Determination of MDMA, MDA, MDEA and MBDB in oral fluid using high performance liquid chromatography with native fluorescence detection

Quantification of amphetamine and derivatives in oral fluid by dispersive liquid-liquid microextraction and liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry

The abuse of stimulants such as amphetamine, methamphetamine, ecstasy (MDMA), and their analogues (MDEA and MDA) has been increasing considerably worldwide since 2009. In this work, an analytical method using dispersive liquid-liquid microextraction (DLLME) to determine amphetamine and derivatives in oral fluid samples by liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) was developed and validated. Linearity was achieved between 20 to 5000 ng/mL (r>0.992, 1/x² weighted linear regression), with a limit of quantification (LOQ) of 20 ng/mL. Imprecision (%relative standard deviation) and bias (%) were not higher than 9.1 and -12.3%, respectively. The matrix effect was lower than 14.6%, with no carryover observed up to 5000 ng/mL and no interference with 10 different oral fluid matrix sources and against 14 pharmaceuticals and other common drugs of abuse. MDMA, MDA, and MDEA in processed samples were stable up to 24 h at autosampler (10°C); and amphetamine and methamphetamine up to 18 h. The developed method was successfully applied to authentic oral fluid analyses (n = 140). The proposed method is an example of the Green Analytical Toxicology, since it reduces both the amount of solvent required in samples preparation and the quantity of solvents and reagents used in analytical-instrumental stage, as well as requires a minimal sample volume, being a cheaper, quicker and more ecological alternative to conventional methods. Obtained results showed that DLLME extraction combined with LC-MS/MS is a fast and simple method to quantify amphetamine derivatives in oral fluid samples.

Direct immersion single-drop microextraction of semi-volatile organic compounds in environmental samples: A review

Single-drop microextraction (SDME) techniques are efficient approaches to pretreatment of aqueous samples. The main advantage of SDME lies in the miniaturization of the solvent extraction process, minimizing the hazards associated with the use of toxic organic solvents. Thus, SDME techniques are cost-effective, and represent less harm to the environment, subscribing to green analytical chemistry principles. In practice, two main approaches can be used to perform SDME - direct immersion (DI)-SDME and headspace (HS)-SDME. Even though the DI-SDME has been shown to be quite effective for extraction and enrichment of various organic compounds, applications of DI-SDME are normally more suitable for moderately polar and non-polar semi-volatile organic compounds (SVOCs) using organic solvents which are immiscible with water. In this review, we present a historical overview and current advances in DI-SDME, including the common analytical tools which are usually coupled with DI-SDME. The review also focuses on applications concerning SVOCs in environmental samples. Currents trends in DI-SDME and possible future direction of the procedure are discussed.

Water-compatible imprinted pills for sensitive determination of cannabinoids in urine and oral fluid

A novel molecularly imprinted solid phase extraction (MISPE) methodology followed by liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) has been developed using cylindrical shaped molecularly imprinted pills for detection of Δ(9)-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), 11-nor-Δ(9)-tetrahydrocannabinol carboxylic acid (THC-COOH), cannabinol (CBN) and cannabidiol (CBD) in urine and oral fluid (OF). The composition of the molecular imprinted polymer (MIP) was optimized based on the screening results of a non-imprinted polymer library (NIP-library). Thus, acrylamide as functional monomer and ethylene glycol dimethacrylate as cross-linker were selected for the preparation of the MIP, using catechin as a mimic template. MISPE pills were incubated with 0.5 mL urine or OF sample for adsorption of analytes. For desorption, the pills were transferred to a vial with 2 mL of methanol:acetic acid (4:1) and sonicated for 15 min. The elution solvent was evaporated and reconstituted in methanol:formic acid (0.1%) 50:50 to inject in LC-MS/MS. The developed method was linear over the range from 1 to 500 ng mL(-1) in urine and from 0.75 to 500 ng mL(-1) in OF for all four analytes. Intra- and inter-day imprecision were <15%. Extraction recovery was 50-111%, process efficiency 15.4-54.5% and matrix effect ranged from -78.0 to -6.1%. Finally, the optimized and validated method was applied to 4 urine and 5 OF specimens. This is the first method for the determination of THC, THC-COOH, CBN and CBD in urine and OF using MISPE technology.

