physiological aspects, with unique strengths and limitations for specific research applications.

Table 1: Core Characteristics of Hormone Testing Methodologies

Parameter	Serum/Plasma Testing	Saliva Testing	Urine Testing
What is measured	Total and free hormones in circulation	Free, bioavailable hormones	Hormone metabolites and conjugates
Temporal resolution	Moment-in-time snapshot	Multiple timepoints across circadian cycle	Integrated over collection period (hours)
Key advantages	Gold standard for many hormones; established reference ranges	Captures circadian rhythms; non-invasive	Reveals metabolic pathways; non-invasive
Primary limitations	Does not reflect tissue uptake or metabolism	Does not show hormone metabolism	Does not capture real-time fluctuations
Optimal research applications	Acute hormone status; diagnostic thresholds	Circadian rhythm analysis; stress response	Metabolic pathway mapping; detoxification studies

Serum testing represents the historical gold standard in clinical endocrinology, providing precise quantification of both protein-bound and free hormone fractions within the vascular compartment [37]. However, this approach offers limited insight into hormonal activity at the tissue level or the metabolic fate of hormones following cellular interaction [5].

Saliva testing measures the free, biologically active fraction of steroid hormones that have passively diffused from the circulation into saliva [5]. This method is particularly valuable for capturing diurnal patterns of hormone secretion, especially for cortisol, through non-invasive serial sampling [5] [37].

Urine testing provides a fundamentally different perspective by quantifying hormonally derived metabolites excreted over time [5] [35]. Unlike direct hormone measurements, these metabolites reflect the cumulative activity of enzymatic pathways involved in hormone metabolism and elimination, offering unique insights into an individual's metabolic phenotype [28] [38].

Technical and Methodological Considerations

The analytical approaches employed in hormone testing significantly influence result interpretation. Serum testing typically utilizes immunoassays or mass spectrometry, with careful attention to binding protein variations that affect free hormone calculations [5].

Saliva testing requires specialized collection devices and strict adherence to timing protocols to accurately capture circadian rhythms [5]. Potential interference from oral contaminants or blood contamination must be controlled through proper collection protocols.

Urine testing employs two primary collection methodologies with distinct research applications:

• 24-hour urine collection: Captures the complete spectrum of hormone metabolites excreted throughout a full circadian cycle, allowing absolute quantification of daily output [35]. This method is essential for investigating hormones with pulsatile secretion or nocturnal peaks (e.g., melatonin, growth hormone) [35].
• Dried urine testing: Utilizes multiple timed collections (typically 4-5 points) throughout a single day, providing a metabolic profile while capturing circadian patterns of cortisol and cortisone [28] [35]. This approach offers practical advantages for field studies and longitudinal monitoring.

Mass spectrometry represents the analytical gold standard for urinary hormone metabolite profiling, providing the specificity required to distinguish structurally similar metabolites [35]. Both gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS) and liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) platforms offer excellent sensitivity and reproducibility for steroid metabolite quantification [35].

Urinary Hormone Metabolites: Analytical Targets and Physiological Significance

Estrogen Metabolism Pathways

Estrogen metabolism represents a paradigmatic example of how urinary metabolite profiling illuminates physiologically significant pathways with clinical implications. The metabolic fate of estrogens involves complex phase I and phase II biotransformation pathways that determine their biological activity and potential pathogenicity [38].

Table 2: Key Estrogen Metabolites in Urinary Profiling

Metabolite	Enzymatic Pathway	Biological Significance	Research Implications
2-Hydroxyestrone (2-OHE1)	CYP1A1/CYP1A2	"Protective" pathway; weaker estrogenic activity	Higher ratios associated with favorable metabolic phenotypes
4-Hydroxyestrone (4-OHE1)	CYP1B1	Potentially genotoxic; can form DNA-damaging semiquinones	Marker of oxidative stress; requires phase II detoxification
16α-Hydroxyestrone (16α-OHE1)	CYP3A4	Proliferative; strong estrogenic activity	Associated with tissue proliferation patterns
2-Methoxyestrone (2-MeOE1)	COMT	Methylated metabolite of 2-OHE1	Indicator of methylation capacity; anti-angiogenic properties

The 2-/16α-hydroxyestrone ratio provides particularly valuable insight into estrogen metabolism balance, with lower ratios associated with less favorable metabolic phenotypes in hormone-sensitive tissues [38] [35]. Similarly, the 2-/4-hydroxyestrone ratio reflects the balance between protective and potentially detrimental metabolic pathways [38].

The efficiency of phase II conjugation reactions, particularly methylation via catechol-O-methyltransferase (COMT), significantly influences the biological impact of estrogen metabolites [38]. The 2-MeO-E1:2-OHE1 ratio serves as a functional marker of methylation efficiency, with lower values suggesting impaired phase II detoxification capacity that may increase susceptibility to oxidative DNA damage [38] [35].

Diagram 1: Estrogen Metabolism and Detoxification Pathways. This diagram illustrates the phase I hydroxylation and phase II conjugation pathways of estrogen metabolism, highlighting enzymes and metabolites with protective (green) versus potentially detrimental (red) profiles.

Cortisol Metabolism and HPA Axis Function

Urinary cortisol metabolite profiling provides a comprehensive assessment of hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) axis activity and glucocorticoid metabolism. Unlike salivary cortisol which captures free cortisol at specific timepoints, urinary testing measures both active cortisol and its multiple metabolites, offering insights into global cortisol production and clearance [5] [35].

The cortisol/cortisone ratio in urine reflects 11β-hydroxysteroid dehydrogenase (11β-HSD) activity, a critical enzyme system governing tissue-specific glucocorticoid exposure [35]. The sum of cortisol metabolites (THE + THF + 5α-THF) provides an index of total daily cortisol production, often referred to as "adrenal reserve" [35]. Additionally, the 5α-THF/THF ratio indicates 5α-reductase activity, an enzyme pathway with implications for both glucocorticoid and androgen metabolism [35].

Androgen and Progesterone Metabolism Pathways

Urinary metabolite profiling extends to androgens and progesterone, revealing individual variations in metabolic patterns that influence hormonal activity. Testosterone metabolism proceeds primarily through 5α-reductase or aromatase pathways, with the balance between these routes having significant physiological implications [39].

The 5α-/5β-reductase ratio for both androgens and progesterone reflects individual metabolic phenotypes that influence hormone sensitivity [39]. Increased 5α-reductase activity enhances androgen signaling in responsive tissues, while preferential 5β-reduction represents an inactivation pathway [39].

The androstanediol:etiocholanolone ratio provides another marker of 5α-reductase activity, with implications for tissue-specific androgen exposure [39]. In progesterone metabolism, the 5α-pregnanediol:5β-pregnanediol ratio influences neuroactive steroid production, potentially affecting GABAergic tone and central nervous system function [39].

Experimental Protocols for Urinary Hormone Metabolite Analysis

Sample Collection and Processing

Proper sample collection is paramount for reliable urinary hormone metabolite analysis. Researchers must implement standardized protocols to maintain sample integrity and minimize pre-analytical variability.

24-Hour Urine Collection Protocol:

• Collection Initiation: Participants discard first morning void and note exact time (collection start)
• Timed Collection: All urine for subsequent 24 hours is collected in pre-treated containers
• Final Collection: Include first morning void of following day at exactly 24-hour mark
• Storage: Keep collection container refrigerated throughout collection period
• Volume Measurement: Record total volume after completion of collection
• Aliquot Preparation: Mix total collection thoroughly and prepare aliquots for analysis
• Preservation: Freeze aliquots at -20°C or lower until analysis [40] [35]

Dried Urine Collection Protocol:

• Timed Collections: Collect urine at 4-5 specified times (typically first morning, late morning, afternoon, evening)
• Sample Application: Saturate filter cards with precise urine volume at each collection
• Drying: Air-dry cards completely before storage or shipping
• Storage: Protect from light and moisture; stable at room temperature for several weeks [28] [35]

Critical methodological considerations include:

• Complete Collection Verification: Assess 24-hour completeness using creatinine excretion (approximately 15-25 mg/kg body weight for men, 10-20 mg/kg for women)
• Sample Contamination Prevention: Exclude collections contaminated with blood, excessive bacteria, or fecal material
• Stability Preservation: Add preservatives when necessary (e.g., boric acid for bacterial overgrowth prevention) [40]

Analytical Methodologies

Mass spectrometry represents the gold standard for urinary hormone metabolite quantification due to its superior specificity, sensitivity, and capacity for multiplex analysis.

Liquid Chromatography-Tandem Mass Spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) Protocol:

• Hydrolysis: Enzymatic deconjugation using β-glucuronidase/sulfatase
• Extraction: Liquid-liquid or solid-phase extraction
• Derivatization: Chemical derivatization to enhance sensitivity (if required)
• Chromatographic Separation: Reverse-phase UPLC with gradient elution
• Mass Spectrometric Detection: Multiple reaction monitoring (MRM) for specific metabolites [35]

Quality Control Measures:

• Internal Standards: Use stable isotope-labeled analogs for each analyte
• Calibration Curves: Prepare fresh with each analytical batch
• Quality Control Pools: Include low, medium, and high concentration pools
• Proficiency Testing: Participate in external quality assurance programs [35]

Table 3: Essential Research Reagent Solutions for Urinary Hormone Metabolite Analysis

Reagent/Category	Specific Examples	Research Function	Technical Considerations
Sample Preservation	Boric acid, hydrochloric acid, sodium azide	Preserve analyte integrity during collection	Concentration-dependent effects on specific analytes
Enzymatic Deconjugation	β-Glucuronidase, sulfatase	Hydrolyze phase II conjugates	Source and activity optimization required
Internal Standards	Deuterated steroid metabolites	Correct for extraction and ionization variability	Use structural analogs for each analyte class
Solid-Phase Extraction	C18, mixed-mode, polymeric sorbents	Extract and concentrate analytes	Select sorbent based on metabolite polarity
Derivatization Reagents	Methoxyamine, MSTFA, dansyl chloride	Enhance MS sensitivity and specificity	Reaction conditions vary by metabolite class
Mass Spectrometry Mobile Phases	Ammonium acetate, formic acid, methanol, acetonitrile	Chromatographic separation	MS-compatible additives required

Research Applications and Data Interpretation

Key Applications in Clinical and Translational Research

Urinary hormone metabolite profiling enables sophisticated research applications across multiple disciplines:

Cancer Risk Assessment and Prevention Studies: Estrogen metabolite ratios, particularly the 2/16α-OHE1 ratio, serve as biomarkers in studies investigating hormonal carcinogenesis [28] [38]. Longitudinal studies demonstrate that individuals with higher 2/16α-OHE1 ratios exhibit reduced incidence of hormone-sensitive malignancies, making this a valuable endpoint for cancer prevention trials [38].

Neuroendocrine and Stress Research: Comprehensive urinary cortisol metabolite profiling provides insights into HPA axis dysregulation in stress-related disorders [5] [35]. The non-invasive nature of urine collection facilitates repeated measures in study designs investigating chronic stress, shift work, or circadian disruption [36].

Therapeutic Intervention Monitoring: Urinary metabolite patterns reveal individual variations in hormone metabolism that influence treatment responses [39]. This approach is particularly valuable in studies of hormone replacement therapies, where metabolite profiles can predict efficacy and side effect susceptibility [39].

Environmental Toxicology Studies: Urinary hormone metabolites serve as sensitive biomarkers in studies investigating endocrine-disrupting chemical exposure [28]. The inclusion of bisphenol-A (BPA) in some urinary hormone panels further enhances utility for environmental health research [28].

Data Analysis and Interpretation Framework

Proper interpretation of urinary hormone metabolite data requires consideration of several analytical factors:

Normalization Approaches:

• Creatinine Correction: Express metabolites as μg/mg creatinine to adjust for urinary concentration
• 24-Hour Excretion: Calculate total daily output when complete collections are obtained
• Metabolite Ratios: Use ratios to minimize biological and analytical variability [35]

Pattern Recognition:

• Pathway Dominance: Identify preferential metabolic routes (e.g., 5α- vs 5β-reduction)
• Phase I/II Balance: Assess coordination between hydroxylation and conjugation
• Enzyme Activity Indices: Use metabolite ratios to infer in vivo enzyme activity [35] [39]

Diagram 2: Experimental Workflow for Urinary Hormone Metabolite Studies. This diagram outlines the sequential steps from sample collection through biological interpretation in urinary hormone metabolite research.

Urinary hormone metabolite profiling represents a sophisticated methodological approach that complements serum and saliva testing in endocrine research. Its unique capacity to illuminate metabolic pathways and detoxification processes makes it particularly valuable for investigators studying hormone-dependent conditions, metabolic individuality, and endocrine disruption.

The integration of urinary metabolite data with genetic, genomic, and clinical information represents a promising frontier in precision medicine research [41]. As mass spectrometry technologies continue to advance, with improvements in sensitivity, throughput, and computational analytics, urinary hormone metabolite profiling will likely assume an increasingly prominent role in both basic and translational endocrine research.

For research design purposes, urinary testing provides maximal value when applied to questions involving hormone metabolism, metabolic phenotyping, and detoxification pathway assessment. When combined with serum-based hormone measurements and salivary circadian profiling, urinary metabolite analysis completes a comprehensive endocrine assessment strategy capable of addressing complex research questions across multiple physiological domains.

In the evolving landscape of clinical diagnostics and research, the accurate measurement of hormones is paramount for understanding endocrine function, diagnosing disorders, and monitoring treatments. Traditional approaches have often relied on single biological matrices—typically serum—as the gold standard. However, emerging evidence suggests that this singular perspective fails to capture the complex dynamics of hormone activity across different biological compartments. Integrated testing strategies that combine multiple matrices offer a more comprehensive systems biology view of endocrine function, accounting for the distinct information provided by saliva, urine, and serum.

Each biological matrix reflects different aspects of hormone physiology. Serum measurements capture total hormone concentrations including protein-bound and free fractions, saliva provides the bioavailable free fraction that is biologically active at the tissue level, while urine contains hormone metabolites that reflect clearance and overall production. When combined, these matrices provide a multidimensional perspective that more accurately represents the endocrine system's complexity. This comparative guide examines the technical performance, clinical applications, and practical considerations of these testing methodologies, providing researchers and clinicians with evidence-based insights for selecting appropriate testing strategies.

