Biomarkers of Recent Cannabis Use in Blood, Oral Fluid and Breath

Quantitative analysis of cannabinoids and metabolites in oral fluid by volumetric absorptive microsampling combined with UHPLC-HRMS

With recent evolution of cannabis legalization around the world and multiplication of cannabis derived products, identifying and qualifying cannabis consumption has a proven interest. Although blood, plasma, and urine are common matrices widely used in toxicology laboratories, oral fluid presents specific advantages. In the context of doping tests, addiction consultation or roadside checks, where other matrices are impractical to collect or can be adulterated, oral fluid is a promising matrix that allows a non-invasive, rapid, and monitored self-sampling. However, available devices required a consequent volume of oral fluid, more than 250 µL, sometimes difficult to collect. We present here a fully optimized quantitative method for seven cannabinoids, including four metabolites, in oral fluid, Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol, 11-hydroxy-Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol and 11-nor-9-carboxy-Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol; cannabidiol, 7-hydroxy and 7-carboxycannabidiol; and cannabinol. After self-collection of 20 µL using an accurate and precise volumetric absorptive microsampling device (VAMS®), cannabinoids were derivatized with 2-fluoro-1-methylpyridinium p-toluenesulfonate to increase sensitivity. The successive steps of the proposed method, including biosampling, 1 h sample preparation with derivatization, and acquisition by ultrahigh-performance liquid chromatography coupled to high-resolution mass spectrometry, were fully optimized. A limit of quantification of 0.5 ng/mL (≈10 pg per sampling) was thus targeted, adapted to the legal threshold required by the authorities and to clinical monitoring. Applied to six cannabis consumers, the proposed method made it possible to quantify in 20 µL oral fluid samples, Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol ranging from 0.5 to 6236 ng/mL, cannabidiol from 0.6 to 190 ng/mL and cannabinol from 0.5 to 118 ng/mL.

Development and validation of a method for analysis of 25 cannabinoids in oral fluid and exhaled breath condensate

Currently, there is a significant demand in forensic toxicology for biomarkers of cannabis exposure that, unlike ∆9-tetrahydrocannabinol, can reliably indicate time and frequency of use, be sampled with relative ease, and correlate with impairment. Oral fluid (OF) and exhaled breath condensate (EBC) are alternative, non-invasive sample matrices that hold promise for identifying cannabis exposure biomarkers. OF, produced by salivary glands, is increasingly utilized in drug screening due to its non-invasive collection and is being explored as an alternative matrix for cannabinoid analysis. EBC is an aqueous specimen consisting of condensed water vapor containing water-soluble volatile and non-volatile components present in exhaled breath. Despite potential advantages, there are no reports on the use of EBC for cannabinoid detection. This study developed a supported liquid extraction approach and LC-QqQ-MS dMRM analytical method for quantification of 25 major and minor cannabinoids and metabolites in OF and EBC. The method was validated according to the ANSI/ASB 036 standard and other published guidelines. LOQ ranged from 0.5 to 6.0 ng/mL for all cannabinoids in both matrices. Recoveries for most analytes were 60-90%, with generally higher values for EBC compared to OF. Matrix effects were observed with some cannabinoids, with effects mitigated by use of matrix-matched calibration. Bias and precision were within ± 25%. Method applicability was demonstrated by analyzing ten authentic OF and EBC samples, with positive detections of multiple analytes in both matrices. The method will facilitate comprehensive analysis of cannabinoids in non-invasive sample matrices for the development of reliable cannabis exposure biomarkers.

