Development of an LC–MS/MS method for the simultaneous determination of 25 benzodiazepines and zolpidem in oral fluid and its application to authentic samples from regular drug users

Comprehensive evaluation of drug cases in Seoul and its metropolitan areas - 2022

In order to prepare a response strategy for future drug analyses, the number and results of drug cases handled by the Seoul Institute of National Forensic Service were comprehensively evaluated, with a focus on Seoul and its metropolitan areas. In 2022, the Seoul Institute received approximately 12,150 requests for drug testing related to drug abuse and possession, and the urine samples were tested for approximately 16,000 drug species. The most frequently requested test was for cannabis (Δ-9-THC and Δ-8-THC), followed by methamphetamine, MDMA, ketamine, and synthetic cannabinoids. ADB-5'Br-BUTINACA and propyl butylone were newly emerging substances in 2022. These results were consistent with the main drug detection findings of the confiscated materials. During this period, 24 cases of drug-related deaths were reported, of which 6 were suspected to be the result of acute overdose poisoning caused by methamphetamine, MDMA, fentanyl, and heroin. In addition to the controlled substances regulated by the Narcotics Control Act, new psychoactive substances are being found to be circulating, and various measures are required to address this issue. This study is expected to improve future drug analyses methods and assist in establishing drug policies, and responding to future investigations.

Rapid Extraction and Qualitative Screening of 30 Drugs in Oral Fluid at Concentrations Recommended for the Investigation of DUID Cases

A rapid, simple extraction method followed by qualitative screening using liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS-MS) for drugs in oral fluid is presented. The decision points were selected to be at, or lower, than those recommended as Tier I compounds by the National Safety Council's Alcohol, Drugs, and Impairment Division for toxicological investigation of driving under the influence of drugs cases (DUID) and were also at, or lower, than those recommended by Substance Abuse and Mental Health Service Administration (SAMHSA) and the Department of Transportation (DOT) for Federal workplace drug testing programs. The method included 30 drugs: delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), amphetamine, methamphetamine, 3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine (MDMA), 3,4-methylenedioxyamphetamine (MDA), cocaine, benzoylecgonine, carisoprodol, meprobamate, zolpidem, alprazolam, clonazepam, 7-aminoclonazepam, diazepam, nordiazepam, lorazepam, oxazepam, temazepam, codeine, morphine, 6-acetylmorphine, buprenorphine, fentanyl, hydrocodone, hydromorphone, oxycodone, oxymorphone, methadone, tramadol, and phencyclidine. Phencyclidine was included because it is in the Federal workplace program even though it is considered a Tier II drug for DUID cases. A liquid-liquid extraction method using isopropanol, hexane, and ethyl acetate to extract drugs from the oral fluid-buffer mix collected in a Quantisal™ device, followed by LC-MS-MS screening was developed and validated according to ANSI/ASB 2019 Standard Practices for Method Validation in Forensic Toxicology. Interference studies, limit of detection, precision at the decision point, ionization suppression/enhancement and processed sample stability were determined for each drug. The method was successfully applied to proficiency specimens and routine samples received into the laboratory.

Facile Fabrication of Diatomite-Supported ZIF-8 Composite for Solid-Phase Extraction of Benzodiazepines in Urine Samples Prior to High-Performance Liquid Chromatography

A novel diatomite-supported zeolitic imidazolate framework-8 sorbent (ZIF-8@Dt-COOH) was in situ fabricated and developed for solid-phase extraction of three benzodiazepines (triazolam, midazolam and diazepam) in urine followed by high-performance liquid chromatography. ZIF-8@Dt-COOH was easily prepared by coating ZIF-8 on the surface of Dt-COOH and characterized by Fourier transform infrared spectra, X-ray powder diffractometry and scanning electron microscopy. Compared with bare Dt-COOH, the extraction efficiency of ZIF-8@Dt-COOH for the target was significantly increased from 20.1–39.0% to 100%. Main extraction parameters, including ionic strength and pH of solution, loading volume, washing solution, elution solvent and elution volume, were optimized in detail. Under optimum conditions, the developed method gave linearity of three BZDs in 2–500 ng/mL (r ≥ 0.9995). Limits of detection (S/N = 3), and limits of quantification (S/N = 10) were 0.3–0.4 ng/mL and 1.0–1.3 ng/mL, respectively. In addition, the average recoveries at three spiked levels (5, 10 and 20 ng/mL) varied from 80.0% to 98.7%, with the intra-day and inter-day precisions of 1.4–5.2% and 1.5–8.2%, respectively. The proposed method provided an effective purification performance and gave the enrichment factors of 24.0–29.6. The proposed method was successfully employed for the accurate and sensitive determination of benzodiazepines in urine.