Comparative Analysis of Testing Matrices

Analytical Performance and Methodological Considerations

Table 1: Analytical Performance Characteristics Across Biological Matrices

Parameter	Saliva Testing	Urine Testing	Serum Testing
Hormones Measured	Free, bioavailable steroids (estradiol, progesterone, cortisol, testosterone)	Hormone metabolites (E3G, PdG), LH	Total hormones (bound + free)
Sensitivity Requirements	High (low concentrations)	Moderate	Standard
Common Methods	ELISA, LC-MS/MS	Lateral flow immunoassays, ELISA	Immunoassays, LC-MS/MS
Key Technical Considerations	Collection device compatibility, avoiding blood contamination	Correction for creatinine/ specific gravity	Impact of binding proteins on results
Stability	Stable at -20°C for up to a year [2]	Requires refrigeration	Variable stability

Saliva testing requires particularly sensitive analytical methods due to the low concentrations of steroid hormones present. Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISA) can offer the necessary sensitivity but require standardization within and between testing laboratories [2]. Liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) offers improved specificity and sensitivity for cortisol measurement across matrices, though reference ranges remain poorly standardized for saliva [11].

For urine hormone testing, lateral flow immunoassays have been developed that can quantitatively measure reproductive hormones including estrone-3-glucuronide (E3G), pregnanediol glucuronide (PdG), and luteinizing hormone (LH). These assays show strong correlation with laboratory-based ELISA methods, with coefficients of variation below 6% for all three analytes [42].

Clinical Validity and Diagnostic Performance

Table 2: Clinical Validity and Applications by Matrix

Clinical Application	Saliva	Urine	Serum
Menstrual Cycle Mapping	Excellent for daily monitoring of estradiol & progesterone [2]	Excellent for E3G, PdG, LH patterns [42]	Impractical for daily sampling
Ovulation Confirmation	Progesterone rise detection	PdG rise post-LH surge (100% specificity) [42]	Progesterone rise detection
Adrenal Function	Excellent for cortisol diurnal rhythm	Good for free cortisol output	Affected by binding proteins
Therapeutic Monitoring	Accurate for topical, oral, vaginal, injectable, pellet [9]	Accurate for oral, troche, sublingual [9]	Gold standard for most applications
Infertility Workup	Comprehensive hormone profiling	LH surge detection, ovulation confirmation	Standard assessment

Saliva testing has proven particularly valuable for female hormone monitoring throughout the menstrual cycle, with studies demonstrating clear profiles of estradiol and progesterone that align with expected physiological patterns [2]. The non-invasive nature of saliva collection enables daily sampling, which is crucial for capturing the dynamic hormonal changes across the cycle—an approach that would be unrealistic with repeated venous blood sampling [2].

Urinary hormone measurements have shown remarkable diagnostic performance for reproductive applications. The Inito Fertility Monitor demonstrated 100% specificity for confirming ovulation when using a novel criterion based on urinary PdG rise following the LH surge, with an area under the ROC curve of 0.98 [42]. This highlights the clinical utility of urinary hormone metabolite testing for ovulation confirmation.

Practical Considerations and Economic Factors

Saliva collection is approximately 48% less costly than blood collection when comparing method-specific prices [2]. The economic advantage extends beyond direct costs to include practical considerations—saliva can be collected at home without specialized training, and samples remain stable with proper storage, reducing the need for repeat collections [2]. This practicality is particularly valuable for conditions requiring frequent monitoring, such as female hormone imbalance assessment, where missing samples could delay diagnosis and therapy for an entire menstrual cycle.

Urine testing also offers significant practical advantages for home-based monitoring. The development of smartphone-connected readers that can quantitatively measure multiple urinary hormones has made sophisticated hormone tracking accessible outside clinical settings [42]. These systems allow patients to monitor their fertile window and confirm ovulation without repeated clinic visits.

Experimental Protocols for Multi-Matrix Assessment

Saliva Collection and Processing Protocol

Sample Collection: Participants should refrain from eating, drinking, or brushing teeth for at least 30 minutes prior to sample collection. Passive drool into polypropylene tubes is recommended for maximum analyte recovery. Cotton-based swabs should be avoided for steroid hormone measurement due to potential interference from plant sterols present in cotton that can cross-react in steroid immunoassays [2].

Sample Processing and Storage: Following collection, saliva samples should be centrifuged at 1500-3000xg for 15 minutes to precipitate mucins and other particulate matter. The clear supernatant should be transferred to polypropylene cryovials for storage at -20°C. Studies indicate that frozen saliva samples can maintain stable steroid hormone concentrations for up to a year at -20°C, with no remarkable variations in steroid hormone concentration [2].

Analytical Considerations: When establishing saliva testing, it is crucial to ensure that the collection protocol is compatible with the target analytes. Certain hormones require passive drool collection, as using swabs can lead to over-recovery or under-recovery of the measured analyte [2]. Additionally, care should be taken to avoid blood contamination in samples, as this can skew results.

Urinary Hormone Assessment Methodology

Sample Collection: First-morning urine samples are preferred for hormone assessment due to their concentrated nature. For quantitative assessments, creatinine correction or specific gravity measurement should be performed to account for variations in urine concentration.

Lateral Flow Immunoassay Protocol: The Inito Fertility Monitor protocol provides an example of a validated urinary hormone assessment method [42]:

• Dip the test strip in urine for 15 seconds
• Insert the strip into the reader attached to a mobile device
• Capture test strip images using the mobile application
• Process images to yield optical density values corresponding to metabolite concentrations
• Convert optical density to concentration values using batch-specific calibration curves

Validation Parameters: For the Inito system, validation included precision studies (CV <6% for all three hormones), linearity of concentration reproduction, and cross-reactivity studies. The system demonstrated high correlation with laboratory-based ELISA methods for E3G, PdG, and LH measurements [42].

Integrated Multi-Matrix Study Design

For a comprehensive systems biology approach to hormone assessment, researchers can implement parallel sampling across matrices:

Study Protocol:

• Collect matched serum, saliva, and urine samples at predetermined intervals based on the research question (e.g., daily throughout menstrual cycle, multiple times daily for circadian rhythms)
• Process each matrix according to established protocols
• Analyze hormones using validated assays appropriate for each matrix
• Correlate measurements across matrices to build integrated physiological models

Data Integration: Advanced computational approaches, including correlation networks and multivariate statistical methods, can identify relationships between hormone measurements across different matrices [43]. These integrated analyses can reveal how hormone dynamics in one compartment relate to those in another, providing insights into physiological regulation and disease mechanisms.

Hormone Transport and Metabolism Pathways

This pathway illustrates the complex journey of steroid hormones through different biological compartments. In serum, the majority (95-99%) of steroid hormones are bound to carrier proteins such as cortisol-binding globulin (CBG) and albumin, leaving only 1-5% in the free, biologically active form [2] [11]. The free hormone fraction passively diffuses into saliva, making salivary measurements representative of the bioavailable hormone concentration [2]. Hormones are metabolized in the liver, often through glucuronidation, and these metabolites are excreted in urine, providing a integrated measure of hormone production and clearance [42].

Multi-Omics Integration in Systems Endocrinology

The integration of multiple biological matrices aligns with the broader framework of systems biology, which aims to understand biological systems through the integration of diverse molecular data types [44] [45]. This approach recognizes that biological functions emerge from complex networks of interactions rather than from individual molecules acting in isolation.

Data-driven integration strategies for combining omics data include statistical methods, multivariate approaches, and machine learning techniques [43]. Correlation-based methods, such as Weighted Gene Correlation Network Analysis (WGCNA), can identify clusters of co-expressed biological features across different molecular layers [43]. These approaches have been successfully applied to identify relationships between transcriptomic, proteomic, and metabolomic data, revealing how changes at one level of biological organization influence other levels.

In the context of hormone testing, a systems biology approach might integrate genomic data (such as polymorphisms in hormone metabolism genes), transcriptomic data from relevant tissues, proteomic measurements of hormone receptors, and metabolomic profiles including hormone metabolites. This multi-layered perspective moves beyond simplistic single-hormone measurements to capture the emergent properties of endocrine networks.

Essential Research Reagent Solutions

Table 3: Essential Research Tools for Multi-Matrix Hormone Analysis

Reagent/Tool	Function	Matrix Compatibility	Key Considerations
Polypropylene Collection Tubes	Sample containment	Saliva, Urine	Avoid polyethylene (adsorbs steroids) [2]
Competitive ELISA Kits	Steroid hormone quantification	Saliva, Serum	Requires high sensitivity for saliva
Lateral Flow Immunoassays	Point-of-care hormone detection	Urine	Quantitative readers enhance utility [42]
LC-MS/MS Systems	Gold standard quantification	All matrices	High specificity, reference method [11]
Cryopreservation Tubes	Long-term sample storage	All matrices	Maintain -20°C for steroid stability [2]
Creatinine Assay Kits	Urine normalization	Urine	Correct for concentration variations
Cotton-Free Swabs	Alternative saliva collection	Saliva	Cotton contains plant sterols [2]

When establishing hormone testing capabilities, researchers should select collection devices that have been validated for their specific analytes of interest. For saliva steroid testing, devices must be evaluated to minimize interactions between salivary analytes and device surfaces [2]. Similarly, for urinary hormone assessment, quantitative readers that can convert lateral flow assay signals into continuous concentration values significantly enhance the utility of point-of-care testing devices [42].

The comparative analysis of saliva, urine, and serum testing methodologies reveals that each matrix provides unique and complementary information about endocrine function. Rather than viewing these approaches as competing alternatives, researchers and clinicians should adopt integrated testing strategies that leverage the distinct advantages of each matrix based on the specific clinical or research question.

Saliva testing offers unparalleled utility for assessing bioavailable hormone fractions through non-invasive, frequent sampling protocols. Urine testing provides valuable information about hormone metabolites and patterns of excretion, particularly for reproductive hormone monitoring. Serum testing remains essential for assessing total hormone concentrations and for applications where established clinical decision limits are based on serum measurements.

A systems biology approach that integrates data from multiple matrices, combined with other molecular data types, promises to advance our understanding of endocrine function in health and disease. By moving beyond single-matrix assessments, researchers can capture the emergent properties of endocrine networks and develop more comprehensive diagnostic and monitoring strategies. As analytical technologies continue to evolve and computational integration methods become more sophisticated, multi-matrix hormone assessment will likely become the standard for advanced endocrine research and personalized clinical care.

Troubleshooting and Optimization: Overcoming Analytical Challenges in Hormone Assays

Hormone testing is a critical component of diagnostic medicine and research, providing insights into endocrine function, reproductive health, stress response, and metabolic processes. The pre-analytical phase—encompassing sample collection, handling, and stability—introduces significant variability that can impact assay results and their clinical or research interpretation. While substantial focus has been placed on analytical method validation, the pre-analytical stage represents a major source of potential error in hormone measurement. Understanding these variables is particularly crucial when comparing the three primary sampling matrices: serum, saliva, and urine.

This guide objectively compares the performance of these sampling methods within the context of a broader thesis on the comparative accuracy of hormone testing methodologies. It synthesizes current experimental data to elucidate how pre-analytical factors influence measurement reliability, providing researchers with evidence-based guidance for selecting appropriate methodologies based on their specific experimental or clinical requirements.

Comparative Analysis of Sample Matrices

The choice of sample matrix directly influences which hormonal fractions are measured, the dynamic range of detection, and the susceptibility to pre-analytical artifacts. The table below summarizes the key characteristics, advantages, and limitations of serum, saliva, and urine for hormone testing.

Table 1: Performance Comparison of Hormone Testing Matrices

Parameter	Serum/Plasma	Saliva	Urine
Hormone Fraction Measured	Total (free + protein-bound) [3]	Free, bioavailable fraction [2] [3]	Metabolites and conjugated hormones [37]
Primary Collection Method	Venipuncture; novel at-home devices (e.g., TAP II) [22]	Passive drool; specialized swabs (analyte-specific validation required) [2]	24-hour collection; spot collection (liquid); dried on filter paper [6] [46]
Invasiveness & Patient Burden	High (venipuncture); Low (TAP II device) [22]	Low [47] [2]	Low [37]
Ideal For	Thyroid hormones, AMH; hormones with low circadian fluctuation [37]	Cortisol (circadian rhythm), free sex steroids [47] [2] [3]	Assessing hormone metabolism and daily production [9] [6]
Key Limitations	Invasive; reflects total rather than bioavailable hormone [37]	Not suitable for troche/sublingual therapies; risk of blood contamination; low analyte concentrations [9] [48] [2]	Not reflective of tissue uptake for topical/oral meds; hydration status affects concentration [9] [37]
Sample Stability	Requires refrigeration or freezing; specific stability varies by analyte.	Stable at room temperature for short periods; can be frozen for long-term storage (up to a year at -20°C) [2]	Dried urine stable at room temperature for at least 84 days; liquid urine requires refrigeration [6] [9]

Experimental Data on Method Validation

Validation of Dried Urine Testing

A 2021 prospective observational study evaluated the reliability of a dried urine test for assessing reproductive hormones and metabolites, comparing it to traditional 24-hour liquid urine collection [6] [46].

• Experimental Protocol: A group of 26 individuals collected both a 24-hour liquid urine sample and four dried spot urine samples on filter paper at specific times during the same day (first morning, 2 hours post-awakening, afternoon, and before bed). Dried urine was extracted, hydrolyzed, and derivatized before analysis by GC-MS/MS and LC-MS/MS. All analytes from dried urine were normalized to urine creatinine [6].
• Results: The comparison showed excellent agreement (ICC > 0.90) for 14 of the 17 urine metabolites and good agreement (ICC 0.78 to 0.85) for the remaining three. The study concluded that a collection of four spot dried urines provides a comparable assessment to a 24-hour collection without systematic differences, significantly reducing patient burden [6] [46].

Saliva vs. Serum Assay Performance

A 2025 study directly compared enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) and liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) for measuring salivary sex hormones [48].

• Experimental Protocol: Salivary estradiol, progesterone, and testosterone levels were measured using both ELISA (Salimetrics) and LC-MS/MS in 218 healthy young adults, including men, naturally cycling women, and combined oral contraceptive users [48].
• Results: The between-methods relationship was strong for salivary testosterone only. For estradiol and progesterone, LC-MS/MS was found to be significantly more valid than ELISA. Machine-learning classification models confirmed superior performance with LC-MS/MS data, highlighting the critical impact of the analytical technique itself on data quality, independent of the saliva matrix [48].

At-Home Blood Collection Device Performance

A 2022 head-to-head comparison study evaluated the concordance of serum Anti-Müllerian Hormone (AMH) levels obtained via standard venipuncture, the TAP II device (a microneedle array collecting whole blood), and the ADx card (a dried blood spot card) [22].