Cannabinoids detected in exhaled breath condensate after cannabis use

Cannabinoids can be detected in breath after cannabis use, but different breath matrices need to be explored as studies to date with filter-based devices that collect breath aerosols have not demonstrated that breath-based measurements can reliably identify recent cannabis use. Exhaled breath condensate (EBC) is an unexplored aqueous breath matrix that contains condensed volatile compounds and water vapor in addition to aerosols. EBC was collected from participants both before and at two time points (0.7 ± 0.2 h and 1.7 ± 0.3 h) after observed cannabis use. Eleven different cannabinoids were monitored with liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry. Five different cannabinoids, including Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), were detected in EBC collected from cannabis users. THC was detected in some EBC samples before cannabis use, despite the requested abstinence period. THC was detected in all EBC samples collected at 0.7 h post use and decreased for all participants at 1.7 h. Non-THC cannabinoids were only detected after cannabis use. THC concentrations in EBC samples collected at 0.7 h showed no trend with sample metrics like mass or number of breaths. EBC sampling devices deserve further investigation with respect to modes of cannabis use (e.g, edibles), post use time points, and optimization of cannabinoid recovery.

Validation and application of an automated multitarget LC-MS/MS method for drugs of abuse testing using exhaled breath as specimen

Aerosol microparticles in exhaled breath carry non-volatile compounds from the deeper parts of the lung. When captured and analyzed, these aerosol microparticles constitute a non-invasive and readily available specimen for drugs of abuse testing. The present study aimed to evaluate a simple breath collection device in a clinical setting. The device divides a breath sample into three parallel "collectors" that can be individually analyzed. Urine was used as the reference specimen, and parallel specimens were collected from 99 patients undergoing methadone maintenance treatment. Methadone was used as the primary validation parameter. A sensitive multi-analyte method using tandem liquid chromatography - mass spectrometry was developed and validated as part of the project. The method was successfully validated for 36 analytes with a limit of detection of 1 pg/collector for most compounds. Based on the validation results tetrahydrocannabinol THC), cannabidiol (CBD), and lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD) are suitable for qualitative analysis, but all other analytes can be quantitively assessed by the method. Methadone was positive in urine in 97 cases and detected in exhaled breath in 98 cases. Median methadone concentration was 64 pg/collector. The methadone metabolite 2-ethylidene-1,5-dimethyl-3,3-diphenylpyrrolidine (EDDP) was detected in 90 % of the cases but below 10 pg/collector in most. Amphetamine was also present in the urine in 17 cases and in exhaled breath in 16 cases. Several other substances were detected in the exhaled breath and urine samples, but at a lower frequency. This study concluded that the device provides a specimen from exhaled breath, that is useful for drugs of abuse testing. The results show that high analytical sensitivity is needed to achieve good detectability and detection time after intake.

Complexity of Translating Analytics to Recent Cannabis Use and Impairment

While current analytical methodologies can readily identify cannabis use, definitively establishing recent use within the impairment window has proven to be far more complex, requiring a new approach. Recent studies have shown no direct relationship between impairment and Δ9-tetra-hydrocannabinol (Δ9-THC) concentrations in blood or saliva, making legal "per se" Δ9-THC limits scientifically unjustified. Current methods that focus on Δ9-THC and/or metabolite concentrations in blood, saliva, urine, or exhaled breath can lead to false-positive results for recent use due to the persistence of Δ9-THC well outside of the typical 3-4 h window of potential impairment following cannabis inhalation. There is also the issue of impairment due to other intoxicating substances-just because a subject exhibits signs of impairment and cannabis use is detected does not rule out the involvement of other drugs. Compounding the matter is the increasing popularity of hemp-derived cannabidiol (CBD) products following passage of the 2018 Farm Bill, which legalized industrial hemp in the United States. Many of these products contain varying levels of Δ9-THC, which can lead to false-positive tests for cannabis use. Furthermore, hemp-derived CBD is used to synthesize Δ8-THC, which possesses psychoactive properties similar to Δ9-THC and is surrounded by legal controversy. For accuracy, analytical methods must be able to distinguish the various THC isomers, which have identical masses and exhibit immunological cross-reactivity. A new testing approach has been developed based on exhaled breath and blood sampling that incorporates kinetic changes and the presence of key cannabinoids to detect recent cannabis use within the impairment window without the false-positive results seen with other methods. The complexity of determining recent cannabis use that may lead to impairment demands such a comprehensive method so that irresponsible users can be accurately detected without falsely accusing responsible users who may unjustly suffer harsh, life-changing consequences.