Development and validation of quantitative analytical method for 50 drugs of antidepressants, benzodiazepines and opioids in oral fluid samples by liquid chromatography–tandem mass spectrometry

Purpose

We developed and validated a method for quantitative analysis of 50 psychoactive substances and metabolites (antidepressants, benzodiazepines and opioids) in oral fluid samples using simple liquid–liquid extraction procedure followed by liquid chromatography–tandem mass spectrometry (LC–MS/MS).

Method

Oral fluid samples were collected using Quantisal™ device and extracted by liquid–liquid extraction with 1.0 mL of methyl tert-butyl ether and then analyzed using LC–MS/MS.

Results

The method attended method validation criteria, with limits of quantification as low as 0.5 and 1.0 ng/mL, and linearity between 0.5–50.0 ng/mL for antidepressants, 0.5–25.0 ng/mL for benzodiazepines and 1.0–50.0 ng/mL to opioids. During method validation, bias and imprecision values were not greater than 16 and 20%, respectively. Ionization suppression/enhancement bias results were not greater than 25%. No evidence of carryover was observed. Sample stability studies showed that almost all analytes were stable at 25 °C for 3 days and at 4 °C for 7 days. Freeze–thaw cycles stability showed that most antidepressants and opioids were stable under these conditions. Autosampler stability study showed that all analytes were stable for 24 h, except for nitrazepam and 7-aminoclonazepam. Thirty-eight authentic oral fluid samples were analyzed; 36.8% of the samples were positive for 2 drugs. Citalopram was the most common drug found, followed by venlafaxine.

Conclusions

The method was validated according to international recommendations for the 50 analytes, showing low limits of quantification, good imprecision and bias values, using simple liquid–liquid extraction, and was successfully applied to authentic oral fluid samples analysis.

Clonazepam: Indications, Side Effects, and Potential for Nonmedical Use

After participating in this activity, learners should be better able to:• Assess the misuse potential of clonazepam• Characterize the nonmedical use of clonazepam• Identify the health problems associated with long-term use of clonazepam ABSTRACT: Clonazepam, a benzodiazepine, is commonly used in treating various conditions, including anxiety disorders and epileptic seizures. Due to its low price and easy availability, however, it has become a commonly misused medication, both in medical and recreational contexts. In this review, we aim to highlight the behavioral and pharmacological aspects of clonazepam and its history following its approval for human use. We examine the circumstances commonly associated with the nonmedical use of clonazepam and raise points of particular concern. Clonazepam, alone or in combination with other psychoactive substances, can lead to unwanted effects on health, such as motor and cognitive impairment, sleep disorders, and aggravation of mood and anxiety disorders. Prolonged use of clonazepam may lead to physical dependence and tolerance. There is therefore a need to find safer therapeutic alternatives for treating seizures and anxiety disorders. Greater awareness of its frequent nonmedical use is also needed to achieve safer overall use of this medication.

Characterization and tentative identification of new flunitrazepam metabolites in authentic human urine specimens using liquid chromatography-Q exactive-HF hybrid quadrupole-Orbitrap-mass spectrometry (LC-QE-HF-MS)

Flunitrazepam (FNZ) is a potent hypnotic, sedative, and amnestic drug used to treat severe insomnia. In our recent study, FNZ metabolic profiles were investigated carefully. Six authentic human urine samples were purified using solid phase extraction (SPE) without enzymatic hydrolysis, and urine extracts were then analyzed by liquid chromatography-Q exactive-HF hybrid quadrupole-Orbitrap-mass spectrometry (LC-QE-HF-MS), using the full scan positive ion mode and targeted MS/MS (ddms2) technique to make accurate mass measurements. There were 25 metabolites, including 13 phase I and 12 phase II metabolites, which were detected and tentatively identified by LC-QE-HF-MS. In addition, nine previously unreported phase II glucuronide conjugates and four phase I metabolites are reported here for the first time. Eight metabolic pathways, including N-reduction and O-reduction, N-glucuronidation, O-glucuronidation, mono-hydroxylation and di-hydroxylation, demethylation, acetylation, and combinations, were implicated in this work, and 2-O-reduction together with dihydroxylation were two novel metabolic pathways for FNZ that were identified tentatively. Although 7-amino FNZ is widely considered to be the primary metabolite, a previously unreported metabolites (M12) can also serve as a potential biomarker for FNZ misuse.