• Experimental Protocol: Forty-one women of reproductive age underwent blood collection using all three modalities in a single session. Samples were analyzed for AMH using the Roche Elecsys assay, with venipuncture serving as the reference standard [22].
• Results: The TAP II device showed a near-perfect correlation with venipuncture (R-squared = 0.99), with 100% sensitivity and specificity. In contrast, the ADx card showed a lower correlation (R-squared = 0.87) and 88% specificity, indicating a higher rate of false positives. The TAP device was also significantly preferred by users based on lower pain and a higher Net Promoter Score [22].

Table 2: Summary of Key Experimental Validation Studies

Study Focus	Key Comparative Metric	Saliva/Urine Performance	Serum/Blood Standard	Reference
Dried Urine vs. 24-hr Collection	Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC)	ICC > 0.9 for 14/17 hormones	24-hour liquid urine collection	[6] [46]
Salivary ELISA vs. LC-MS/MS	Method Agreement & Machine-Learning Classification	LC-MS/MS superior for estradiol/progesterone; ELISA less valid	Not Applicable (Method Comparison)	[48]
At-Home Blood Collection	R-squared with Venipuncture	N/A	TAP II: R²=0.99; ADx Card: R²=0.87	[22]
Saliva Utility	Clinical Context of Use	Gold standard for cortisol; reliable for testosterone/DHEA	Blood tests regarded as gold standard for most hormones	[47]

Sample Collection and Handling Protocols

Saliva Collection Essentials

Saliva collection is highly sensitive to methodology, and standardized protocols are critical for reliable results.

• Collection Device: The choice of collection device must be validated for the specific analyte. Using a swab validated only for cortisol to collect samples for testosterone, estradiol, or DHEA can yield highly erroneous results due to cross-reactivity with plant sterols in the cotton [2]. Polypropylene tubes are recommended over polyethylene, which can adsorb steroids [2].
• Avoiding Contamination: Vigorous tooth-brushing can increase salivary testosterone levels for at least 30 minutes, and blood contamination from oral micro-wounds can also skew results. Passive drool is the preferred method for certain analytes, as it avoids these interference issues [2].
• Stability: Saliva samples can be stored frozen at –20°C for up to a year or longer without remarkable variations in steroid hormone concentration [2].

Urine Collection Methods

The validation of dried urine spots has provided a more convenient and stable alternative to cumbersome 24-hour liquid collections.

• 24-hour Collection: This traditional method involves collecting all urine output over a full 24-hour period in a single container, typically kept refrigerated and often with a preservative like boric acid. The total volume is measured, and an aliquot is taken for analysis. This process is burdensome for patients and prone to collection errors [6].
• Dried Urine Spot Collection: This method involves saturating a specified area of filter paper with a spot of urine and allowing it to dry at room temperature. A protocol of four spots collected throughout the day (first morning, 2 hours post-awakening, afternoon, and before bed) has been validated to accurately reflect the total daily production of reproductive hormones [6]. Analytes in dried urine are stable at room temperature for at least 84 days, simplifying storage and shipping [6] [9].

Blood Collection Innovations

While venipuncture remains the gold standard for many serum hormones, new at-home collection devices are improving accessibility.

• TAP II Device: This device uses a microneedle array and suction to painlessly collect a capillary whole blood sample from the arm into a vial. It has demonstrated performance nearly equivalent to venipuncture for AMH testing [22].
• Dried Blood Spot (ADx Card): This method requires a finger-prick lance to deposit drops of blood on a filter paper card. The blood dries and is then mailed to a lab. While widely used, its correlation with venipuncture can be lower than other methods, and results may require a lab-specific correction factor [22].

Signaling Pathways and Workflow Visualization

The following diagram illustrates the logical workflow for selecting an appropriate hormone testing matrix based on research objectives and practical constraints, integrating the performance data and pre-analytical considerations discussed.

Diagram 1: Decision workflow for hormone testing matrix selection.

The Scientist's Toolkit: Essential Research Reagents and Materials

The following table details key materials and their functions, as derived from the experimental protocols cited in this guide.

Table 3: Essential Research Reagents and Materials for Hormone Testing

Item	Function/Application	Key Considerations	Experimental Context
Filter Paper (Whatman)	Matrix for dried urine or blood spot collection.	Specific size and type (e.g., 2x3 inch body fluid collection paper) must be used for standardized sample volume [6].	Dried urine hormone and metabolite analysis [6] [46].
LC-MS/MS & GC-MS/MS	High-sensitivity analytical platforms for hormone quantification.	Considered reference method; provides high resolution for multiple analytes simultaneously [6] [48].	Analysis of salivary sex hormones and urinary reproductive hormone profiles [6] [48].
Enzyme Immunoassay (ELISA) Kits	Immunoassay-based quantification of specific hormones.	Performance varies; may be less valid for some salivary hormones compared to LC-MS/MS [48]. Must be validated for the specific sample matrix [2].	Used in validation of home-based fertility monitors and salivary hormone testing [48] [42].
Polypropylene Collection Tubes	Storage of liquid saliva samples.	Preferred over polyethylene to minimize adsorption of steroid hormones to the tube walls [2].	Saliva hormone testing [2].
Passive Drool Collection Kit	Collection of uncontaminated saliva samples.	Avoids interference from cotton swabs; essential for accurate measurement of certain steroids [2] [3].	National Social Life, Health, and Aging Project (NSHAP) [3].
TAP II Device	At-home capillary whole blood collection.	Provides a serum sample quality comparable to venipuncture with high patient acceptance [22].	At-home AMH testing validation study [22].
Helix Pomatia Enzymes	Enzymatic hydrolysis of conjugated hormones in urine.	Converts glucuronide and sulfate conjugates back to free forms for analysis by mass spectrometry [6].	Urinary reproductive hormone profiling [6].
CCL27	CCL27 Chemokine Recombinant Protein|RUO	Recombinant CCL27 for research. Study skin immunity, T-cell homing, and inflammatory pathways. For Research Use Only. Not for human or diagnostic use.	Bench Chemicals
Ns-D1	Ns-D1 (NSD1) for Epigenetics Research|Supplier	Explore high-purity Ns-D1 for research into histone methylation, cancer, and Sotos syndrome. This product is for Research Use Only (RUO). Not for human use.	Bench Chemicals

The accuracy of hormone testing is fundamentally linked to pre-analytical decisions. The evidence demonstrates that saliva, urine, and serum each have distinct and non-interchangeable roles. Saliva excels for measuring free, bioavailable hormones like cortisol; urine is optimal for assessing hormone metabolism and 24-hour production; and serum remains the gold standard for many hormones like AMH and thyroid hormones. The adoption of standardized collection protocols, validated devices, and advanced detection methods like LC-MS/MS is critical for generating reliable, reproducible data. Researchers must align their choice of matrix and methodology with the specific biological question, carefully controlling for pre-analytical variables to ensure the integrity of their findings.

The accurate quantification of biomarkers, particularly steroid hormones, is a cornerstone of clinical diagnostics and research. Within this field, a central thesis investigates the comparative accuracy of hormone testing methods across different biological matrices—serum, saliva, and urine. Two principal analytical techniques dominate this landscape: the long-established immunoassay and the increasingly prevalent liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS). Immunoassay has served as the gold standard biomolecule assay for fifty years, but its limitations have prompted a critical evaluation of alternative methodologies [49]. LC-MS/MS represents a complementary and potentially future replacement technology, offering greater specificity, a wider analyte range, and a potentially lower cost per sample [49]. This guide provides an objective comparison of these two techniques, framing the discussion within the context of multi-matrix hormone testing and providing supporting experimental data to inform researchers, scientists, and drug development professionals.

Fundamental Principles and Technical Comparison

Immunoassay

Immunoassays, such as Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay (ELISA), rely on the specific binding between an antibody and the target antigen (e.g., a hormone). This binding event is detected and quantified through an enzymatic reaction that produces a measurable signal, typically a color change. While this method is well-established and widely used, its principal limitation is the potential for cross-reactivity, where antibodies bind to structurally similar molecules, leading to overestimation of the target analyte concentration [50]. This is a significant concern in complex matrices like urine or saliva, which contain numerous homologous compounds.

Liquid Chromatography-Tandem Mass Spectrometry (LC-MS/MS)

LC-MS/MS is a hyphenated technique that combines the physical separation capabilities of liquid chromatography (LC) with the highly specific detection of tandem mass spectrometry (MS/MS). The LC component separates analytes from a complex sample matrix, which are then ionized and introduced into the mass spectrometer. The first mass analyzer selects the ion of the parent compound (precursor ion), which is then fragmented, and a second mass analyzer selects a unique fragment (product ion) for quantification. This two-stage mass filtering process provides exceptional specificity, effectively distinguishing the target analyte from nearly all potential interferences [51]. A key advancement is the use of MS³ (MS/MS/MS) in linear ion trap instruments, which further enhances specificity by performing an additional fragmentation step, proving particularly useful for complex matrices like hair [51].

Table 1: Core Technical Characteristics of Immunoassay and LC-MS/MS

Characteristic	Immunoassay	LC-MS/MS
Principle of Detection	Antibody-Antigen Binding & Enzymatic Signal	Physical Separation & Mass-to-Charge Ratio
Specificity	Moderate (subject to cross-reactivity)	High (based on mass and fragmentation pattern)
Analyte Range	Limited (often single-analyte or small panels)	Broad (inherently multi-analyte)
Throughput	High	Moderate to High
Sample Volume	Typically low	Can be very low (e.g., 100 µL for plasma) [51]
Cost per Sample	Lower (for single analytes)	Can be lower for multi-analyte panels [52]
Development/Validation	Relatively simpler	Complex and time-intensive

Comparative Experimental Data Across Biological Matrices

The choice between immunoassay and LC-MS/MS has profound implications for the accuracy of hormone measurement in different biological specimens. The following data, drawn from comparative studies, highlights the performance disparities between these techniques.

Plasma/Serum Matrix

In the monitoring of therapeutic drugs like vancomycin, a comparative study developed a novel LC-MS/MS method and compared it with four frequently used immunoassays. Using LC-MS/MS as a reference, three immunoassays showed a mean proportional difference within 10%, but one exhibited a substantial mean proportional difference of >20% [53]. This analytical discrepancy translated directly to clinical impact: the rate of clinically discordant interpretation (i.e., classifying a concentration as toxic, therapeutic, or sub-therapeutic differently than the reference method) ranged from 6.1% to 22.2% across the different immunoassays [53]. This means that in the worst-case scenario, more than one in five clinical decisions could be erroneous based on the immunoassay result.

Urine Matrix

Comparisons in urine toxicology screening reveal similar trends. A validation study for a 52-analyte urine drug panel found that the LC-MS/MS method had limits of detection equal to or lower than ELISA cutoffs and exhibited fewer exogenous interferences [52]. Crucially, the study demonstrated that relying solely on ELISA led to a failure to detect several drugs in a significant number of forensic specimens: benzoylecgonine in 26%, lorazepam in 33%, and oxymorphone in 60% of the positive specimens [52]. Furthermore, the cost of screening per specimen was reduced by ~70% with the LC-MS/MS method compared to ELISA, challenging the notion that mass spectrometry is invariably more expensive, especially for multi-analyte panels [52].

A comparison of pesticide metabolite measurement in urine also found that while immunoassay and HPLC-MS/MS were moderately correlated (correlation 0.40–0.49), immunoassay methods consistently produced significantly higher geometric mean estimates, suggesting an upward bias likely due to cross-reactivity [50].

Saliva Matrix

Saliva is an increasingly valuable matrix for hormone testing, as it theoretically contains the free, bioavailable fraction of steroid hormones and allows for non-invasive, serial sampling [54] [2]. However, the choice of analytical technique and collection method is critical.

LC coupled with electrospray ionization-MS/MS (LC/ESI-MS/MS) is highly valued for its specificity in the analysis of salivary hormones, though a major challenge is the low concentration of hormones in saliva, often requiring sensitive methods or practical derivatization to enhance detectability [55]. The reliability of salivary hormone measurement was demonstrated in a study of professional soccer players, which found an excellent correlation between serum and saliva cortisol (r = 0.751; P < 0.001) and a significant correlation for free testosterone (r = 0.590; P = 0.002) when measured with commercial immunoassays [54]. In contrast, no significant correlation was found for total testosterone in serum and saliva (r = 0.181; P = 0.387), underscoring the importance of measuring the free fraction in this matrix [54].

Table 2: Summary of Key Comparative Studies

Study Matrix	Analyte(s)	Key Finding	Clinical/Research Impact
Plasma [53]	Vancomycin	1 of 4 immunoassays showed >20% mean bias vs. LC-MS/MS.	Discordant clinical interpretation in up to 22.2% of samples.
Urine [52]	52 Drugs/Metabolites	LC-MS/MS detected more positives; cost 70% less than ELISA.	Missed drug use with ELISA; LC-MS/MS is cost-effective for panels.
Urine [50]	Pesticide Metabolites	Immunoassay yielded higher GM estimates (upward bias).	Overestimation of exposure levels in biomonitoring studies.
Saliva [54]	Cortisol, Testosterone	Good correlation for cortisol/free testosterone with IA; poor for total testosterone.	Validates saliva for free hormone monitoring; collection is patient-friendly.

Detailed Experimental Protocols

To ensure reliable and reproducible results, the experimental protocol must be meticulously designed, from sample collection to data analysis.

Protocol 1: LC-MS/MS for Steroid Hormones in Multiple Matrices

This protocol, adapted from a validated method for the simultaneous quantification of nine steroids, demonstrates the versatility of LC-MS/MS [51].

• Sample Collection: Collect human plasma/serum, saliva, urine, or hair samples. For saliva, use a validated collection device (e.g., Sali-Tube). Avoid cotton-based swabs for steroid hormones other than cortisol, as plant sterols in cotton can cross-react and cause erroneous results [2]. Use polypropylene tubes to minimize steroid adsorption [2].
• Sample Preparation: For plasma, serum, and saliva, use a simple protein precipitation step. For urine, employ enzymatic hydrolysis to deconjugate metabolites. For hair, wash and pulverize the sample before extraction.
• Online Solid Phase Extraction (SPE) and LC Separation: Inject the processed sample into an online SPE system for purification and concentration. Subsequent separation is performed using a fast liquid chromatography gradient (e.g., 4-minute run time) [51].
• Mass Spectrometric Detection: Utilize an LC-MS/MS system capable of MS² or MS³ detection. For complex matrices like hair, MS³ on a linear ion trap mass spectrometer can provide superior specificity by reducing background interference [51].
• Validation Parameters: The method should be validated for lower limits of quantitation (e.g., 37 pmol/L for estradiol to 3.1 nmol/L for DHEAS), accuracy (e.g., 89-107%), and between-run imprecision (e.g., ≤10%) [51].