Assessing Cannabis Use in People with Psychosis

Introduction: Cannabis use is common in people with psychotic disorders and is associated with the exacerbation of symptoms, poor treatment adherence, and an increased risk of relapse. Accurate assessment of cannabis use is thus critical to the clinical management of psychosis. Discussion: Cannabis use is usually assessed with self-report questionnaires that were originally developed for healthy individuals or people with a cannabis use disorder. Compared to these groups, the pattern of cannabis use and the associated harms in patients with psychosis are quite different. Moreover, in people with psychosis, the accuracy of self-reported use may be impaired by psychotic symptoms, cognitive deficits, and a desire to conceal use when clinicians have advised against it. Although urinary screening for delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol is sometimes used in the assessment of acute psychotic episodes, it is not used in routinely. Cannabis use could be assessed by measuring the concentration of cannabinoids in urine and blood, but this is rarely done in either clinical settings or research. Conclusion: Using quantitative biological measures could provide a more accurate guide to the effects of use on the disorder than asking patients or using questionnaires.

Recent advances of drugs monitoring in oral fluid and comparison with blood

The use of alternative matrices in toxicological analyses has been on the rise in clinical and forensic settings. Oral fluid (OF), as non-invasive fluid, has attracted attention in the field of drug screening, both for therapeutic and forensic purposes, as well as for medical diagnosis, clinical management, on-site (real time) doping and for monitoring environmental exposure to toxic substances. A good correlation between OF and blood is now established for drug concentrations. Therefore, OF might be a potential substitute of blood, especially for long-term surveillance (e.g., therapeutic drugs) or to screen a large number of patients, as well as for the development of salivary point-of-care technologies. In this review, we aimed to summarize and critically evaluate the current literature that focused on the comparison of drugs detection in OF and blood specimens.

Evaluation of Field Sobriety Tests for Identifying Drivers Under the Influence of Cannabis: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

With increasing medicinal and recreational cannabis legalization, there is a public health need for effective and unbiased evaluations for determining whether a driver is impaired due to Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) exposure. Field sobriety tests (FSTs) are a key component of the gold standard law enforcement officer-based evaluations, yet controlled studies are inconclusive regarding their efficacy in detecting whether a person is under the influence of THC.

Objective

To examine the classification accuracy of FSTs with respect to cannabis exposure and driving impairment (as determined via a driving simulation).

Design, Setting, and Participants

This double-blind, placebo-controlled parallel randomized clinical trial was conducted from February 2017 to June 2019 at the Center for Medicinal Cannabis Research, University of California, San Diego. Participants were aged 21 to 55 years and had used cannabis in the past month. Data were analyzed from August 2021 to April 2023.

Intervention

Participants were randomized 1:1:1 to placebo (0.02% THC), 5.9% THC cannabis, or 13.4% THC cannabis smoked ad libitum.

Main Outcome and Measures

The primary end point was law enforcement officer determination of FST impairment at 4 time points after smoking. Additional measures included officer estimation as to whether participants were in the THC or placebo group as well as driving simulator data. Officers did not observe driving performance.

Results

The study included 184 participants (117 [63.6%] male; mean [SD] age, 30 [8.3] years) who had used cannabis a mean (SD) of 16.7 (9.8) days in the past 30 days; 121 received THC and 63, placebo. Officers classified 98 participants (81.0%) in the THC group and 31 (49.2%) in the placebo group as FST impaired (difference, 31.8 percentage points; 95% CI, 16.4-47.2 percentage points; P < .001) at 70 minutes after smoking. The THC group performed significantly worse than the placebo group on 8 of 27 individual FST components (29.6%) and all FST summary scores. However, the placebo group did not complete a median of 8 (IQR, 5-11) FST components as instructed. Of 128 participants classified as FST impaired, officers suspected 127 (99.2%) as having received THC. Driving simulator performance was significantly associated with results of select FSTs (eg, ≥2 clues on One Leg Stand was associated with impairment on the simulator: odds ratio, 3.09; 95% CI, 1.63-5.88; P < .001).