Oral Fluid Drug Testing: Analytical Approaches, Issues and Interpretation of Results

With advances in analytical technology and new research informing result interpretation, oral fluid (OF) testing has gained acceptance over the past decades as an alternative biological matrix for detecting drugs in forensic and clinical settings. OF testing offers simple, rapid, non-invasive, observed specimen collection. This article offers a review of the scientific literature covering analytical methods and interpretation published over the past two decades for amphetamines, cannabis, cocaine, opioids, and benzodiazepines. Several analytical methods have been published for individual drug classes and, increasingly, for multiple drug classes. The method of OF collection can have a significant impact on the resultant drug concentration. Drug concentrations for amphetamines, cannabis, cocaine, opioids, and benzodiazepines are reviewed in the context of the dosing condition and the collection method. Time of last detection is evaluated against several agencies' cutoffs, including the proposed Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, European Workplace Drug Testing Society and Driving Under the Influence of Drugs, Alcohol and Medicines cutoffs. A significant correlation was frequently observed between matrices (i.e., between OF and plasma or blood concentrations); however, high intra-subject and inter-subject variability precludes prediction of blood concentrations from OF concentrations. This article will assist individuals in understanding the relative merits and limitations of various methods of OF collection, analysis and interpretation.

Quantification of eight benzodiazepines in human breastmilk and plasma by liquid-liquid extraction and liquid-chromatography tandem mass spectrometry: Application to evaluation of alprazolam transfer into breastmilk

Breastfeeding is strongly encouraged for infant and maternal health. Benzodiazepines (BZDs) are widely prescribed drugs for symptoms, such as anxiety and insomnia, which many women could experience during the postpartum period. However, limited information is currently available to evaluate the transfer of different BZDs into breastmilk. In order to assess the proprieties of this medication during breastfeeding, robust and sensitive analytical methods to quantify BZDs are required. For this purpose, we developed a method for quantification of BZDs, including alprazolam, bromazepam, clonazepam, clotiazepam, etizolam, flunitrazepam, lorazepam, and CM7116 (a metabolite of ethyl loflazepate), in human breastmilk and plasma using liquid chromatography/tandem mass spectrometry (LC/MS/MS). Sample preparation was performed by a simple liquid-liquid extraction (LLE) with ethyl acetate. For sample preparation of CM7116, the pretreatment process to completely obtain the metabolite was added before the LLE step. The BZDs were separated by a C₁₈ column using a gradient elution of acetonitrile in aqueous ammonium acetate solution, and were detected in the positive ion electrospray mode with multiple reaction monitoring (MRM). Lower limits of quantification (LLOQs) in breastmilk ranged from 0.25 to 0.5 ng/mL, and those in plasma ranged from 0.5 to 1.0 ng/mL. The intra-day and inter-day precision, and accuracy of data were assessed and found to be acceptable. The developed method was successfully applied to measure the concentration of alprazolam in breastmilk and plasma, which were donated by a lactating woman who had been regularly treated with alprazolam. Milk to plasma (M/P) ratios were calculated as 0.52 (before oral administration) and 0.49 (2 h after administration) 3 days after delivery. The M/P ratio 1 month after delivery was calculated as 0.41 (2 h after administration). We estimated that the relative infant dose (RID) values of alprazolam ranged from 3.11 to 4.61%.

Analysis of Drugs in Oral Fluid Using LC-MS/MS

Oral fluid analysis for drugs is increasingly used in a variety of testing areas: pain management and medication monitoring, parole and probation situations, driving under the influence of drugs (DUID), therapeutic drug monitoring, and testing for drugs in the workplace. The sample collection itself is straightforward, rapid, observable, and noninvasive, requiring no special facilities (compared to urine) or medical personnel (compared to blood). The pH of saliva is slightly acidic relative to blood; therefore, drugs which are more basic tend to be present in higher concentration in oral fluid than in blood: cocaine, amphetamines, oxycodone, tramadol, buprenorphine, methadone, and fentanyl. Conversely, acidic drugs and drugs which are strongly protein bound have lower concentrations in oral fluid than in blood: examples include benzodiazepines, barbiturates, and carisoprodol. Because of the low volume of specimen available for analysis and the drug concentrations present (generally much lower than those in urine), efficient extraction methods and sensitive confirmation procedures are necessary for routine analysis of drugs in oral fluid. In this chapter, solid-phase extraction methods are described for a variety of drugs with liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry detection.