Protocol 2: Comparison Study for Vancomycin in Plasma

This protocol outlines the key steps for a method comparison study [53].

• Reference Method Development: Develop and validate a novel LC-MS/MS method. The described method used protein precipitation with an internal standard (vancomycin-des-leucine) and a 5.0 min analysis on a UPLC-MS/MS system. The validation demonstrated a total imprecision of 2.6-8.5% and an accuracy of 101.4-111.2%.
• Comparator Immunoassays: Test the same set of patient plasma samples (lithium heparin) using multiple commercially available immunoassays from different manufacturers.
• Statistical and Clinical Comparison: Perform correlation and Bland-Altman analyses to determine mean proportional differences. Subsequently, classify vancomycin concentrations according to clinical categories (toxic, therapeutic, sub-therapeutic) for each method and calculate the percentage of samples with discordant clinical interpretations.

The Scientist's Toolkit: Essential Research Reagents and Materials

The following table details key materials required for conducting reliable hormone analyses, emphasizing the critical role of sample collection devices.

Table 3: Essential Research Materials for Hormone Testing

Item	Function/Application	Critical Considerations
Lithium Heparin Plasma Tubes	Sample collection for vancomycin and other small molecule assays [53].	Preferred over serum for certain LC-MS/MS applications to avoid clot interference.
Passive Drool Collection Device (e.g., Sali-Tube)	Collection of saliva for hormone testing [54].	Validated for specific analytes; avoids interference from plant sterols in cotton swabs [2].
Polypropylene Collection Tubes	Storage of saliva and other biological samples.	Prevents adsorption of steroid hormones to the tube walls, which is a known issue with polyethylene tubes [2].
Immunoassay Kits (e.g., DxI 800)	Quantification of cortisol, total testosterone, SHBG, etc., in serum and saliva [54].	Must be validated for the specific sample matrix (e.g., saliva). Used for calculating free testosterone.
LC-MS/MS System with ESI Source	High-specificity identification and quantification of multiple analytes.	Requires method development and validation for each analyte/matrix combination. Enables MS³ for enhanced specificity [51] [55].
Internal Standards (e.g., Vancomycin-des-leucine)	Used in LC-MS/MS for quantification.	Corrects for losses during sample preparation and variations in ionization efficiency; crucial for accuracy [53].

The comparative data from direct method comparisons consistently demonstrates the superior specificity of LC-MS/MS over immunoassay across plasma, urine, and saliva matrices. Immunoassays, while historically entrenched and offering high throughput for single analytes, carry a significant risk of cross-reactivity, leading to both false positives and false negatives. This can directly result in clinically discordant interpretations, as seen with vancomycin monitoring [53]. LC-MS/MS addresses this fundamental limitation, providing a highly specific and versatile platform capable of simultaneously quantifying a broad panel of analytes. The perception of LC-MS/MS as prohibitively expensive is also being overturned, with studies showing it can be more cost-effective than immunoassay for comprehensive screening panels [52]. For the advancement of research and precision medicine, particularly within the framework of comparative accuracy for hormone testing, LC-MS/MS represents the unequivocal technical standard. Its ability to deliver accurate, specific, and multiplexed data from small sample volumes makes it the leading technology for the future of biomarker quantification.

The accurate measurement of hormone levels is a cornerstone of endocrine research and clinical diagnostics. However, the analytical validity of these measurements is fundamentally challenged by interference from cross-reactivity, contaminants, and matrix effects. These pre-analytical and analytical variables differ significantly across biological matrices—serum, saliva, and urine—and can substantially impact the reliability of hormone assays. Understanding these sources of interference is critical for selecting appropriate methodologies and interpreting results within the context of a broader thesis on the comparative accuracy of hormone testing methods. This guide objectively compares the performance of these matrices and the technologies used to analyze them, supported by experimental data highlighting how interference affects analytical accuracy.

Comparative Analysis of Biological Matrices

The choice of biological matrix—serum, saliva, or urine—directly influences the fraction of hormone measured and its vulnerability to different types of interference.

Fundamental Matrix Characteristics

Table 1: Characteristics of Biological Matrices for Hormone Testing

Matrix	Hormone Fraction Measured	Key Advantages	Inherent Vulnerabilities to Interference
Serum/Plasma	Total (free + protein-bound) and sometimes free	Widely accepted; standardized protocols [1]	Matrix effects from binding proteins; high potential for cross-reactivity in immunoassays [56]
Saliva	Free (bioavailable) fraction only	Reflects biologically active hormone; stress-free collection [3] [18]	Contamination from oral sources; blood contamination; requires sensitive assays [57]
Urine	Free (unconjugated) and conjugated metabolites	Integrated measure over time (e.g., 24-hour cortisol) [58]	Incomplete collection; hydration status; extensive cross-reactivity from metabolites without extraction [58] [9]

A key physiological concept underpinning these differences is the hydrophobicity of steroid hormones. Because they are fat-soluble, in watery environments like serum and urine, they must be bound to carrier proteins or conjugated to be soluble. This fundamental property directly influences what is measured in each matrix [1]. Saliva, being more lipid-friendly, contains the free, bioavailable fraction of hormones that has passively diffused from the bloodstream, making it a theoretically superior indicator of hormonally active tissue exposure [3] [18].

Hormone-Specific Dynamics and Contamination

Different hormones and testing scenarios present unique challenges for each matrix.

• Estrogen & Progesterone Testing: Saliva measures the free, biologically active fraction of these hormones, which is valuable for assessing tissue uptake, especially in hormone replacement therapy [9] [18]. Urine testing, in contrast, shows how the body is metabolizing these hormones but is not recommended for monitoring vaginal hormone delivery due to a high risk of contamination leading to falsely elevated results [9].

• Cortisol Awakening Response (CAR): Saliva is the matrix of choice for CAR assessment due to the ease of multiple, stress-free self-collections immediately upon awakening and at set intervals thereafter [57]. Its ability to provide an "instantaneous snapshot" is crucial for capturing this dynamic phenomenon [9].

• Exogenous Hormone Interference: The route of hormone supplementation can severely skew results if the wrong matrix is used. For example, troche or sublingual hormone therapies deliver high local concentrations to the salivary glands, creating a false-high measurement of whole-body hormone exposure in saliva tests. In this scenario, blood spot testing is more accurate [9].

Analytical Techniques and Cross-Reactivity

The technology used for hormone quantification is a major determinant of specificity, with a well-documented divide between immunoassays and mass spectrometry.

Immunoassay Limitations

Immunoassays are plagued by cross-reactivity, where antibodies bind to structurally similar molecules other than the target analyte. This is a particular problem for steroids, which share a common cholesterol backbone.

• Urine Cortisol: Urine contains numerous cortisol metabolites (e.g., dihydrocortisol, tetrahydrocortisol) that cross-react with antibodies in immunoassays, causing a marked positive bias. While an organic solvent extraction step can reduce this interference, it cannot eliminate it entirely and is often omitted in routine practice due to its complexity [58].

• Serum Cortisol: Immunoassays for serum cortisol show considerable inter-method bias and can be affected by the patient's gender and clinical condition. Studies demonstrate that these assays can exhibit a negative bias in pregnancy serum and a positive bias in samples from patients with renal failure or in intensive care, indicating that disease-state-specific matrix effects significantly interfere [56].

• Salivary Cortisone: Salivary cortisone levels are typically 2-6 times higher than cortisol levels. Many immunoassays overestimate salivary cortisol because of cross-reactivity with this abundant cortisone [57].

Mass Spectrometry Superiority

Liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) overcomes the specificity issues of immunoassays by separating analytes chromatographically and identifying them by their unique mass-to-charge ratio.

• Specificity: LC-MS/MS avoids antibody cross-reactivity, providing highly specific measurement of the target hormone even in complex matrices like urine and saliva [58] [59] [57]. This allows for the simultaneous and accurate quantification of multiple steroids, such as both cortisol and cortisone in saliva [57].

• Sensitivity and Workflow: Advanced LC-MS/MS methods provide high sensitivity and specificity even without deuterated internal standards, using simpler liquid-liquid extraction instead of solid-phase extraction, making them more feasible for clinical laboratories [59]. New atmospheric pressure ionization sources can further enhance sensitivity and signal-to-noise ratio [57].

• Standardization: Mass spectrometry offers more accurate results and considerably reduced variation across laboratories compared to immunoassays, helping to avoid false-positive results in Cushing's syndrome screening [58].

Experimental Data and Protocols

Supporting experimental data highlights the magnitude of interference and outlines specific protocols for reliable measurement.

Quantitative Data on Assay Bias

Table 2: Experimental Data on Cortisol Immunoassay Bias Across Patient Populations [56]

Patient Population	Observed Immunoassay Bias (vs. GC-MS)	Noteworthy Variation
General (Pooled Serum)	Reference Baseline	Used as comparator for patient groups
Pregnancy	Marked Negative Bias	Associated with changes in steroid-binding proteins
Renal Failure	Pronounced Positive Bias	Greatest variation; interquartile range up to 44% (Roche E170)
Intensive Care	Positive Bias	More positive than baseline

Detailed LC-MS/MS Protocol for Salivary Cortisol

The following protocol, adapted from a validated UPLC-MS/MS method, illustrates a robust approach to measuring salivary cortisol while minimizing interference [59].

Objective: To accurately measure cortisol levels in human saliva using a simple liquid-liquid extraction and UPLC-MS/MS.

Reagents and Materials:

• Chemicals: Cortisol standard, tolperisone (Internal Standard, IS), methyl tert-butyl ether, hexane, ammonium acetate, acetonitrile (HPLC grade).
• Saliva Collection: Unstimulated saliva collected by direct spitting into sterile 50 mL centrifuge tubes.
• Equipment: UPLC system coupled to a tandem mass spectrometer (e.g., Waters Xevo-TQD), Atlantis dC18 column (2.1 × 100 mm, 3 μm).

Methodology:

• Sample Collection and Storage: Collect unstimulated saliva by passive drool. Centrifuge at 2000 x g for 5 min to obtain clear saliva. Store aliquots at -20°C until analysis.
• Sample Preparation: To 1.0 mL of saliva (calibrator, control, or unknown), add 50 μL of IS working solution (20 ng/mL). Add 4.0 mL of a methyl tert-butyl ether and hexane mixture (8:2, v:v). Vortex for 2 minutes and centrifuge at 4000 rpm for 15 minutes at 20°C.
• Extraction and Reconstitution: Transfer the clear organic supernatant to a clean tube and evaporate to dryness under a gentle stream of nitrogen at 40°C. Reconstitute the dry residue in 100 μL of mobile phase (50:50, v:v, 2 mM ammonium acetate:acetonitrile).
• Chromatography and Detection: Inject 10 μL into the UPLC-MS/MS. Use a mobile phase flow rate of 0.3 mL/min. Monitor cortisol and IS transitions in positive-ion MRM mode (m/z 363.1 → 121.0 for cortisol; m/z 246.0 → 97.9 for IS).
• Validation Parameters: The method should be validated for linearity (e.g., 0.5-100 ng/mL), intra- and inter-day precision (CV% ≤ 9.0%), accuracy (bias ≤ 12.0%), and extraction recovery (≥ 92%) [59].

Research Reagent Solutions

Table 3: Essential Reagents and Materials for LC-MS/MS Hormone Analysis

Item	Function / Role	Example from Protocol
Steroid Hormone Standards	Calibration and quantification	Cortisol and cortisone reference materials [59] [57]
Stable Isotope-Labeled IS	Corrects for matrix effects and loss	d4-cortisol, d8-cortisone [57]
Liquid Chromatography Column	Separates analytes to reduce interference	Reversed-phase C18 column (e.g., Atlantis dC18) [59]
Mass Spectrometer	Provides specific detection and quantification	UPLC-MS/MS with MRM capability [59] [57]
Solid-Phase/Liquid-Liquid Extraction	Purifies sample, removes interfering contaminants	Oasis PRiME HLB cartridges [57] or MTBE/Hexane mixture [59]

Interference from cross-reactivity, contaminants, and matrix effects presents a significant challenge in hormone testing, and the impact of these factors varies substantially across biological matrices. Serum is susceptible to protein-binding dynamics and disease-state-specific matrix effects. Urine requires careful handling to avoid metabolite cross-reactivity and ensure collection accuracy. Saliva, while ideal for measuring the free, bioactive hormone and for dynamic profiling, is vulnerable to local contamination.

The evidence consistently demonstrates that mass spectrometry is analytically superior to immunoassays, offering the specificity needed to overcome fundamental limitations like cross-reactivity. While immunoassays may retain clinical utility in certain settings, LC-MS/MS provides more accurate results, reduced inter-laboratory variation, and the ability to profile multiple steroids simultaneously, making it the preferred technology for research and reference laboratory applications where the highest degree of analytical accuracy is required.

Standardization and Quality Control for Reproducible Research Data

In biomedical research, particularly in endocrinology and drug development, the choice of biological matrix for hormone testing is a fundamental decision that directly impacts data quality, reproducibility, and clinical relevance. Serum, saliva, and urine each offer distinct advantages and limitations for quantifying steroid hormones, with significant implications for research standardization. Serum testing has long been considered the gold standard in clinical medicine, providing robust measurements of peptide hormones and establishing baseline levels [21]. However, saliva testing has gained prominence for assessing free, bioavailable hormone levels due to its non-invasive collection method and correlation with unbound hormone concentrations in circulation [2]. Meanwhile, urine testing provides unique insights into hormone metabolism and daily production through measurement of hormone metabolites [6] [21].

The standardization of testing methodologies across these matrices presents considerable challenges for researchers. Variabilities in collection protocols, storage conditions, analytical techniques, and normalization approaches can significantly affect result comparability across studies [60]. This comprehensive analysis compares the technical performance, experimental considerations, and quality control requirements for serum, saliva, and urine hormone testing to support reproducible research data generation in scientific and drug development contexts.

