Comparison of Oral Fluid and Urine for Detection of Fentanyl Use Using Liquid Chromatography with Tandem Mass Spectrometry

Comparing presumptive with direct-to-definitive drug testing in oral fluid vs. urine for a U.S. national sample of individuals misusing drugs

BACKGROUND

The aims are to compare the results of presumptive drug testing with confirmation of positives vs. direct-to-definitive drug testing, combined with investigation of urine vs. oral fluid as test matrices.

METHODS

Paired oral fluid and urine specimens were collected voluntarily and anonymously from 1098 individuals applying for methadone treatment in 11 clinics across 7 U.S. states. All specimens were analyzed by immunoassay (IA) and liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS-MS).

RESULTS

Confirmed IA prevalences for urine were significantly higher than for oral fluid for 7 out of 10 drug classes - benzodiazepines, cannabis, cocaine, methadone, opiates, oxycodone and tramadol. Drug prevalences by direct-to-definitive LC-MS-MS were either the same or higher than prevalences by confirmed IA. Drug prevalences by LC-MS-MS were higher in urine for two drug classes (cocaine, methadone) and higher in oral fluid for two drug classes (buprenorphine, tramadol), but were equivalent in urine and oral fluid when averaged over all 10 drug classes. Certain drugs of special concern such as heroin and buprenorphine were more frequently detected in oral fluid than urine.

CONCLUSIONS

Urine analysis showed some technical advantage over oral fluid in sensitivity to several drug classes within a confirmed IA testing protocol, but this may be outweighed if there is reason to believe that tampering with urine specimens is a significant problem. Overall drug detection by direct-to-definitive testing was similar for oral fluid and urine, but one matrix may be preferable if there is a particular drug of clinical or epidemiological interest.

Advances in fentanyl testing

Fentanyl is a synthetic opioid that was approved by the FDA in the late 1960s. In the decades since, non-prescription use of fentanyl, its analogs, and structurally unrelated novel synthetic opioids (NSO) has become a worsening public health crisis. There is a clear need for accessible testing for these substances in biological specimens and in apprehended drugs. Immunoassays for fentanyl in urine are available but their performance is restricted to facilities that hold moderate complexity laboratory licenses. Immunoassays for other matrices such as oral fluid (OF), blood, and meconium have been developed but are not widely available. Point of care tests (POCT), such as lateral flow immunoassays or fentanyl test strips (FTS), are widely available but not approved by the FDA for clinical use. All immunoassays are vulnerable to false positive and false negative results. Immunoassays may or may not be able to detect fentanyl analogs and NSOs. Mass spectrometry (MS) can accurately and reliably measure fentanyl and its major metabolite norfentanyl in urine and oral fluid. MS is available at reference laboratories and large hospitals. Liquid chromatography paired with tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) is the most widely used method and has outstanding specificity and sensitivity for fentanyl and norfentanyl. When compared to immunoassays, MS is more expensive, requires more technical skill, and takes longer to result. Newer mass spectrometry methods can measure fentanyl analogs and NSO. Both mass spectrometry assays and immunoassays [in the form of fentanyl test strips (FTS)] have potential use in harm reduction programs.