LC-MS-MS with Post-Column Reagent Addition for the Determination of Zolpidem and its Metabolite Zolpidem Phenyl-4-carboxylic Acid in Oral Fluid after a Single Dose

A rapid, selective and sensitive LC-MS-MS method with a post-column addition of acetonitrile was developed and fully validated for the quantitative determination of zolpidem and its major metabolite, zolpidem phenyl-4-carboxylic acid (ZPCA), in oral fluid. Preliminary sample treatment was limited to a simple dilution of 1 mL oral fluid specimen aliquots with methanol. Chromatography was performed on a Capcell Pak C18 MGII column (250 × 2.0 mm, 5 μm i.d., Shiseido, Tokyo, Japan) with isocratic elution using a water-acetonitrile mobile phase with 0.1% formic acid, 5% acetonitrile and 20 mM ammonium acetate in an aqueous phase at a flow rate of 0.4 mL/min. Acetonitrile was added post-column at a flow rate of 0.4 mL/min to enhance ionization of the analytes in the MS source. Detection was carried out on a QTrapTM 6500 mass spectrometer in positive ionization mode. Good linearities were generated over the range of 0.05-200 ng/mL for zolpidem and 0.1-200 ng/mL for ZPCA. Limit of detection for zolpidem and ZPCA were 0.01 ng/mL and 0.05 ng/mL, respectively, whereas LLOQs were 0.05 ng/mL and 0.1 ng/mL, respectively. This method meets the required criteria for bioanalytical analyses to be used for clinical and forensic purposes. Application of this method was demonstrated by testing authentic samples collected after a single oral dose to obtain insights into the general detectability and detection windows of zolpidem and ZPCA in oral fluid.

Urine and oral fluid drug testing in support of pain management

In recent years, the abuse of opioid drugs has resulted in greater prevalence of addiction, overdose, and deaths attributable to opioid abuse. The epidemic of opioid abuse has prompted professional and government agencies to issue practice guidelines for prescribing opioids to manage chronic pain. An important tool available to providers is the drug test for use in the initial assessment of patients for possible opioid therapy, subsequent monitoring of compliance, and documentation of suspected aberrant drug behaviors. This review discusses the issues that most affect the clinical utility of drug testing in chronic pain management with opioid therapy. It focuses on the two most commonly used specimen matrices in drug testing: urine and oral fluid. The advantages and disadvantages of urine and oral fluid in the entire testing process, from specimen collection and analytical methodologies to result interpretation are reviewed. The analytical sensitivity and specificity limitations of immunoassays used for testing are examined in detail to draw attention to how these shortcomings can affect result interpretation and influence clinical decision-making in pain management. The need for specific identification and quantitative measurement of the drugs and metabolites present to investigate suspected aberrant drug behavior or unexpected positive results is analyzed. Also presented are recent developments in optimization of test menus and testing strategies, such as the modification of the standard screen and reflexed-confirmation testing model by eliminating some of the initial immunoassay-based tests and proceeding directly to definitive testing by mass spectrometry assays.

Detection Times of Diazepam, Clonazepam, and Alprazolam in Oral Fluid Collected From Patients Admitted to Detoxification, After High and Repeated Drug Intake

BACKGROUND

Clonazepam, diazepam, and alprazolam are benzodiazepines with sedative, anticonvulsant, and anxiolytic effects, but their prevalence in drug abuse and drug overdoses has long been recognized. When detection times for psychoactive drugs in oral fluid are reported, they are most often based on therapeutic doses administered in clinical studies. Repeated ingestions of high doses, as seen after drug abuse, are however likely to cause positive samples for extended time periods. Findings of drugs of abuse in oral fluid collected from imprisoned persons might lead to negative sanctions, and the knowledge of detection times of these drugs is thus important to ensure correct interpretation. The aim of this study was to investigate the time window of detection for diazepam, clonazepam, and alprazolam in oral fluid from drug addicts admitted to detoxification.