Comparative Analysis of Testing Methodologies

Technical Performance Characteristics

Table 1: Performance Characteristics of Hormone Testing Matrices

Parameter	Serum/Plasma	Saliva	Urine
Analytes Measured	Total hormone levels (bound + free); peptide hormones [21]	Free, bioavailable hormones [2] [21]	Hormone metabolites [6] [21]
Collection Frequency	Single time point; challenging for frequent sampling [2]	High frequency; daily sampling feasible [2]	Multiple spots or 24-hour collection [6]
Sample Stability	Requires refrigeration; limited stability [2]	Stable at -20°C for ≥1 year; resistant to freeze-thaw cycles [2]	Dried spots stable at room temperature; liquid requires freezing [6]
Key Advantages	Gold standard for many hormones; wide acceptance [21]	Non-invasive; reflects biologically active fraction [2]	Captures daily production; metabolic profiling [21]
Major Limitations	Invasive collection; poor for circadian rhythm assessment [2] [21]	Contamination risks; not for peptide hormones [2] [47]	Complex normalization; collection burden [6]

Analytical Method Performance

Table 2: Analytical Performance Across Methodologies

Methodology	Sensitivity	Precision	Multiplexing Capacity	Reference Standard Correlation
LC-MS/MS	LOD: 0.11-0.35 ng/mL (serum) [61]	Intra-day: 0-21.7%; Inter-day: 0.16-11.5% [61]	19 steroid hormones simultaneously [61]	NIST SRM1950 validation (CV: 3-11%) [61]
ELISA (Saliva)	Sufficient for low salivary concentrations [2]	Intra-assay CV <10%; Inter-assay CV <15% [2]	Limited multiplexing	Correlation with mass spectrometry demonstrated [2]
Dried Urine MS	ICC: 0.75-0.99 vs liquid urine [6]	Excellent agreement (ICC >0.9) for 14/17 metabolites [6]	17 reproductive hormones simultaneously [6]	4-spot vs 24-h collection: ICC 0.78-0.85 [6]

Experimental Protocols for Method Validation

LC-MS/MS for Multi-Steroid Profiling

The simultaneous quantification of 19 steroid hormones in serum and urine represents a significant advancement in hormonal assessment capabilities [61]. The optimized protocol requires 500 μL of urine or serum/plasma, utilizing isotopically labeled internal standards for accurate quantification. Sample preparation involves liquid-liquid extraction with methyl tert-butyl ether and ethyl acetate, followed by derivatization of estrogens with dansyl chloride to improve sensitivity (11- to 23-fold enhancement) and chromatographic separation [61].

Liquid chromatography employs a C18 column with gradient elution using water and acetonitrile, both containing 0.1% formic acid. Mass spectrometric detection utilizes electrospray ionization in positive mode with multiple reaction monitoring. The method demonstrates limits of detection ranging from 0.04-0.28 ng/mL in urine and 0.11-0.35 ng/mL in serum, with recovery rates of 80-120% for most analytes at fortification levels of 10, 20, and 200 ng/mL [61]. Validation against NIST Standard Reference Material 1950 shows excellent correlation for cortisol, progesterone, and testosterone with coefficients of variation between 3-11% [61].

Salivary Hormone Assessment Protocol

Saliva collection for hormone analysis requires strict adherence to standardized protocols to ensure reliable results [2]. Participants should refrain from eating, drinking, or oral hygiene activities for at least 30 minutes before sample collection. Passive drool into polypropylene tubes is recommended, as cotton-based materials and polyethylene tubes can interfere with steroid measurements due to adsorption issues or plant sterol contamination [2].

For female hormone monitoring across the menstrual cycle, daily collection upon waking provides optimal tracking of estradiol and progesterone patterns. Samples remain stable at -20°C for up to one year without remarkable changes in steroid hormone concentrations [2]. Analytical methods such as ELISA require validation for salivary matrix effects, with recommended intra-assay coefficients of variation below 10% and inter-assay variation under 15% [2]. Correlation with mass spectrometry methods strengthens methodological validity, particularly when establishing new laboratory protocols.

Dried Urine Hormone Profiling Workflow

Dried urine collection on filter paper provides a practical alternative to 24-hour urine collections for comprehensive hormone metabolite assessment [6]. The protocol involves complete saturation of 2×3 inch filter paper with urine at four specific times during waking hours: (1) first morning void, (2) 2 hours after awakening, (3) afternoon (approximately 4 PM), and (4) before bed (10 PM) [6].

For analysis, the equivalent of 600 μL of urine is extracted from filter paper using 2 mL of 100 mM ammonium acetate (pH 5.9). Conjugated hormones are isolated via C18 solid-phase extraction, enzymatically hydrolysed using Helix pomatia enzymes (90 minutes at 55°C), and extracted with ethyl acetate. Derivatization employs bis(trimethylsilyl)trifluoroacetamide at 70°C for 30 minutes before analysis by GC-MS/MS or LC-MS/MS [6]. All results are normalized to urine creatinine to account for concentration variations. This methodology shows excellent agreement with liquid urine measurements (ICC >0.9 for most hormones) and comparable performance to 24-hour collections for 14 of 17 metabolites [6].

Quality Control Framework for Reproductive Hormone Research

Standardization Challenges and Solutions

The complexity of menstrual cycle hormone dynamics presents significant standardization challenges for reproductive research [60]. Substantial inconsistencies exist in menstrual phase definitions, validity measures, and reported hormone values across studies, complicating cross-study comparisons [60]. Research indicates that only approximately 30% of menstrual cycle studies report the number of cycles analyzed, creating reproducibility concerns [60].

A robust quality control framework must include several key components: standardized menstrual phase definitions (early, mid, and late follicular phases; mid and late luteal phases), clear reporting of validity parameters (sensitivity, specificity), precision metrics (intra- and inter-assay coefficients of variation), and participant characterization including age, cycle regularity, and hormonal medication use [60]. Implementation of uniform collection protocols across study sites, including specific timing relative to waking and menstrual cycle days, significantly improves data consistency.

Analytical Quality Control Measures

For high-quality hormone assessment, several analytical quality control measures must be implemented. Batch-to-batch variation should be monitored using quality control pools at low, medium, and high concentrations [2] [61]. Participation in inter-laboratory comparison programs and use of certified reference materials (e.g., NIST SRM1950) validates methodological accuracy [61]. For novel methods, correlation with established reference methods (e.g., mass spectrometry for salivary ELISA tests) provides essential validation [2].

Sample collection quality checks must include assessment for blood contamination in saliva samples, proper saturation of dried urine cards, and documentation of collection time and handling procedures [2] [6]. For urinary hormone measurements, creatinine normalization is essential to account for urine concentration variations [6]. Stability studies should establish appropriate storage conditions and stability timelines for each matrix type.

Essential Research Reagent Solutions

Table 3: Essential Research Reagents for Hormone Testing

Reagent/Category	Specific Examples	Research Application	Technical Considerations
Internal Standards	13C3-cortisone, 13C3-estrone, D4-aldosterone [61]	Isotope dilution for LC-MS/MS quantification	Correct for extraction efficiency and matrix effects
Solid Phase Extraction	Bond Elut C18, Bond Elut Plexa, Bond Elut NEXUS [61]	Sample cleanup and analyte concentration	Cartridge selection depends on analyte polarity and matrix
Enzymatic Hydrolysis	β-glucuronidase/arylsulfatase from Helix pomatia [61] [6]	Deconjugation of glucuronide and sulfate metabolites	Optimal activity at 55°C for 90 minutes in acetate buffer
Derivatization Reagents	Dansyl chloride, bis(trimethylsilyl) trifluoroacetamide [61] [6]	Enhance sensitivity and chromatographic separation	Critical for estrogen analysis by LC-MS/MS
Reference Materials	NIST SRM1950 [61]	Method validation and accuracy verification	Certified concentrations for cortisol, progesterone, testosterone
Collection Devices	Polypropylene tubes, Whatman filter paper, TAP II device [2] [6] [62]	Standardized sample acquisition	Material compatibility critical (avoid polyethylene)

The selection of appropriate testing matrices and implementation of robust standardization protocols are fundamental requirements for generating reproducible hormone research data. Each biological matrix offers unique advantages: serum for peptide hormones and clinical acceptance, saliva for free hormone assessment and circadian rhythm tracking, and urine for metabolic profiling and integrated hormone production measurement. Method selection must align with specific research questions while maintaining rigorous quality control through standardized protocols, appropriate validation against reference methods, and participation in inter-laboratory comparison programs. As research methodologies advance, particularly in mass spectrometry and at-home collection technologies, maintaining focus on standardization and quality control will ensure the generation of reliable, comparable data across the scientific community.

Validation and Comparative Analysis: Weighing the Evidence for Each Method

The accurate quantification of steroid hormone levels is a cornerstone of endocrinological research and clinical diagnostics. Saliva, serum, and urine represent the three primary biological matrices used for this purpose, each offering distinct advantages and limitations based on the physiological principles they reflect. Serum measurements have traditionally been the gold standard in clinical settings, but saliva and urine testing have gained significant traction for their non-invasive nature and ability to provide unique physiological insights. The correlation between hormone levels across these different matrices is not always straightforward, as it is influenced by complex factors including hormone bioavailability, metabolism, and the specific assay methodologies employed.

Understanding the fundamental physiological differences between these matrices is crucial for interpreting results. In serum, a water-based medium, steroid hormones are largely bound to carrier proteins, with only a small fraction circulating in their free, biologically active form. Saliva, in contrast, contains primarily the free, unbound hormones that have passively diffused from the bloodstream, potentially offering a more direct measurement of bioavailable hormone activity. Urine contains hormone metabolites that have been processed and conjugated by the liver, providing insights into hormone metabolism and clearance. This guide provides a comprehensive, evidence-based comparison of these testing modalities to assist researchers in selecting the most appropriate methodology for their specific investigative needs.

Physiological Basis and Comparative Analysis

The selection of a biological matrix for hormone analysis must be guided by the specific research question, as each medium reflects different physiological processes and offers unique analytical challenges. The table below provides a structured comparison of the core characteristics of saliva, serum, and urine for steroid hormone testing.

Table 1: Fundamental Comparison of Hormone Testing Matrices

Characteristic	Saliva	Serum	Urine
Hormones Measured	Free, bioavailable hormones [2]	Total hormones (free + protein-bound) [1]	Hormone metabolites (conjugated) [1] [9]
Primary Physiological Insight	Tissue-available hormone fraction	Circulating hormone pool	Hormone production, metabolism, and clearance
Collection Method	Non-invasive, self-collection possible [2]	Invasive, requires phlebotomist	Non-invasive, self-collection possible
Sample Stability	Stable at -20°C for up to a year; resistant to freeze-thaw cycles [2]	Requires specific handling and rapid processing/freezing	Requires refrigeration or freezing for preservation
Ideal for Diurnal Rhythm	Excellent (frequent, stress-free sampling) [9]	Poor (impractical for frequent draws)	Good (can reflect output over several hours) [9]
Economic Cost	~48% less costly than blood collection [2]	Highest cost (clinical visit, phlebotomy)	Moderate cost

The relationship between these matrices is governed by fundamental biochemistry. Because steroid hormones are lipophilic, they are not soluble in aqueous environments like serum or urine without being bound to proteins or conjugated into water-soluble forms [1]. This principle underlies the key differences in what each matrix measures. Saliva testing is particularly valued for assessing the bioavailable fraction of hormones like cortisol, estradiol, and progesterone, which is crucial for research on stress, menstrual cycle dynamics, and response to topical hormone therapies [2] [9]. Furthermore, the ability to collect samples at home over time, such as daily across a menstrual cycle, provides rich data that would be unrealistic to obtain via repeated venipuncture [2].

Urine testing offers the distinct advantage of evaluating hormone metabolism. It measures hormone metabolites, such as pregnanediol glucuronide (PdG) for progesterone and estrone-3-glucuronide (E3G) for estrogen, providing a window into how the body is processing and eliminating hormones [9] [42]. This is particularly valuable in research on fertility and metabolic pathways. However, urine results represent an integrated average of hormone secretion since the last void, making it less suitable for capturing rapid, pulsatile fluctuations in hormone levels compared to saliva [9].

Analytical Methodologies and Experimental Data

The accuracy of hormone quantification is profoundly affected by the analytical technique employed. Immunoassays and mass spectrometry are the two primary technologies used, each with different performance characteristics, especially when applied to different matrices.

Methodological Workflow

The following diagram illustrates the general decision-making workflow for selecting an appropriate hormone testing methodology, from matrix selection to analytical technique.

Comparative Performance Data

A critical 2025 study directly compared Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay (ELISA) and Liquid Chromatography-Tandem Mass Spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) for analyzing salivary sex hormones [48]. The results demonstrate significant methodological differences, summarized in the table below.

Table 2: Comparative Analytical Performance of ELISA vs. LC-MS/MS for Salivary Hormones [48]

Hormone	Relationship Between Methods	ELISA Limitations	LC-MS/MS Advantages
Testosterone	Strong between-methods relationship	Moderate performance	Accurate quantification; showed expected group differences
Estradiol (E2)	Poor between-methods relationship	Much less valid than LC-MS/MS	Superior reliability; better classification in machine learning models
Progesterone	Poor between-methods relationship	Much less valid than LC-MS/MS	Superior reliability; better classification in machine learning models

The study concluded that LC-MS/MS is a more reliable option compared to ELISA for the quantification of salivary sex hormones, primarily due to challenges with the validity of ELISA for estradiol and progesterone [48]. This highlights the importance of considering the assay technology when designing studies and interpreting data, particularly for matrices like saliva where hormone concentrations are low.

Experimental Protocol for Salivary Hormone Validation

For laboratories establishing saliva-based testing, a rigorous validation protocol is essential. The following methodology, derived from search results, outlines key steps:

• Sample Collection: Use a standardized, validated collection protocol. Passive drool into polypropylene tubes is often recommended. Avoid cotton-based swabs for steroid hormones other than cortisol, as plant sterols in cotton can cross-react in immunoassays [2]. Ensure no blood contamination and instruct participants to avoid vigorous tooth-brushing for at least 30 minutes prior to collection [2].
• Sample Handling and Storage: Following collection, samples can be stored at -20°C. Studies indicate samples can remain stable under these conditions for up to a year, and may be resilient to several freeze-thaw cycles with no remarkable variation in steroid hormone concentration [2].
• Assay Analysis:
  • For ELISA, ensure the test has been validated for salivary matrices. Performance metrics should include an inter-assay coefficient of variation (CV) of less than 15% and an intra-assay CV of less than 10% over triplicates [2].
  • For LC-MS/MS, this method is considered the established reference for hormone quantification. When initiating a new platform, it is critical to cross-validate results against existing MS data to ensure empirical evidence of efficient function [2] [48].
• Data Analysis: Utilize computational approaches and machine learning classification models, which have been shown to more effectively distinguish hormonal profiles when based on LC-MS/MS data compared to ELISA-derived data [48].