Molecularly imprinted solid-phase extraction for the selective determination of methamphetamine, amphetamine, and methylenedioxyphenylalkylamine designer drugs in human whole blood by gas chromatography-mass spectrometry

A novel method is described for the extraction of methamphetamine, amphetamine, and methylenedioxyphenylalkylamine designer drugs, such as 3,4-methylenedioxy-methamphetamine, 3,4-methylenedioxyamphetamine, 3,4-methylenedioxyethylamphetamine, N-methyl-1-(3,4-methylenedioxyphenyl)-2-butanamine, and 3,4-(methylenedioxyphenyl)-2-butanamine, from human whole blood using molecularly imprinted solid-phase extraction as highly selective sample clean-up technique. Whole blood samples were diluted with 10 mmol/L ammonium acetate (pH 8.6) and applied to a SupelMIP-Amphetamine molecularly imprinted solid-phase extraction cartridge. The cartridge was then washed to eliminate interferences, and the amphetamines of interest were eluted with formic acid/methanol (1:100, v/v). After derivatization with trifluoroacetic anhydride, the analytes were quantified using gas chromatography-mass spectrometry. Recoveries of the seven amphetamines spiked into whole blood were 89.1-102%. The limits of quantification for each compound in 200 μL of whole blood were between 0.25 and 1.0 ng. The maximum intra- and inter-day coefficients of variation were 9.96 and 13.8%, respectively. The results show that methamphetamine, amphetamine, and methylenedioxyphenylalkyl-amine designer drugs can be efficiently extracted from crude biological samples such as whole blood by molecularly imprinted solid-phase extraction with good reproducibility. This extraction method will be useful for the pretreatment of human samples before gas chromatography-mass spectrometry.

The measurement of ecstasy in human hair by triple phase directly suspended droplet microextraction prior to HPLC-DAD analysis

New pre-concentration technique, triple phase suspended droplet microextraction (SD-LPME) and liquid chromatography-photodiode array detection was applied to determine ecstasy, MDMA (3,4-methylendioxy-N-methylamphetamine) in hair samples. In this research MDMA in hair was digested and after treatment extracted. The effective parameters were investigated and method was evaluated. Under the optimal conditions, the MDMA was enriched by factor 98.11. Linearity (r=0.9921), was obtained in the range of 10-15,000 ng mL(-1) and detection limit was 0.1 ng mL(-1).

Oral fluid testing for drugs of abuse

BACKGROUND

Oral fluid (OF) is an exciting alternative matrix for monitoring drugs of abuse in workplace, clinical toxicology, criminal justice, and driving under the influence of drugs (DUID) programs. During the last 5 years, scientific and technological advances in OF collection, point-of-collection testing devices, and screening and confirmation methods were achieved. Guidelines were proposed for workplace OF testing by the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, DUID testing by the European Union's Driving under the Influence of Drugs, Alcohol and Medicines (DRUID) program, and standardization of DUID research. Although OF testing is now commonplace in many monitoring programs, the greatest current limitation is the scarcity of controlled drug administration studies available to guide interpretation.

CONTENT

This review outlines OF testing advantages and limitations, and the progress in OF that has occurred during the last 5 years in collection, screening, confirmation, and interpretation of cannabinoids, opioids, amphetamines, cocaine, and benzodiazepines. We examine controlled drug administration studies, immunoassay and chromatographic methods, collection devices, point-of-collection testing device performance, and recent applications of OF testing.

SUMMARY

Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration approval of OF testing was delayed because questions about drug OF disposition were not yet resolved, and collection device performance and testing assays required improvement. Here, we document the many advances achieved in the use of OF. Additional research is needed to identify new biomarkers, determine drug detection windows, characterize OF adulteration techniques, and evaluate analyte stability. Nevertheless, there is no doubt that OF offers multiple advantages as an alternative matrix for drug monitoring and has an important role in DUID, treatment, workplace, and criminal justice programs.

Current technologies and considerations for drug bioanalysis in oral fluid

Drug oral fluid analysis was first used almost 30 years ago for the purpose of therapeutic drug monitoring. Since then, oral fluid bioanalysis has become more popular, mainly in the fields of pharmacokinetics, workplace drug testing, criminal justice, driving under the influence testing and therapeutic drug monitoring. In fact, oral fluid can provide a readily available and noninvasive medium, without any privacy loss by the examinee, which occurs, for instance, during the collection of urine samples. It is believed that drug concentrations in oral fluid may parallel those measured in blood. This feature makes oral fluid an alternative analytical specimen to blood, which assumes particular importance in roadside testing, the most published application of this sample. Great improvements in the development of accurate and reliable methods for sample collection, in situ detection devices (on-site drug detection kits), and highly sensitive and specific analytical methods for oral fluid testing of drugs have been observed in the last few years. However, without mass spectrometry-based analytical methods, such as liquid chromatography coupled to mass spectrometry (LC–MS) or tandem mass spectrometry (LC–MS/MS), the desired sensitivity would not be met, due to the low amounts of sample usually available for analysis. This review will discuss a series of published papers on the applicability of oral fluid in the field of analytical, clinical and forensic toxicology, with a special focus on its advantages and drawbacks over the normally used biological specimens and the main technological advances over the last decade, which have made oral fluid analysis of drugs possible.