Conclusions and Relevance

This randomized clinical trial found that when administered by highly trained officers, FSTs differentiated between individuals receiving THC vs placebo and driving abilities were associated with results of some FSTs. However, the high rate at which the participants receiving placebo failed to adequately perform FSTs and the high frequency that poor FST performance was suspected to be due to THC-related impairment suggest that FSTs, absent other indicators, may be insufficient to denote THC-specific impairment in drivers.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02849587.

Driving Under the Influence of Cannabis: Impact of Combining Toxicology Testing with Field Sobriety Tests

BACKGROUND

Cannabis is increasingly used both medically and recreationally. With widespread use, there is growing concern about how to identify cannabis-impaired drivers.

METHODS

A placebo-controlled randomized double-blinded protocol was conducted to study the effects of cannabis on driving performance. One hundred ninety-one participants were randomized to smoke ad libitum a cannabis cigarette containing placebo or delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) (5.9% or 13.4%). Blood, oral fluid (OF), and breath samples were collected along with longitudinal driving performance on a simulator (standard deviation of lateral position [SDLP] and car following [coherence]) over a 5-hour period. Law enforcement officers performed field sobriety tests (FSTs) to determine if participants were impaired.

RESULTS

There was no relationship between THC concentrations measured in blood, OF, or breath and SDLP or coherence at any of the timepoints studied (P > 0.05). FSTs were significant (P < 0.05) for classifying participants into the THC group vs the placebo group up to 188 minutes after smoking. Seventy-one minutes after smoking, FSTs classified 81% of the participants who received active drug as being impaired. However, 49% of participants who smoked placebo (controls) were also deemed impaired at this same timepoint. Combining a 2 ng/mL THC cutoff in OF with positive findings on FSTs reduced the number of controls classified as impaired to zero, 86 minutes after smoking the placebo.

CONCLUSIONS

Requiring a positive toxicology result in addition to the FST observations substantially improved the classification accuracy regarding possible driving under the influence of THC by decreasing the percentage of controls classified as impaired.

Analysis of Cannabinoids in Biological Specimens: An Update

Cannabinoids are still the most consumed drugs of abuse worldwide. Despite being considered less harmful to human health, particularly if compared with opiates or cocaine, cannabis consumption has important medico-legal and public health consequences. For this reason, the development and optimization of sensitive analytical methods that allow the determination of these compounds in different biological specimens is important, involving relevant efforts from laboratories. This paper will discuss cannabis consumption; toxicokinetics, the most detected compounds in biological samples; and characteristics of the latter. In addition, a comprehensive review of extraction methods and analytical tools available for cannabinoid detection in selected biological specimens will be reviewed. Important issues such as pitfalls and cut-off values will be considered.

Examining impairment and kinetic patterns associated with recent use of hemp-derived Δ8-tetrahydrocannabinol: case studies

Background

As a result of the legalization of U.S. industrial hemp production in late 2018, products containing hemp-derived Δ⁸-tetrahydrocannabinol (Δ⁸-THC) are increasing in popularity. Little, however, is known regarding Δ⁸-THC’s impairment potential and the associated impacts on roadway and workplace safety, and testing for Δ⁸-THC is not yet common. The present study explored impairment patterns and cannabinoid kinetics associated with recent use of Δ⁸-THC.

Methods

Hemp-derived Δ⁸-THC concentrate was administered by vaporization ad libitum to three male frequent cannabis users aged 23–25 years. In addition to self-assessments of impairment using a 10-point scale, horizontal gaze nystagmus (HGN) was evaluated in each subject as a physical means of assessing impairment before and after vaporization. To examine cannabinoid kinetic patterns, exhaled breath and capillary blood samples were collected prior to vaporization up to 180 min post-vaporization and analyzed by liquid chromatography high-resolution mass spectrometry for cannabinoid content using validated methods. The impairment and cannabinoid kinetic results were then compared to analogous results obtained from the same three subjects after they had smoked a ∆⁹-THC cannabis cigarette ad libitum in a previous study to determine whether any similarities existed.