METHODS

Twenty-five patients with a history of heavy drug abuse admitted to a detoxification ward were included. Oral fluid was collected daily in the morning and the evening and urine samples every morning for 10 days, using the Intercept device. Whole blood samples were collected if the patient accepted. The cutoff levels in oral fluid were 1.3 ng/mL for diazepam, N-desmethyldiazepam, and 7-aminoclonazepam and 1 ng/mL for clonazepam and alprazolam. In urine, the cutoff levels for quantifications were 30 ng/mL for alprazolam, alpha-OH-alprazolam, and 7-aminoclonazepam, 135 ng/mL for N-desmethyldizepam, and 150 ng/mL for 3-OH-diazepam and for all the compounds, the cutoff for the screening analyses were 200 ng/mL.

RESULTS

The maximum detection times for diazepam and N-desmethyldiazepam in oral fluid were 7 and 9 days, respectively. For clonazepam and 7-aminoclonazepam, the maximum detection times in oral fluid were 5 and 6 days, respectively. The maximum detection time for alprazolam in oral fluid was 2.5 days. New ingestions were not suspected in any of the cases, because the corresponding concentrations in urine were decreasing. Results from blood samples revealed that high doses of benzodiazepines had been ingested before admission, and explains the longer detection times in oral fluids than reported previously after intake of therapeutic doses of these drugs.

CONCLUSIONS

This study has shown that oral fluid might be a viable alternative medium to urine when the abuse of benzodiazepines is suspected.

Detection of Nitrobenzodiazepines and Their 7-Amino Metabolites in Oral Fluid

Clonazepam, nitrazepam and flunitrazepam are frequently used benzodiazepines, both as prescribed medication and as drugs of abuse. Little is, however, known about how these drugs are excreted in oral fluid. It has been claimed that the parent drugs are more likely to be detected in oral fluid than the 7-amino metabolites. The aim of this study was to investigate whether the parent drugs or the 7-amino metabolites of the nitrobenzodiazepines were most frequently detected in authentic oral fluid samples. Oral fluid samples were collected from patients undergoing opioid maintenance treatment. Cases where clonazepam, nitrazepam, flunitrazepam and/or their metabolites were detected were included. The samples were collected using the Intercept Oral Specimen Collection Device. A cutoff concentration of 1 nM (∼0.3 ng/mL) in oral fluid-buffer mixture was applied for all the substances. A total of 1,001 oral fluid samples were positive for clonazepam and/or 7-aminoclonazepam; both substances were detected in 707 samples, only the parent drug in 64 cases and only the metabolite in 230 cases. For nitrazepam, both substances were detected in 139 samples; only the parent drug in 16 cases and only the metabolite in 56 cases. Flunitrazepam only was not detected in any sample; both substances were detected in one of these cases, and only the metabolite in three cases. This study revealed that 7-amino metabolites were more likely to be detected in oral fluid than the parent drugs.

Oral fluid drug analysis in the age of new psychoactive substances

Oral fluid has become an important matrix for drugs of abuse analysis. These days the applicability is challenged by the fact that an increasing number of new psychoactive drugs are coming on the market. Synthetic cannabinoids and synthetic cathinones have been the main drug classes, but the diversity is increasing and other drugs like piperazines, phenethylamines, tryptamines, designer opioids and designer benzodiazepines are becoming more prevalent. Many of the substances are very potent, and low doses ingested will lead to low concentrations in biological media, including oral fluid. This review will highlight the phenomenon of new psychoactive substances and review methods for oral fluid drug testing analysis using on-site tests, immunoassays and chromatographic methods.

7-aminoclonazepam is superior to clonazepam for detection of clonazepam use in oral fluid by LC-MS/MS

BACKGROUND

Clonazepam (CLON) is not only frequently prescribed in addiction management but is also commonly abused. Therefore many addiction clinics perform oral fluid (OF) testing, which unlike urine is not subject to adulteration, to monitor CLON compliance. However, CLON and other benzodiazepines can be challenging to detect in OF due to their weakly acidic nature and their presence in low concentrations. We determined the optimal technical and clinical approach for the detection of CLON use using OF.

METHODS

We measured CLON and its primary metabolite 7-aminoclonazepam (7AC) by liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry in OF specimens over a 2 month period. The samples were collected using the Orasure Intercept OF sample collection device.

RESULTS

One hundred samples were presumptive-positive for 7AC and/or CLON. 91 (91.0%) confirmed positive for 7AC (median, range: 4.2, 0.5-316.7 ng/ml) using the ion ratio test, while only 44 of the 100 (44.0%) samples confirmed positive for CLON (median, range: 3.7, 0.5-217.2 ng/ml) using the ion ratio test. In OF the levels of 7AC were approximately 2.4-fold higher than CLON. The use of 7AC as an analyte for the detection of both CLON compliance and undisclosed use is also recommended.