Thin layer chromatography/fluorescence detection of 3,4-methylenedioxy-methamphetamine and related compounds

A rapid and sensitive method for the detection of six methylenedioxylatedphenethylamines, 3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine (MDMA); 3,4-methylenedioxyamphetamine; 3,4-methylenedioxyethylamphetamine; N-methyl-1-(3,4-methylenedioxyphenyl)-2-butamine; N-methyl-1-(3,4-methylenedioxyphenyl)-3-butamine; and 3,4-methylenedioxydimethylamphetamine, by thin-layer chromatography with fluorescence detection is proposed. These compounds form fluorophores on the developing plate following spraying with a reagent consisting of sodium hypochlorite, potassium hexacyanoferrate (III), and sodium hydroxide, and heating for 3 min at 100 degrees C. Blue fluorescent spots were observed under ultraviolet light in a wavelength range of 250-400 nm. The detection limits for MDMA and the above related compounds were 50 ng. The proposed method was effectively applied to the detection of MDMA in urine samples.

Fast LC–MS/MS method for the determination of amphetamine, methamphetamine, MDA, MDMA, MDEA, MBDB and PMA in urine

A fast method was designed for the simultaneous determination of amphetamine (A), methamphetamine (MA), PMA, MDA, MDMA, MDEA and MBDB in urine. The drugs were analysed by LC (ESI)-MS/MS, after a simple liquid-liquid extraction in the presence of the deuterated analogues. Reverse phase separation on an Atlantis dC18 Intelligent Speed column was achieved in less than 4 min under gradient conditions, and the total run time was 8 min. The method was fully validated, including linearity (1-1000 ng/mL for A, MDMA, MDEA and MBDB; 2-1000 ng/mL for MDA and PMA; 1-200 ng/mL for MA; r2>0.99 for all compounds), recovery (>80%), within-day and between-day precision and accuracy (CV and MRE<12.7% for intermediate level and ULOQ, and <17.2% for LLOQ), limit of detection (0.2 ng/mL for MDMA, MDEA and MBDB; 0.5 ng/mL for A, MA and PMA; 1 ng/mL for MDA) and quantitation (1 ng/mL for A, MA, MDMA, MDEA and MBDB; 2 ng/mL for MDA and PMA) and relative ion intensities. No matrix effect was observed. The procedure proved to be sensitive, specific and rapid, and was applied to real forensic cases.

Bioanalytical procedures for determination of drugs of abuse in oral fluid

Recent advances in analytical techniques have enabled the detection of drugs and drug metabolites in oral fluid specimens. Although GC-MS is still commonly used in practice, many laboratories have developed and successfully validated methods for LC-MS(-MS) that can detect a large number of compounds in the limited sample volume available. In addition, several enzyme immunoassays have been commercialized for the detection of drugs of abuse in oral fluid samples, enabling the fast screening and selection of presumably positive samples. A number of concerns are discussed, such as the variability in the volume of sample collected and its implications in terms of quantitative measurements, and the drug recoveries of the many different specimen collection systems on the market. Additional considerations that also receive attention are the importance of providing complete validation data with respect to analyte stability, matrix effect, and the choice of collection method.

Negative-Ion Chemical Ionization Gas Chromatography–Mass Spectrometry Assay for Enantioselective Measurement of Amphetamines in Oral Fluid: Application to a Controlled Study with MDMA and Driving Under the Influence Cases

Background: Enantioselective analysis of amphetamine (AM), methamphetamine (MA), 3,4-methylenedioxyamphetamine (MDA), 3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine (MDMA), and 3,4-methylenedioxyethylamphetamine (MDEA) helps interpret toxicological results. Methods have been described for various matrices, but so far not for oral fluid, a matrix of increasing importance in testing for drugs of abuse, especially in the context of driving under the influence of drugs (DUID).

Methods: After dilution with 200 μL carbonate buffer (pH 9), oral fluid samples (10–50 μL) were derivatized with S-heptafluorobutyrylprolyl chloride. The resulting diastereomers were extracted into 100 μL of cyclohexane, separated by gas chromatography (HP-5MS column), and detected by mass spectrometry in the negative-ion chemical ionization mode (GC-NICI-MS). The method was validated and applied to samples from a controlled study with MDMA and from authentic DUID cases.