Results

Patterns of impairment after vaporizing Δ⁸-THC were similar to those observed after smoking cannabis, with self-assessed impairment peaking within the first hour after use, and then declining to zero by 3 h post-use. Likewise, HGN was observed only after vaporizing, and by 3 h post-vaporization, evidence of HGN had dissipated. Cannabinoid kinetic patterns observed after vaporizing Δ⁸-THC (short ∆⁸-THC half-lives of 5.2 to 11.2 min at 20 min post-vaporization, presence of key cannabinoids cannabichromene, cannabigerol, and tetrahydrocannabivarin, and breath/blood Δ⁸-THC ratios > 2 within the first hour post-vaporization) were also analogous to those observed for ∆⁹-THC and the same key cannabinoids within the first hour after the same subjects had smoked cannabis in the previous study.

Conclusions

Hemp-derived Δ⁸-THC and Δ⁹-THC from cannabis display similar impairment profiles, suggesting that recent use of Δ⁸-THC products may carry the same risks as cannabis products. Standard testing methods need to incorporate this emerging, hemp-derived cannabinoid.

Indeterminacy of cannabis impairment and ∆9-tetrahydrocannabinol (∆9-THC) levels in blood and breath

Previous investigators have found no clear relationship between specific blood concentrations of ∆⁹-tetrahydrocannabinol (∆⁹-THC) and impairment, and thus no scientific justification for use of legal “per se” ∆⁹-THC blood concentration limits. Analyzing blood from 30 subjects showed ∆⁹-THC concentrations that exceeded 5 ng/mL in 16 of the 30 subjects following a 12-h period of abstinence in the absence of any impairment. In blood and exhaled breath samples collected from a group of 34 subjects at baseline prior to smoking, increasing breath ∆⁹-THC levels were correlated with increasing blood levels (P < 0.0001) in the absence of impairment, suggesting that single measurements of ∆⁹-THC in breath, as in blood, are not related to impairment. When post-smoking duration of impairment was compared to baseline ∆⁹-THC blood concentrations, subjects with the highest baseline ∆⁹-THC levels tended to have the shortest duration of impairment. It was further shown that subjects with the shortest duration of impairment also had the lowest incidence of horizontal gaze nystagmus at 3 h post-smoking compared to subjects with the longest duration of impairment (P < 0.05). Finally, analysis of breath samples from a group of 44 subjects revealed the presence of transient cannabinoids such as cannabigerol, cannabichromene, and ∆⁹-tetrahydrocannabivarin during the peak impairment window, suggesting that these compounds may be key indicators of recent cannabis use through inhalation. In conclusion, these results provide further evidence that single measurements of ∆⁹-THC in blood, and now in exhaled breath, do not correlate with impairment following inhalation, and that other cannabinoids may be key indicators of recent cannabis inhalation.

Driving Performance and Cannabis Users' Perception of Safety: A Randomized Clinical Trial

IMPORTANCE

Expanding cannabis medicalization and legalization increases the urgency to understand the factors associated with acute driving impairment.

OBJECTIVE

To determine, in a large sample of regular cannabis users, the magnitude and time course of driving impairment produced by smoked cannabis of different Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) content, the effects of use history, and concordance between perceived impairment and observed performance.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This double-blind, placebo-controlled parallel randomized clinical trial took place from February 2017 to June 2019 at the Center for Medicinal Cannabis Research, University of California San Diego. Cannabis users were recruited for this study, and analysis took place between April 2020 and September 2021.

INTERVENTIONS

Placebo or 5.9% or 13.4% THC cannabis smoked ad libitum.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary end point was the Composite Drive Score (CDS), which comprised key driving simulator variables, assessed prior to smoking and at multiple time points postsmoking. Additional measures included self-perceptions of driving impairment and cannabis use history.