CONCLUSIONS

7AC should be the analyte measured in OF for the detection of CLON use.

Simultaneous detection of ketamine, lorazepam, midazolam and sufentanil in human serum with liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry for monitoring of analgosedation in critically ill patients

A liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) method has been developed and validated for the determination and quantification of four predominantly used analgosedatives in the intensive care unit: ketamine, lorazepam, midazolam and sufentanil in human serum. The extraction procedure consisted of protein precipitation of serum samples with acetonitrile and subsequent centrifugation. D₅-fentanyl and D₄-midazolam served as internal standards (ISTD). Separation of analytes was performed with a Hypersil C18 column and a mobile phase with acetonitrile and 0.1% formic acid (60/40, v/v) under isocratic conditions at a flow rate of 280μl/min. Analytes were simultaneously detected with a triple-stage quadrupole mass spectrometer (LC-MS/MS) in a selected reaction monitoring (SRM) mode with positive heated electrospray ionization (HESI) within a single 2-min run. Calibration curves were linear over a range of 50-2000 for ketamine, 10-1000 for lorazepam, 5-500 for midazolam and 1-100 for sufentanil (ng/ml). The limit of detection and the lower limit of quantification were 0.01 and 10.00 for ketamine, 0.005 and 10.00 for lorazepam, 0.018 and 5.00 for midazolam and 0.068 and 0.25 for sufentanil (ng/ml). Intra- and inter-day accuracies and precisions of all analytes were less than 15%. Bench stability with spiked serum samples was ensured after 12, 24 and 48h at room temperature, freeze- and thaw-stability after 3 cycles of thawing and freezing. The method was successfully established according to International Conference on Harmonization (ICH) guideline Q2 (R1) "Validation of Analytical Procedures" and applied in critically ill adult patients in the intensive care unit. We suggest its suitability for parallel quantification of the sedative analgesics ketamine, lorazepam, midazolam and sufentanil. The method serves as an instrumental tool for therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) and pharmacokinetic studies [1].

Trends in drug testing in oral fluid and hair as alternative matrices

The use of alternative matrices such as oral fluid and hair has increased in the past decades because of advances in analytical technology. However, there are still many issues that need to be resolved. Standardized protocols of sample pretreatment are needed to link the detected concentrations to final conclusions. The development of suitable proficiency testing schemes is required. Finally, interpretation issues such as link to effect, adulteration, detection markers and thresholds will hamper the vast use of these matrices. Today, several niche areas apply these matrices with success, such as drugs and driving for oral fluid and drug-facilitated crimes for hair. Once those issues are resolved, the number of applications will markedly grow in the future.

Development of microextraction by packed sorbent for toxicological analysis of tricyclic antidepressant drugs in human oral fluid

The aim of this study was to apply microextraction by packed sorbent (MEPS) to the isolation of six tricyclic antidepressants (TCADs): nordoxepin, doxepin, desipramine, nortriptyline, imipramine, and amitriptyline from human oral fluid. Samples were collected from healthy volunteers via free spillage from the oral cavity to disposable test tubes. A method of oral fluid sample pretreatment was developed and optimized in terms of suitability for MEPS extraction and removing of interfering agents (protein, food debris, or air bubbles). Moreover, it was short and simple to perform with limited sample consumption (150μL). Extracts were analysed by UHPLC-MS. The MEPS/UHPLC-MS method was validated at three concentration levels (2.00, 4.00 and 8.00ng/mL) of all analytes in the range 1.25-10.0ng/mL. The following parameters were determined: limit of detection, limit of quantification, precision, and accuracy. For all tested concentration levels, the intra- and inter-day repeatability did not exceeded 8.1% and 12.2%, respectively. Gained LOQ value, 0.50ng/mL, made the MEPS/UHPLC-MS method to be a useful tool in clinical and forensic laboratories, which was demonstrated on the basis of analysis of real samples.

Oral fluid for the detection of drugs of abuse using immunoassay and LC–MS/MS

The utility of oral fluid as a sample matrix for the analysis of drugs has been increasing in popularity over the last few years. This is largely because of collection advantages over other matrices, but also due to the rapid improvements in analytical assays including highly sensitive liquid reagent format enzyme immunoassays and LC–MS/MS. This review will highlight improvements in assay formats, sensitivity, laboratory equipment and sample processing using low sample volumes to expand drug test profiles.