The Scientist's Toolkit: Essential Research Reagents and Materials

Successful execution of hormone correlation studies requires careful selection of specialized materials and reagents. The following table details key items and their functions in the research process.

Table 3: Essential Research Reagents and Materials for Hormone Testing

Item	Function/Application	Key Considerations
Polypropylene Collection Tubes	Sample receptacle for saliva collection [2].	Preferred over polyethylene, which may adsorb steroids and reduce recovery [2].
Passive Drool Collection Aid	Allows collection of neat saliva without a swab [2].	Essential for certain analytes (e.g., testosterone) where swabs can cause under-recovery or over-recovery [2].
LC-MS/MS System	High-specificity quantification of steroid hormones [48].	Considered a reference method; superior to immunoassays for low-concentration salivary estradiol and progesterone [48].
Validated Salivary ELISA Kits	Immunoassay-based quantification of specific hormones.	Must be standardized and reproducible; check CVs and ensure validation for salivary matrix [2].
Calibrators & Controls	For creating standard curves and ensuring assay accuracy [42].	Should be matrix-matched (e.g., in saliva or spiked urine) to account for interference [42].
Competitive & Sandwich ELISA Reagents	Core components for different assay formats [42].	Competitive format is used for small molecules (e.g., E3G, PdG); Sandwich format for large proteins (e.g., LH) [42].

Discussion and Research Implications

The choice between saliva, serum, and urine for hormone testing is not a matter of identifying a single "best" matrix, but rather of selecting the most appropriate one for the specific research context [1]. The correlation between levels across matrices is complex and is influenced by the hormone in question, its binding proteins, metabolic pathways, and the analytical technique used. Saliva excels in assessing the free, bioavailable fraction of hormones and is ideal for frequent, at-home sampling to capture dynamic rhythms [2]. Urine provides a valuable integrated measure of hormone metabolism and excretion, highly useful in fertility research [42]. Serum remains the standard for assessing the total circulating pool of hormones, though it may not directly reflect tissue activity.

A critical finding from recent literature is the demonstrable superiority of LC-MS/MS over ELISA for measuring key salivary sex hormones like estradiol and progesterone, challenging the reliance on immunoassays in research settings [48]. This has significant implications for the validity and reproducibility of scientific discoveries relating hormones to behavior and health outcomes. Future research should continue to leverage direct method comparisons and adhere to rigorous validation protocols to advance the field of endocrine analytics.

The precision of hormone and drug testing is foundational to reliable diagnostic and research outcomes. Intra- and inter-assay coefficients of variation (CV) serve as the key metrics for quantifying this precision, measuring variability within a single assay run and between different assay runs over time, respectively [63]. For researchers and drug development professionals, understanding these variabilities across different testing matrices—serum, saliva, and urine—is critical for selecting the appropriate method for specific applications, from clinical diagnostics to workplace drug testing.

This guide objectively compares the stability and reliability of these biological matrices by synthesizing current experimental data. It provides a detailed examination of the statistical principles governing precision measurement, summarizes performance data across methodologies, outlines standard experimental protocols for generating this data, and identifies essential research reagents, offering a comprehensive resource for experimental planning and validation.

Statistical Foundations of Assay Precision

The coefficient of variation (CV) is a standardized measure of dispersion, expressed as a percentage, that describes the level of variability relative to the mean of a set of measurements [63]. It is calculated as:

CV (%) = (Standard Deviation / Mean) × 100

This measure is particularly useful for comparing the variability of datasets with different units or widely different means [63]. In the context of assay validation, two specific types of CV are paramount:

• Intra-Assay CV: This measures the precision or repeatability within a single assay run. It is determined by testing multiple replicates of the same sample within the same run and calculating the variability between those replicate measurements [64] [63]. It reflects inconsistencies due to pipetting errors, plate effects, or other within-run factors.
• Inter-Assay CV: This measures the reproducibility of an assay across different runs performed on different days, with different reagent lots, or by different technicians. It is calculated from the mean values of control samples run in multiple independent assays [64] [63]. This metric captures variability introduced by factors like reagent preparation, calibration of equipment, and operator technique.

Acceptable CV thresholds vary by analyte and application, but general guidelines in immunoassay testing suggest an intra-assay CV of less than 10% and an inter-assay CV of less than 15% are indicative of a robust and reliable assay [64] [65]. For long-term studies, CVs of 7% (intra) and 15% (inter) are more typical [63].

Table 1: Summary of Acceptable Coefficient of Variation Thresholds

Assay Type	Typical Intra-Assay CV Target	Typical Inter-Assay CV Target	Key Source
General Immunoassay	< 10%	< 15%	Salimetrics [64], Enzo [65]
Long-Term Studies	~7%	~15%	InfluentialPoints [63]

Figure 1: Conceptual breakdown of intra- and inter-assay coefficients of variation (CV), showing their definitions, causes, and common acceptability thresholds. [64] [63] [65]

Comparative Data Across Biological Matrices

Hormone Assays

Different biological specimens offer distinct advantages and challenges for hormone testing, significantly impacting measured variability and clinical utility.

Saliva Testing is valued for measuring free, bioavailable hormone levels, as it largely excludes protein-bound hormones [2]. A key study monitoring salivary estradiol and progesterone across the menstrual cycle demonstrated the method's reliability for daily at-home sampling, a practicality unmatched by serum testing [2]. For salivary ELISA tests, maintaining an intra-assay CV below 10% and an inter-assay CV below 15% is critical for ensuring data quality [2]. However, the choice of collection device is paramount; for instance, using cotton swabs validated only for cortisol can lead to highly erroneous results for other steroids like testosterone or estradiol due to cross-reactivity with plant sterols in the cotton [2].

Serum/Plasma Testing remains the gold standard for many hormone tests but can show significant inherent biological variation. A study on Anti-Müllerian Hormone (AMH) using a fully automated assay reported substantial intra-individual, inter-cycle variability with a CV of 0.28, and an intra-cycle CV of 0.21, indicating that a single measurement may not be fully representative [66]. This highlights that variability is not just analytical but also biological.

Urine Testing is particularly useful for assessing hormone metabolism and providing an integrated measure of hormone output over time [9]. For example, urinary free cortisol reflects an average output over several hours, unlike the instantaneous snapshot provided by salivary cortisol [9]. Its non-invasive nature is a benefit, but it is generally not recommended for monitoring topical or vaginal hormone delivery due to risks of contamination and poor correlation with tissue uptake [9].

Table 2: Comparison of Hormone Testing Matrices: Characteristics and Data Variability

Specimen	Key Advantage	Key Limitation	Reported/Expected CVs	Best Use Case
Saliva	Measures free, bioavailable hormone; non-invasive; ideal for frequent sampling.	Sensitive to collection device and technique; potential for blood contamination.	Intra <10%, Inter <15% (ELISA) [2].	Frequent monitoring (e.g., circadian rhythms, menstrual cycle).
Serum/Plasma	Gold standard for many analytes; robust, established methods.	Invasive procedure; requires a clinical setting; measures total hormone (bound + free).	AMH: Inter-cycle CV=0.28 [66].	Single-point clinical diagnosis where total hormone is relevant.
Urine	Integrated output over hours; useful for metabolite profiling.	Not reflective of tissue uptake for topical meds; risk of contamination.	Not explicitly quantified for hormones in results.	Assessing 24-hour hormone output or metabolism.

Drug Assays

The choice of matrix for drug testing is heavily influenced by the desired detection window and the correlation with recent use.

Urine Drug Testing has a longer detection window for most substances, allowing for the detection of drug use days or even weeks after consumption [67]. This wider window can also identify long-term use and potential "hangover" effects or withdrawal-related impairment [67]. A large comparative study involving 1,500 paired samples found that urine testing detected substances in 3.7% of samples, significantly more than the 0.5% detected by oral fluid [67].

Oral Fluid (Saliva) Drug Testing detects recent drug use, typically within 12-48 hours, which more closely approximates the period of potential impairment [67]. However, its sensitivity is lower for certain drugs like cannabis and benzodiazepines compared to urine [67]. The aforementioned study concluded that urine testing was more likely to detect overall substance use and identify workers with possible substance use disorders [67].

Table 3: Comparison of Drug Testing Matrices Based on a Workplace Study [67]

Specimen	Detection Window	Detection Rate (Study)	Correlation with Impairment	Key Finding
Urine	Long (up to days/weeks)	3.7% (56/1500 samples)	Detects long-term use; "hangover" & withdrawal effects may impact safety.	More likely to detect overall use and workers with substance use disorders.
Oral Fluid	Short (12-48 hours)	0.5% (8/1500 samples)	More closely approximates period of acute impairment.	Detected only one worker positive who was negative in urine.

Experimental Protocols for Determining CVs

The following protocols detail standard methodologies for establishing the precision of an assay.

Protocol for Intra-Assay CV Determination

The intra-assay CV is calculated from replicate measurements within a single run [64] [63].

• Sample Preparation: Select multiple control samples (e.g., low, medium, and high concentrations). For each sample, prepare multiple aliquots (typically 2-5) [64].
• Assay Run: Analyze all replicates of all samples in the same assay run under identical conditions.
• Data Calculation:
  • For each sample, calculate the mean and standard deviation (SD) of the replicate concentration values.
  • Calculate the CV for each sample: CV (%) = (SD / Mean) × 100.
  • The intra-assay CV for the entire run is the average of the individual CVs from all samples [64].

Protocol for Inter-Assay CV Determination

The inter-assay CV assesses consistency across different runs [64] [63].

• Longitudinal Sampling: Use stable, control samples with known concentrations (e.g., frozen aliquots of a pooled sample or commercial controls).
• Multiple Assay Runs: Include the same controls in a number of independent assay runs (e.g., 10 different runs on different days, with different reagent lots, and preferably by different technicians) [64].
• Data Calculation:
  • For each control, calculate the mean concentration obtained from all runs.
  • Calculate the standard deviation (SD) of the mean concentrations from the different runs.
  • Calculate the inter-assay CV for each control: CV (%) = (SD of Run Means / Mean of Run Means) × 100 [64].
  • The overall inter-assay CV can be reported as the average of the CVs for the different controls.

Figure 2: Experimental workflow for determining intra- and inter-assay coefficients of variation, highlighting the key difference of single versus multiple assay runs. [64] [63]

The Scientist's Toolkit: Essential Research Reagents and Materials

The following reagents and materials are critical for conducting reliable hormone and drug assays, particularly when using saliva and urine matrices.

Table 4: Essential Research Reagents and Materials for Saliva and Urine Testing

Item	Function	Key Consideration
Validated Saliva Collection Device	To collect saliva samples without interfering with the analyte of interest.	Must be validated for the specific hormone being tested (e.g., a swab for cortisol may not work for testosterone) [2].
Polypropylene Collection Tubes	To store saliva samples.	Preferred over polyethylene, which can adsorb steroids and lead to underestimation of concentration [2].
Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay (ELISA) Kits	To quantitatively measure specific hormones or drugs in samples.	Must demonstrate high sensitivity for low-concentration analytes in saliva; CV data should meet acceptance criteria [2] [65].
Control Samples (High & Low)	To monitor assay performance and calculate inter-assay CV.	Should be stable and span the dynamic range of the assay; used on every plate [64].
Calibrated Pipettes and Tips	For accurate and precise liquid handling.	Regular calibration is essential; pre-wetting tips can improve CVs by ensuring accurate volumes [64] [65].
Microplate Washer and Reader	To automate wash steps and read colorimetric or fluorescent signals.	Must be properly calibrated and maintained to avoid introducing variability between wells and plates [65].

The accurate assessment of hormone levels is fundamental to both clinical diagnostics and research in endocrinology. Unlike many biochemical analytes, steroid hormones present unique measurement challenges due to their pulsatile secretion, circadian rhythms, and variable protein binding. Clinical validity—the ability of a test to accurately identify a clinical condition or physiological state—depends heavily on selecting the appropriate testing methodology for the specific biological question. Researchers and clinicians currently rely on three principal specimen types: serum, saliva, and urine, each offering distinct windows into endocrine function [21].

The physiological endpoint of interest—whether it's the biologically active hormone fraction, cumulative hormone production, or metabolic pathways—should dictate the choice of testing medium. Serum measures total hormone levels but may not reflect tissue availability; saliva captures the free, biologically active fraction; and urine provides a integrated view of hormone metabolism and clearance [2] [4] [21]. This review systematically compares the clinical validity of these testing modalities by examining their correlation with physiological endpoints, supported by experimental data and methodological protocols.

Analytical Comparison of Testing Methodologies

Table 1: Comparative Analytical Characteristics of Hormone Testing Modalities

Characteristic	Serum/Plasma	Saliva	Urine
Hormone Fraction Measured	Total (free + protein-bound)	Free, bioavailable fraction	Metabolites & free hormones
Invasiveness	High (venipuncture)	Low (non-invasive)	Low (non-invasive)
Collection Feasibility	Single time point, requires clinic visit	Multiple daily collections, home-based	Multiple spots or 24-hour, home-based
Temporal Representation	Snapshot at collection time	Snapshots throughout day	Cumulative (24-hr) or spot measurements
Best Clinical Applications	Peptide hormones (FSH, LH), thyroid hormones, establishing baselines [21]	Diurnal cortisol patterns, sex hormones in cycling women [21]	Hormone metabolism assessment, adrenal function [21]
Key Limitations	Does not distinguish free vs. bound hormones [21]	Sensitive to blood contamination, not for conjugated hormones like DHEA-S [4]	Requires creatinine normalization, collection burden [6]

Table 2: Correlation Data Between Testing Modalities and Physiological Endpoints

Hormone	Testing Modalities Compared	Correlation with Physiological Endpoint	Experimental Evidence
Cortisol	Salivary vs. Serum Free Cortisol	Preferable for assessing HPA axis dynamics [47]	"Salivary cortisol determined by enzyme immunoassay is preferable to serum total cortisol for assessment of dynamic hypo-pituitary-adrenal axis activity." [47]
Reproductive Hormones	Dried Urine vs. 24-hr Liquid Urine	Excellent agreement (ICC >0.9 for 14/17 metabolites) [6]	ICCs >0.90 for reproductive hormones; good to excellent agreement for organic acids (ICC: 0.75-0.99) [6]
Estradiol, Progesterone, Testosterone, DHEA	Saliva vs. Serum	Reflects biologically active free fraction [3]	Strong correlation for free hormone levels; gender and age differences consistent with serum-based studies [3]
E3G, PdG, LH	Urinary (IFM) vs. Laboratory ELISA	High correlation with laboratory ELISA [42]	Accurate recovery percentage; average CV <5.6% for all three hormones [42]

Experimental Protocols and Methodological Considerations

Salivary Hormone Assessment Protocols

Saliva collection for hormone analysis requires strict adherence to standardized protocols to ensure analytical validity. The passive drool method is preferred for maximizing analyte recovery, particularly for steroid hormones. Collection should utilize polypropylene tubes rather than polyethylene, as the latter may adsorb steroids and reduce measurable concentrations [2]. For cortisol assessment, samples are typically collected at multiple time points throughout the day (e.g., upon awakening, 30 minutes post-awakening, afternoon, and bedtime) to capture the diurnal rhythm [4].