RESULTS

Of 191 cannabis users, 118 (61.8%) were male, the mean (SD) age was 29.9 (8.3) years, and the mean (SD) days of use in the past month was 16.7 (9.8). Participants were randomized to the placebo group (63 [33.0%]), 5.9% THC (66 [34.6%]), and 13.4% THC (62 [32.5%]). Compared with placebo, the THC group significantly declined on the Composite Drive Score at 30 minutes (Cohen d = 0.59 [95% CI, 0.28-0.90]; P < .001) and 1 hour 30 minutes (Cohen d = 0.55 [95% CI, 0.24-0.86]; P < .001), with borderline differences at 3 hours 30 minutes (Cohen d = 0.29 [95% CI, -0.02 to 0.60]; P = .07) and no differences at 4 hours 30 minutes (Cohen d = -0.03 [95% CI, -0.33 to 0.28]; P = .87). The Composite Drive Score did not differ based on THC content (likelihood ratio χ24 = 3.83; P = .43) or use intensity (quantity × frequency) in the past 6 months (likelihood ratio χ24 = 1.41; P = .49), despite postsmoking blood THC concentrations being higher in those with the highest use intensity. Although there was hesitancy to drive immediately postsmoking, increasing numbers (81 [68.6%]) of participants reported readiness to drive at 1 hour 30 minutes despite performance not improving from initial postsmoking levels.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Smoking cannabis ad libitum by regular users resulted in simulated driving decrements. However, when experienced users control their own intake, driving impairment cannot be inferred based on THC content of the cigarette, behavioral tolerance, or THC blood concentrations. Participants' increasing willingness to drive at 1 hour 30 minutes may indicate a false sense of driving safety. Worse driving performance is evident for several hours postsmoking in many users but appears to resolve by 4 hours 30 minutes in most individuals. Further research is needed on the impact of individual biologic differences, cannabis use history, and administration methods on driving performance.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02849587.

Quantitative determination of five cannabinoids in blood and urine by gas chromatography tandem mass spectrometry applying automated on-line solid phase extraction

Cannabis is the most frequently consumed illegal substance worldwide. More recently, an increasing number of legal cannabis products low in psychoactive Δ⁹‐tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) but high in non‐intoxicating cannabidiol (CBD) are being more widely consumed. While the detection and quantification of THC and its metabolites in biological matrices is an important forensic‐toxicological task, additional detection of CBD is also important, for example, when examining the plausibility of consumer's statements. This report describes the method validation for the quantitative determination of THC and its two major metabolites, 11‐hydroxy‐THC (OH‐THC) and 11‐nor‐9‐carboxy‐THC (THC‐COOH), as well as CBD and cannabinol (CBN) in whole blood and urine. The method employs automated on‐line solid phase extraction coupled to gas chromatography tandem mass spectrometry (GC–MS/MS). The method was fully validated according to guidelines of the Swiss Society of Legal Medicine (SGRM) and the Society of Toxicological and Forensic Chemistry (GTFCh). The method fulfilled the validation criteria regarding analytical limits, accuracy and precision, extraction efficacy, and sample stability. The limits of detection (LODs) in whole blood and urine were 0.15 ng/mL for THC, OH‐THC and CBD, 0.1 ng/mL for CBN, and 1.0 ng/mL for THC‐COOH. The limits of quantification (LOQ) in whole blood and urine were 0.3 ng/mL for THC, OH‐THC and CBD, 0.2 ng/mL for CBN, and 3.0 ng/mL for THC‐COOH. The fully validated and automated method allows sensitive and robust measurement of cannabinoids in whole blood and urine. Detection of CBD provides additional information regarding consumed products.

Changes in Expression of DNA-Methyltransferase and Cannabinoid Receptor mRNAs in Blood Lymphocytes After Acute Cannabis Smoking

BACKGROUND

Cannabis use is a component risk factor for the manifestation of schizophrenia. The biological effects of cannabis include effects on epigenetic systems, immunological parameters, in addition to changes in cannabinoid receptors 1 and 2, that may be associated with this risk. However, there has been limited study of the effects of smoked cannabis on these biological effects in human peripheral blood cells. We analyzed the effects of two concentrations of tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) vs. placebo in lymphocytes of a subset of participants who enrolled in a double-blind study of the effects of cannabis on driving performance (outcome not the focus of this study).