Results: The derivatized AM, MA, MDA, MDMA, and MDEA enantiomers were well separated from each other. The method was linear from 5–250 μg/L per enantiomer of MDA and from 25–1250 μg/L per enantiomer of AM, MA, MDMA, and MDEA. With the exception of MDEA, analytical recoveries, repeatability, and intermediate precision were within required limits. The analyte concentrations and enantiomer ratios in the application samples correlated only weakly with corresponding published plasma data.

Conclusions: This sensitive, reliable, and fast GC-NICI-MS assay enantioselectively measures AM, MA, MDA, and MDMA in oral fluid samples. Prediction of plasma concentrations and enantiomer ratios from respective oral fluid data is not possible.

Drug Screening of Preserved Oral Fluid by Liquid Chromatography–Tandem Mass Spectrometry

Background: Oral fluid is an alternative matrix with potential applications in road-side drug screening, work-place testing, drug treatment programs, and epidemiological surveys. Development of methods for extensive drug screening in oral fluid is warranted.

Methods: We developed a liquid chromatography– tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) method for drug screening of preserved oral fluid collected with the Intercept® collection device. Samples were prepared by liquid–liquid extraction with ethylacetate/heptane (4:1). LC-separation was achieved with an Atlantis dC18-column (2.1 × 50 mm, 3 μm particle). Mass detection was performed by positive ion mode electrospray LC-MS/MS and included the following drugs/metabolites: morphine, 6-monoacetylmorphine, codeine, buprenorphine, methadone, amphetamine, methamphetamine, 3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine, 3,4-methylenedioxyamphetamine, 3,4-methylenedioxyethylamphetamine, cocaine, benzoylecgonine, Δ-9-tetrahydrocannabinol, lysergic acid diethylamide, alprazolam, bromazepam, clonazepam, 7-aminoclonazepam, diazepam, N-desmethyldiazepam, 3-OH-diazepam, fenazepam, flunitrazepam, 7-aminoflunitrazepam, lorazepam, nitrazepam, 7-aminonitrazepam, oxazepam, zopiclone, zolpidem, carisoprodol, and meprobamat.

Results: Screening of 32 drugs was performed with a run time of 14 min. Within- and between-day relative CVs varied from 2.0% to 31.8% and from 3.6% to 39.1%, respectively. Extraction recoveries were &gt;50% except for morphine (30%) and benzoylecgonine (0.2%). The concentrations of the lowest calibrator were 1 nmol/L (0.28 μg/L) to 500 nmol/L (68 μg/L), depending on the drug.

Conclusion: The method allowed rapid and sensitive oral fluid screening for the most commonly abused drugs in Norway and will be used for a road-side survey of drug use in normal traffic.

Determination of amphetamines in human urine by liquid chromatography with fluorimetric detection using a solid-phase extraction procedure

A precise and feasible HPLC method has been developed for the analysis of amphetamine (AMPH), methamphetamine (MAMPH) and methylenedioxymethamphetamine (MDMA, ecstasy) in human urine. A chromatographic run on a C8 Genesis (150 mm x 4.6 mm, 5 microm) column maintained at 30 degrees C lasts about 17 min, using a mobile phase composed of ACN (12%) and a pH 2.5 phosphate buffer (88%) containing 0.3% triethylamine. Mirtazapine was used as the internal standard. Good linearity was found in the 100-2000 ng/mL concentration range for AMPH and MAMPH and in the 12-2000 ng/mL concentration range for MDMA. The pretreatment of urine samples was carried out by means of a careful SPE procedure on C2 cartridges. The extraction yields were very satisfactory for all analytes, with average values greater than 97%. The leading conditions allowed the determination of AMPH, MAMPH and MDMA with satisfactory precision and accuracy. The method has been successfully applied to the determination of the analytes in urine of AMPH users.

Product ion mass spectra of amphetamine-type substances, designer analogues, and ketamine using ultra-performance liquid chromatography/tandem mass spectrometry

This paper describes the application of ultra-performance liquid chromatography/tandem mass spectrometry (UPLC/MS/MS) technology to separate and identify amphetamine-type substances (amphetamine, methamphetamine), common and novel designer analogues (MDA, MDMA, PMA, 4-MTA, MBDB), and ketamine using Acquity UPLC/Micromass Quattro Micro API mass spectrometer instrumentation (Waters Corporation, USA). From injection of drug reference standards, it was demonstrated that these compounds can be identified by product ion mass spectra in less than 4 min total analysis time, indicating that the technological advancements associated with UPLC/MS/MS allow it to serve as a powerful analytical tool for high-throughput testing. In addition to demonstrating the separation and response of these drug compounds under the stated UPLC/MS/MS conditions, we believe the acquired product ion spectra will be a beneficial reference to laboratories interested in incorporating the use of this technology in the routine analysis of drugs of abuse.