Critical methodological considerations include avoiding blood contamination through oral lesions or vigorous brushing, which can artificially elevate steroid levels [2]. Additionally, collection devices must be validated for specific analytes; for instance, cotton-based swabs used for cortisol measurement may contain plant sterols that interfere with assays for other steroids like estradiol, progesterone, or testosterone [2]. The enzymatic immunoassays (ELISA) employed for salivary hormone quantification should demonstrate inter-assay coefficients of variation (CV) <15% and intra-assay CV <10% over triplicates to ensure reproducibility [2].

Figure 1: Salivary Hormone Testing Workflow

Urinary Hormone Assessment Protocols

Urinary hormone analysis provides distinct advantages for capturing hormone metabolites and assessing overall hormone production. The traditional 24-hour urine collection has been largely supplanted by the more practical 4-spot collection method, which involves sampling at first morning void, 2 hours post-awakening, afternoon, and before bed [6]. This approach demonstrates excellent agreement with 24-hour collections (intraclass correlation coefficients >0.9 for most reproductive hormones) while significantly reducing patient burden [6].

The dried urine technique represents a methodological advancement, where filter paper is saturated with urine and allowed to dry at room temperature. Analytes remain stable in dried urine for up to 84 days at room temperature, facilitating convenient transport and storage [6]. For mass spectrometric analysis, dried urine specimens are extracted with ammonium acetate buffer, followed by enzymatic deconjugation, liquid-liquid extraction, and derivatization before analysis by GC-MS/MS or LC-MS/MS [6]. All urinary hormone measurements must be normalized to urine creatinine to account for variations in urine concentration.

Serum Hormone Assessment Protocols

Serum collection remains the gold standard for many peptide hormones and for establishing reference ranges. Venous blood is collected in serum separator tubes, allowed to clot, centrifuged, and the serum fraction is analyzed. While standardized for many analytes, the critical limitation for steroid hormone assessment is that serum measures total hormone concentrations (both protein-bound and free fractions), which may not reflect the biologically active component available to tissues [3] [4].

Physiological Pathways and Their Clinical Implications

Bioavailability and the Free Hormone Hypothesis

The free hormone hypothesis posits that only the unbound fraction of steroid hormones can enter cells and exert biological effects. This principle fundamentally underpins the clinical validity of salivary testing, as saliva contains the free, biologically active hormones that have diffused from the bloodstream through the salivary gland acinar cells [3]. In serum, approximately 95-99% of steroid hormones are bound to carrier proteins such as sex hormone-binding globulin (SHBG) and albumin, leaving only a small fraction biologically active [2].

Figure 2: Steroid Hormone Bioavailability Pathway

Hormone Metabolism and Metabolic Pathways

Urinary hormone testing provides unique insights into hormone metabolism, capturing metabolites that reflect both production and clearance pathways. For example, estrogen metabolism occurs through multiple pathways (2-, 4-, and 16-hydroxylation), each with different biological activities and potential health implications [21]. Urinary testing can quantify the ratio of 2-hydroxyestrone to 16α-hydroxyestrone, a potentially important biomarker for breast cancer risk assessment [21].

Similarly, cortisol metabolism can be comprehensively assessed in urine through measurement of cortisol, cortisone, and their tetrahydro metabolites, providing information about 11β-hydroxysteroid dehydrogenase activity, which regulates cortisol access to mineralocorticoid and glucocorticoid receptors [6]. This metabolic profiling represents a significant advantage of urinary testing over serum or saliva for assessing functional endocrine activity.

Essential Research Reagent Solutions

Table 3: Essential Research Reagents for Hormone Testing

Reagent/Category	Function/Application	Specification Considerations
Collection Devices	Sample acquisition and preservation	Polypropylene tubes for saliva; filter paper for dried urine; Salivette for cortisol only [2]
Immunoassay Kits	Hormone quantification	Validated for specific matrix; sensitivity appropriate for low salivary concentrations [2]
Mass Spectrometry Standards	Quantitative analysis by MS	Isotope-labeled internal standards for each analyte [6]
Enzymes	Hydrolysis of conjugated hormones	Helix pomatia extract for glucuronide/sulfate hydrolysis [6]
Solid Phase Extraction	Sample cleanup and concentration	C18 columns for steroid extraction [6]
Derivatization Reagents	Volatility for GC-MS	Bis(trimethylsilyl)trifluoroacetamide for silylation [6]

Discussion: Clinical Applications and Method Selection

The clinical validity of hormone testing modalities must be evaluated against specific physiological endpoints and clinical questions. Salivary testing demonstrates superior validity for assessing biologically active hormone fractions and dynamic hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis activity, particularly for cortisol [47] [4]. The strong correlation between salivary cortisol and serum free cortisol, coupled with the ability to capture diurnal rhythms through multiple sampling, makes saliva the preferred medium for stress research and adrenal function assessment [4].

Urinary hormone testing offers unique clinical validity for comprehensive hormone metabolite profiling and assessment of hormone production and clearance. The excellent agreement between dried spot urine collections and 24-hour urine specimens (ICCs >0.9 for most reproductive hormones) supports the validity of this more convenient collection method for both clinical assessment and large epidemiologic studies [6] [46]. Urinary testing is particularly valuable for evaluating estrogen metabolism pathways, assessing adrenal steroid output, and monitoring hormone therapy outcomes.

Serum testing maintains its validity for peptide hormones (FSH, LH, insulin), thyroid function assessment, and establishing baseline reference ranges [21]. However, for steroid hormones, serum measures total concentrations rather than the biologically active fraction, potentially limiting its clinical validity for assessing tissue hormone activity.

The emerging consensus supports a complementary approach to hormone assessment, selecting the testing modality based on the specific physiological endpoint of interest. This nuanced understanding of methodological strengths and limitations enhances both clinical practice and research validity in endocrinology.

Figure 3: Hormone Testing Method Selection Algorithm

Accurate hormone quantification is fundamental to advancements in clinical diagnostics, therapeutic development, and endocrine research. The complexity of hormonal signaling, with its dynamic fluctuations and diverse bioactive forms, necessitates testing strategies that extend beyond a single biological matrix. The comparative analysis of saliva, serum, and urine represents a sophisticated, multi-matrix approach that provides a more holistic view of endocrine function than any single medium can offer. Each matrix provides a unique window into hormone physiology: serum reflects total hormone content, saliva offers insight into the bioavailable free fraction, and urine reveals metabolic clearance and integrated production over time. This guide objectively compares the performance of these testing matrices, underpinned by experimental data and framed within the broader thesis of optimizing accuracy in endocrine research.

Understanding the physiological basis for hormone distribution across these matrices is the first critical step. Steroid hormones, being lipophilic, are largely bound to carrier proteins like sex hormone-binding globulin (SHBG) and albumin in the watery environment of blood [1]. Only a small, unbound fraction is biologically active and able to diffuse into tissues and salivary glands. Saliva contains this free, bioavailable fraction [2] [4]. In contrast, hormones in urine are primarily metabolites conjugated to make them water-soluble for excretion, providing a distinct picture of hormonal metabolic patterns [1].

Physiological Basis and Analytical Significance

The following diagram illustrates the journey of steroid hormones from synthesis to their measurement in serum, saliva, and urine, highlighting the distinct fractions captured by each matrix.

This physiological pathway is critical for selecting the appropriate matrix. Serum testing typically measures the total hormone concentration (bound and free). Saliva testing captures the unbound, biologically active fraction that is available to tissues [2] [4]. Urine testing measures hormone metabolites that have been processed by the body, providing a longer-term, integrated view of hormone production and clearance [1].

Comparative Performance Data Across Matrices

The following tables summarize key experimental data and performance characteristics of each testing matrix, synthesizing findings from method validation studies and comparative analyses.

Table 1: Analytical Performance and Method Comparison

Parameter	Saliva	Serum	Urine
Hormone Fraction Measured	Free, bioavailable fraction [2] [4]	Total hormone (free + protein-bound) [1]	Metabolites (conjugated) [1]
Primary Analytical Challenge	Low analyte concentration; collection device interference (e.g., cotton swabs) [2]	Matrix effects from binding proteins; overestimation by immunoassay [56] [68]	Variable urine dilution; risk of contamination [9]
Reference Method	LC-MS/MS (recommended for specificity) [11]	LC-MS/MS (superior to immunoassay) [68]	LC-MS/MS or Immunoassay [11]
Representative Correlation with Clinical Status (e.g., Cortisol)	High correlation with free serum cortisol [11]	Total cortisol misleading with altered protein levels [11]	24-hr urine free cortisol correlates with mean serum-free cortisol in Cushing's [11]

Table 2: Practical and Economic Considerations in Research Design

Parameter	Saliva	Serum	Urine
Sample Collection	Non-invasive; self-collection possible; suitable for high-frequency, at-home sampling [2]	Invasive (venipuncture); requires a trained phlebotomist [2] [1]	Non-invasive; collection over 24 hours is logistically challenging [11]
Stability & Storage	Stable at -20°C for up to a year; resistant to freeze-thaw cycles [2]	Requires specific handling and rapid processing/freezing; sensitive to hemolysis [68]	Requires refrigeration or freezing during 24-hour collection; volume measurement needed [11]
Cost Profile	~48% less costly for collection than blood [2]	Higher cost due to collection personnel and processing [2]	Low collection cost, but may involve volume measurement and creatinine correction [11]
Ideal Research Context	Diurnal rhythm studies (e.g., cortisol), monitoring free hormone levels in HRT [9] [4]	Diagnosis of endocrine diseases, validating new methods, total hormone quantification [68]	Assessing hormone metabolite patterns, long-term integrated output, estrogen metabolism studies [1]

Experimental Protocols for Multi-Matrix Assessment

To ensure reliable and comparable results in a multi-matrix study, standardized protocols for sample collection, preparation, and analysis are paramount.

Protocol 1: Validated Collection and Handling for Steroid Hormones

This protocol is adapted from methodology focused on ensuring pre-analytical integrity [2].

• Objective: To collect saliva, serum, and urine samples for the accurate quantification of steroid hormones (e.g., cortisol, estradiol, progesterone, testosterone, DHEA), while minimizing pre-analytical errors.
• Materials:
  • Saliva: Validated saliva collection device (e.g., polypropylene tube; avoid cotton swabs for steroids other than cortisol). Participants should avoid food, drink, and tooth-brushing for at least 30 minutes prior to collection to prevent blood contamination [2].
  • Serum: Blood collection kit (vacutainer tubes with no anticoagulant for serum, tourniquet, needle). Tubes must be processed promptly to clot and then centrifuged to separate serum.
  • Urine: Wide-mouth, sterile polypropylene container for 24-hour collection, with instructions to keep it refrigerated or on ice throughout the collection period.
• Procedure:
  • Saliva Collection: Participants provide a passive drool sample directly into the validated tube. For diurnal cortisol, samples are typically collected upon waking, 30 minutes post-waking, before lunch, and before bed. Samples are immediately frozen at -20°C after collection [2] [4].
  • Serum Collection: A trained phlebotomist performs venipuncture. The blood is allowed to clot for 30 minutes, then centrifuged at a standardized speed (e.g., 1300-2000 RCF for 10 minutes). The separated serum is aliquoted into cryovials and frozen at -80°C until analysis [68].
  • Urine Collection: Participants start the collection by discarding the first morning void and then collect all urine for the next 24 hours, including the first void of the next day. The total volume is recorded, and a 5-10 mL aliquot is taken and frozen at -20°C [11].
• Quality Control: For saliva, ensure collection devices have been validated for the specific analyte of interest to avoid adsorption or interference [2]. For serum, inspect for hemolysis. For urine, measure and record total volume and consider normalizing analyte levels to creatinine concentration to account for dilution.

Protocol 2: LC-MS/MS Analysis of Steroid Hormones Using a Surrogate Matrix

This protocol is based on advanced methodologies developed to overcome the challenge of endogenous hormones in blank matrices, using PBS as a surrogate [68].

• Objective: To simultaneously quantify five steroid hormones (androstenedione, testosterone, DHEA, dihydrotestosterone, progesterone) in human serum with high specificity and sensitivity using HPLC-MS/MS and a phosphate-buffered saline (PBS) surrogate matrix.
• Materials:
  • Instrumentation: HPLC system coupled to a tandem mass spectrometer (MS/MS) with an electrospray ionization (ESI) source.
  • Reagents: HPLC-grade methanol, acetonitrile, and water. Ammonium acetate or formic acid for mobile phase modification.
  • Standards and Surrogates: Pure analytical standards for all target hormones. Stable isotopically labeled internal standards (IS) for each analyte (e.g., Testosterone-13C3). Phosphate-Buffered Saline (PBS, pH 7.4) as the surrogate blank matrix [68].
• Procedure:
  • Sample Preparation: Thaw serum samples on ice. Add a known amount of isotopic IS to each sample (e.g., 50 µL) to correct for matrix effects and recovery variations. Precipitate proteins by adding a cold organic solvent (e.g., 200 µL of methanol or acetonitrile). Vortex mix vigorously and centrifuge at high speed (e.g., 13,000 RCF for 10 minutes) [68].
  • Calibration Curve: Prepare the calibration curve in PBS. Serially dilute the pure analyte standards in PBS to create a concentration series. Add the same isotopic IS mixture to these calibrators as was added to the samples.
  • HPLC-MS/MS Analysis: Inject the supernatant from the prepared samples and calibrators onto the HPLC-MS/MS. Use a reversed-phase C18 column for chromatographic separation. A gradient elution with water and methanol (or acetonitrile) is typically employed. Monitor specific precursor-product ion transitions for each hormone and its corresponding IS in multiple reaction monitoring (MRM) mode [68].
• Data Analysis: The analyte-to-IS peak area ratio is calculated for each sample and calibrator. The calibration curve is constructed by plotting this ratio against the known concentration of the calibrators. The concentration of hormones in the unknown serum samples is determined by interpolating from this curve.