METHODS

Twenty four participants who regularly use cannabis participated in an experiment in which they smoked cannabis cigarettes (5.9 or 13.4% THC) or placebo (0.02%) ad libitum. Blood samples were drawn at baseline and several times after smoking. Lymphocytes were separated and stored at -80^°C for further analysis. Samples were analyzed for mRNA content for cannabinoid receptors 1 (CB1) and 2 (CB2), methylation and demethylating enzymes (DNMT, TET), glucocorticoid receptor (NRC3) and immunological markers (IL1B, TNFα) by qPCR using TaqMan probes. The results were correlated with THC whole blood levels during the course of the day, as well as THCCOOH baseline levels. Statistical analyses used analysis of variance and covariance and t-tests, or non-parametric equivalents for those values which were not normally distributed.

RESULTS

There were no differences in background baseline characteristics of the participants except that the higher concentration THC group was older than the low concentration and placebo groups, and the low concentration THC group had higher baseline CB2 mRNA levels. Both the 5.9 and 13.4% THC groups showed increased THC blood levels that then decreased toward baseline within the first hour. However, there were no significant differences between THC blood levels between the 5.9 and 13.4% groups at any time point. At the 4-h time point after drug administration the 13.4% THC group had higher CB2 (P = 0.021) and DNMT3A (P = 0.027) mRNA levels than the placebo group. DNMT1 mRNA levels showed a trend in the same direction (P = 0.056). The higher 13.4% THC group had significantly increased CB2 mRNA levels than the 5.9% concentration group at several post drug administration time points and showed trends for difference in effects for between 5.9 and 13.4% THC groups for other mRNAs. TET3 mRNA levels were higher in the 13.4% THC group at 55 min post-cannabis ingestion. When the high and lower concentration THC groups were combined, none of the differences in mRNA levels from placebo remained statistically significant. Changes in THC blood levels were not related to changes in mRNA levels.

CONCLUSION

Over the time course of this study, CB2 mRNA increased in blood lymphocytes in the high concentration THC group but were not accompanied by changes in immunological markers. The changes in DNMT and TET mRNAs suggest potential epigenetic effects of THC in human lymphocytes. Increases in DNMT methylating enzymes have been linked to some of the pathophysiological processes in schizophrenia and, therefore, should be further explored in a larger sample population, as one of the potential mechanisms linking cannabis use as a trigger for schizophrenia in vulnerable individuals. Since the two THC groups did not differ in post-smoking blood THC concentrations, the relationship between lymphocytic changes and the THC content of the cigarettes remains to be determined.

Blood and Oral Fluid Cannabinoid Profiles of Frequent and Occasional Cannabis Smokers

Increased prevalence of cannabis consumption and impaired driving are a growing public safety concern. Some states adopted per se driving laws, making it illegal to drive with more than a specified ∆9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) blood concentration of THC in a biological fluid (typically blood). Blood THC concentrations decrease significantly (~90%) with delays in specimen collection, suggesting use of alternative matrices, such as oral fluid (OF). We characterized 10 cannabinoids' concentrations, including THC metabolites, in blood and OF from 191 frequent and occasional users by LC-MS-MS for up to 6 h after ad libitum smoking. Subjects self-titrated when smoking placebo, 5.9 or 13.4% THC cannabis. Higher maximum blood THC concentrations (Cmax) were observed in individuals who received the 5.9% THC versus the 13.4% THC plant material. In blood, the Cmax of multiple analytes, including THC and its metabolites, were increased in frequent compared to occasional users, whereas there were no significant differences in OF Cmax. Blood THC remained detectable (≥5 ng/mL) at the final sample collection for 14% of individuals who smoked either the 5.9% or 13.4% THC cigarette, whereas 54% had detectable THC in OF when applying the same cutoff. Occasional and frequent cannabis users' profiles were compared, THC was detectable for significantly longer in blood and OF from frequent users. Detection rates between frequent and occasional users at multiple per se cutoffs showed larger differences in blood versus OF. Understanding cannabinoid profiles of frequent and occasional users and the subsequent impact on detectability with current drug per se driving limits is important to support forensic interpretations and the development of scientifically supported driving under the influence of cannabis laws.