Essential Research Reagent Solutions

The following table details key materials and reagents required for implementing the robust experimental protocols described above.

Table 3: Research Reagent Solutions for Hormone Analysis

Item	Function & Application	Key Considerations
Validated Saliva Collection Kits (Polypropylene)	To collect saliva for steroid hormone analysis without analyte adsorption [2].	Must be validated for the specific steroid; avoid polyethylene tubes and cotton swabs with plant sterols for estradiol, progesterone, testosterone, and DHEA [2].
Stable Isotope-Labeled Internal Standards (IS)	To correct for matrix effects and loss during sample preparation in LC-MS/MS, improving accuracy and precision [68].	The ideal IS is an isotopically labeled version (e.g., 13C, 2H) of the target analyte, which co-elutes and has nearly identical chemical properties.
Phosphate-Buffered Saline (PBS)	To serve as a surrogate matrix for creating calibration curves in LC-MS/MS, overcoming the challenge of analyte-free biological matrices [68].	Provides a consistent, blank background for calibration. Studies show it can achieve a lower limit of quantification (LLOQ) compared to charcoal-stripped serum [68].
Charcoal-Stripped Serum	An alternative surrogate matrix for preparing calibration standards in hormone assays [68].	May still contain trace levels of endogenous hormones, which can be a significant source of interference, especially at low concentrations found in pathological conditions [68].
Molecularly Imprinted Polymers (MIPs)	Advanced sorbents for microextraction techniques (e.g., SPME) to selectively pre-concentrate target hormones from complex biological matrices prior to analysis [69].	Enhance selectivity and sensitivity; part of the green analytical chemistry trend to minimize solvent use and improve sustainability [69].
Deep Eutectic Solvents (DES)	Green solvents used in microextraction techniques like dispersive liquid-liquid microextraction (DLLME) for isolating hormones [69].	Offer an environmentally friendly alternative to traditional organic solvents, reducing the method's environmental impact [69].

The strategic application of multi-matrix testing moves hormone research from a simplistic, single-medium snapshot to a rich, multi-dimensional understanding of endocrine physiology. As the presented data and protocols demonstrate, the choice between saliva, serum, and urine is not a matter of identifying a universally superior matrix, but of aligning the matrix's strengths with the specific research question. Saliva is unparalleled for assessing the free, bioactive hormone fraction and dynamic diurnal rhythms. Serum remains the standard for diagnosing many classical endocrine diseases based on total hormone levels, especially when measured by gold-standard LC-MS/MS. Urine provides a unique view into metabolic pathways and integrated hormone production.

The ongoing evolution of analytical technologies, particularly the adoption of LC-MS/MS and green microextraction techniques, continues to enhance the sensitivity, specificity, and sustainability of hormone determination across all matrices. By judiciously combining these tools and understanding the physiological basis and limitations of each matrix, researchers and drug developers can generate more robust, clinically relevant data, ultimately accelerating advancements in endocrine science and patient care.

Conclusion

The comparative analysis of serum, saliva, and urine hormone testing reveals that no single matrix is universally superior; each provides a unique and valuable window into endocrine function. Serum remains the gold standard for many peptide hormones and clinical diagnostics, while saliva excels in measuring free, bioavailable hormone fluctuations and circadian rhythms. Urine offers an unparalleled view of hormone metabolism and cumulative exposure. The choice of methodology must be driven by the specific research question, with a growing trend toward integrated, multi-matrix approaches for a holistic understanding. Future directions should focus on standardizing pre-analytical protocols, wider adoption of high-specificity mass spectrometry techniques, and developing advanced computational models to integrate complex, multi-matrix hormonal data. For drug development and advanced research, this synthesis enables more precise study designs, improved biomarker selection, and ultimately, more targeted therapeutic interventions.

References

• 1. Comparing Saliva, Urine, and Serum Hormone Testing: Choosing the Best Test for Each Patient [https://www.drkarafitzgerald.com/2021/07/12/comparing-saliva-urine-and-serum-hormone-testing-choosing-the-best-test-for-each-patient/]
• 2. Five key points to ensure reliable and accurate saliva testing [https://www.news-medical.net/whitepaper/20240506/5-key-points-to-ensure-reliable-and-accurate-saliva-testing-for-female-hormones.aspx]
• 3. The Utility and Dynamics of Salivary Sex Hormone Measurements in the National Social Life, Health, and Aging Project, Wave 2 - PMC [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4303088/]
• 4. : Cortisol and Saliva Result Interpretation Guide Testing Hormone Test [https://www.rupahealth.com/post/saliva-testing-cortisol-and-hormone-test-result-interpretation-guide]
• 5. Saliva vs. Urine Hormone Testing: What’s the Difference? [https://vibrant-wellness.com/blog/saliva-vs.-urine-hormone-testing-whats-the-difference]
• 6. Reliability of a dried urine test for comprehensive assessment of urine hormones and metabolites - PMC [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7962249/]
• 7. Reliability of a dried urine test for comprehensive assessment of urine hormones and metabolites | BMC Chemistry | Full Text [https://bmcchem.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13065-021-00744-3]
• 8. A new model for determining risk of male infertility from serum hormone levels, without semen analysis | Scientific Reports [https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-024-67910-0]
• 9. for Different... | ZRT Laboratory Accurate Hormone Testing [https://www.zrtlab.com/sample-types/hormone-testing-for-different-supplementation-types/]
• 10. Evaluating urinary estrogen and progesterone metabolites using dried filter paper samples and gas chromatography with tandem mass spectrometry (GC–MS/MS) - PMC [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6661742/]
• 11. cortisol in Measuring , serum and urine - are our assays good... saliva [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28068807/]
• 12. Saliva-Based Hormone Testing | Medix Biochemica [https://articles.medixbiochemica.com/saliva-hormone-testing-a-non-invasive-revolution-in-endocrine-diagnostics]
• 13. Development and Validation of a Serum Testosterone... Total [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40340881/]
• 14. Steroid Hormone Analysis with Supelâ„¢ Swift HLB DPX [https://www.sigmaaldrich.com/QA/en/technical-documents/technical-article/clinical-testing-and-diagnostics-manufacturing/clinical-forensics-testing/steroid-hormone-analysis-in-serum]
• 15. Non-invasive assessment of free steroid hormones: development of a high-throughput LC–MS/MS method for salivary steroid hormone quantification - PMC [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12367928/]
• 16. of Mechanisms Action – Integrated Human Anatomy and... Hormone [https://uen.pressbooks.pub/anatomyphysiology2/chapter/mechanisms-of-hormone-action/]
• 17. Human Hormones and Their Functions | The Scientist [https://www.the-scientist.com/human-hormones-and-their-functions-73033]
• 18. The choice is clear: saliva vs. blood diagnostics for hormone testing - The Blog - Tecan [https://www.tecan.com/blog/saliva-hormone-testing-versus-blood-diagnostics]
• 19. Serum bioavailability of sex steroid hormones [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/3521955/]
• 20. Interconnected Health: The Synergy of Hormones , Gut, and Immune... [https://www.rupahealth.com/post/interconnected-health-the-synergy-of-hormones-gut-and-immune-function]
• 21. Hormone Testing: When to Use Serum, Saliva, and Urine [https://www.meridianvalleylab.com/hormone-testing-when-to-use-serum-saliva-and-urine/]
• 22. Evaluation of at-home serum anti-Müllerian hormone testing: a head-to-head comparison study - PMC [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9434544/]
• 23. vs Serum vs DUTCH Saliva : Best Option for... Hormone Testing [https://www.i-screen.com.au/blog/hormone-testing-vs-saliva-hormone-testing]
• 24. From Saliva to Serum: Comprehensive Testing for Men's Hormonal Health [https://www.rupahealth.com/post/from-saliva-to-serum-comprehensive-testing-for-mens-hormonal-health]
• 25. Comparing Hormone Profiles: Dried Urine vs. 24-Hour Testing [https://www.meridianvalleylab.com/24-hour-urine-versus-dried-urine/]
• 26. Clinical utility of laboratory developed mass spectrometry assays for steroid hormone testing - PubMed [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36756146/]
• 27. | Dried Urine and 24-Hour Urine Hormone Testing Testing [https://www.meridianvalleylab.com/areas-of-testing/areas-of-testing-hormones-and-metabolites/]
• 28. Urine Hormones Testing | ZRT Laboratory [https://www.zrtlab.com/test-specialties/urine-hormones/]
• 29. Interpretation of common endocrine laboratory tests : technical pitfalls... [https://clindiabetesendo.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s40842-019-0086-7]
• 30. levels and temporal stability of 27 multiplexed Baseline ... serum [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24348989/]
• 31. Saliva Testing | ZRT Laboratory [https://www.zrtlab.com/sample-types/saliva/]
• 32. Stability and validity of steroid hormones in hair and saliva across two ovulatory cycles - PMC [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9216405/]
• 33. of Three Comparison Collection Saliva to Assess... Methods [https://sciencerepository.org/comparison-of-three-saliva-collection-methods-to-assess-physiological-markers_JFNM-2020-1-105]
• 34. Salivary Diagnostics | American Dental Association [https://www.ada.org/resources/ada-library/oral-health-topics/salivary-diagnostics]
• 35. Comparing Hormone Profiles: Dried Urine vs. 24-Hour Testing [https://www.meridianvalleylab.com/24-hour-urine-versus-dried-urine-hormone-testing/]
• 36. Frontiers | Urine Analysis has a Very Broad Prospect in the Future [https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/analytical-science/articles/10.3389/frans.2021.812301/full]
• 37. 101: How to Hormone and Interpret Your Results Testing Test [https://www.rupahealth.com/post/hormone-testing-101-how-to-test-and-interpret-your-results]
• 38. Estrogen Metabolites in Urine: Key Indicators of Hormone Metabolism [https://www.rupahealth.com/post/estrogen-metabolites-in-urine-key-indicators-of-hormone-metabolism]
• 39. Common Clinical Findings Uncovered Through Urinary Metabolite... [https://physicianslab.com/common-clinical-findings-uncovered-through-urinary-metabolite-testing/]
• 40. Urinalysis - StatPearls - NCBI Bookshelf [https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK557685/]
• 41. Genetic Detoxification Test - Smart Nutrition [https://smartnutrition.co.uk/shop/genetic-detoxification-report/]
• 42. Validation of urinary reproductive hormone measurements using a novel smartphone connected reader | Scientific Reports [https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-023-36539-w]
• 43. Algorithms and tools for data-driven omics integration to achieve... [https://translational-medicine.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12967-025-06446-x]
• 44. Systems Biology as a Comparative Approach to Understand Complex Gene Expression in Neurological Diseases - PMC [https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4217627/]
• 45. and Multi-Omics Systems : Viewpoints from the... Biology Integration [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6523452/]
• 46. Reliability of a dried urine test for comprehensive assessment of urine hormones and metabolites - PubMed [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33722278/]
• 47. Cortisol Salivary | Integrative Therapeutics Tests Accuracy [https://integrativepro.com/blogs/articles/salivary-cortisol-tests-how-accurate-are-they]
• 48. Comparing immunoassay and mass spectrometry techniques for salivary sex hormone analysis - ScienceDirect [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0306453025001027]
• 49. Should LC/LC-MS Replace Immunoassay? | Thermo Fisher Scientific - US [https://www.thermofisher.com/us/en/home/products-and-services/promotions/industrial/should-lc-lcms-replace-immunoassay.html]
• 50. Comparison of immunoassay and HPLC-MS/MS used to measure urinary metabolites of atrazine, metolachlor, and chlorpyrifos from farmers and non-farmers in Iowa | Journal of Exposure Science & Environmental Epidemiology [https://www.nature.com/articles/jes200915]
• 51. Liquid chromatography quadrupole linear ion trap mass ... spectrometry [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27554022/]
• 52. LC-MS-MS vs ELISA: Validation of a Comprehensive Urine Toxicology Screen by LC-MS-MS and a Comparison of 100 Forensic Specimens - PubMed [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31424082/]
• 53. Novel LC - MS / MS method for plasma vancomycin: comparison with... [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25523192/]
• 54. Analytical Evaluation of Free Testosterone and Cortisol... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6806708/]
• 55. Measurement Using Salivary / Hormone / LC : Specific and... MS MS [https://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/bpb/35/9/35_b212009/_article]
• 56. The effect of serum matrix and gender on cortisol measurement by commonly used immunoassays - PubMed [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24361991/]
• 57. Study of temporal variability of salivary cortisol and cortisone by LC-MS/MS using a new atmospheric pressure ionization source | Scientific Reports [https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-019-55571-3]
• 58. Cortisol Measurements in Cushing's Syndrome: Immunoassay or Mass... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7054699/]
• 59. A Simple Ultraperformance Liquid Chromatography-Tandem Mass Spectrometry Method for Measurement of Cortisol Level in Human Saliva - PMC [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6420974/]
• 60. Complexities in salivary and urinary methodology for ovulation and... [https://gremjournal.com/journal/01-2025/complexities-in-salivary-and-urinary-methodology-for-ovulation-and-menstrual-cycle-hormone-detection-a-scoping-review/]
• 61. Determination of 19 Steroid Hormones in Human Serum and Urine... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9699436/]
• 62. Evaluation of at-home serum anti-Müllerian hormone ... testing [https://rbej.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12958-022-01004-2]
• 63. Coefficient of variation- Principles [https://influentialpoints.com/Training/coefficient_of_variation-principles-properties-assumptions.htm]
• 64. Calculating Inter- and Intra-Assay Coefficients of Variability – Salimetrics [https://salimetrics.com/calculating-inter-and-intra-assay-coefficients-of-variability/]
• 65. %CV in ELISA: How to Reduce Them and Why They’re Important - Enzo [https://www.enzolifesciences.com/science-center/technotes/2018/january/cv-in-elisa-how-to-reduce-them-and-why-they-re-important/]
• 66. Anti-müllerian Hormone During Natural Cycle Presents Significant... [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30542322/]
• 67. Comparison of Urine and Oral Fluid for Workplace Drug Testing - PMC [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4986628/]
• 68. A developed HPLC-MS/MS method to quantitate 5 steriod hormones in clinical human serum by using PBS as the surrogate matrix - ScienceDirect [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1570023221004839]
• 69. Green and Emerging Microextraction Strategies for Bioanalytical Determination of Hormones: Trends, Challenges, and Applications | MDPI [https://www.mdpi.com/1420-3049/30/22/4471]