Detection of Cannabinoids in Oral Fluid Specimens as the Preferred Biological Matrix for a Point-of-Care Biosensor Diagnostic Device

An increasing number of countries have started to decriminalize or legalize the consumption of cannabis for recreational and medical purposes. The active ingredients in cannabis, termed cannabinoids, affect multiple functions in the human body, including coordination, motor skills, memory, response time to external stimuli, and even judgment. Cannabinoids are a unique class of terpeno-phenolic compounds, with 120 molecules discovered so far. There are certain situations when people under the influence of cannabis may be a risk to themselves or the public safety. Over the past two decades, there has been a growing research interest in detecting cannabinoids from various biological matrices. There is a need to develop a rapid, accurate, and reliable method of detecting cannabinoids in oral fluid as it can reveal the recent intake in comparison with urine specimens, which only show a history of consumption. Significant improvements are continuously made in the analytical formats of various technologies, mainly concerning improving their sensitivity, miniaturization, and making them more user-friendly. Additionally, sample collection and pretreatment have been extensively studied, and specific devices for collecting oral fluid specimens have been perfected to allow rapid and effective sample collection. This review presents the recent findings regarding the use of oral fluid specimens as the preferred biological matrix for cannabinoid detection in a point-of-care biosensor diagnostic device. A critical review is presented, discussing the findings from a collection of review and research articles, as well as publicly available data from companies that manufacture oral fluid screening devices. Firstly, the various conventional methods used to detect cannabinoids in biological matrices are presented. Secondly, the detection of cannabinoids using point-of-care biosensors is discussed, emphasizing oral fluid specimens. This review presents the current pressing technological challenges and highlights the gaps where new technological solutions can be implemented.

Automation System for the Flexible Sample Preparation for Quantification of Δ9-THC-D3, THC-OH and THC-COOH from Serum, Saliva and Urine

In the life sciences, automation solutions are primarily established in the field of drug discovery. However, there is also an increasing need for automated solutions in the field of medical diagnostics, e.g., for the determination of vitamins, medication or drug abuse. While the actual metrological determination is highly automated today, the necessary sample preparation processes are still mainly carried out manually. In the laboratory, flexible solutions are required that can be used to determine different target substances in different matrices. A suitable system based on an automated liquid handler was implemented. It has been tested and validated for the determination of three cannabinoid metabolites in blood, urine and saliva. To extract Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol-D3 (Δ9-THC-D3), 11-hydroxy-Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC-OH) and 11-nor-9-carboxy-Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC-COOH) from serum, urine and saliva both rapidly and cost-effectively, three sample preparation methods automated with a liquid handling robot are presented in this article, the basic framework of which is an identical SPE method so that they can be quickly exchanged against each other when the matrix is changed. If necessary, the three matrices could also be prepared in parallel. For the sensitive detection of analytes, protein precipitation is used when preparing serum before SPE and basic hydrolysis is used for urine to cleave the glucuronide conjugate. Recoveries of developed methods are >77%. Coefficients of variation are <4%. LODs are below 1 ng/mL and a comparison with the manual process shows a significant cost reduction.

A systematic review of quantitative analysis of cannabinoids in oral fluid

Cannabis sativa L. is a substance widely used around the world for recreational and medicinal purposes. Oral fluid has been investigated as an alternative biological matrix for demonstrating the illegal use of cannabis, particularly in situations where its recent use needs to be identified. In the last two decades, many methods have been developed to detect and quantify cannabinoids in oral fluid, especially for Δ⁹ -tetrahydrocannabinol, the primary psychoactive substance of cannabis. However, some aspects must be considered in the use of these techniques, such as cannabinoids recoveries or extraction efficiency from different oral fluid collection devices/containers. Pharmacokinetic studies have shown that the presence of minor cannabinoids and metabolites in the analysis of oral fluid may be valuable in interpreting tests, which indicates the need to improve the sensitivity of detecting low concentrations. The aim of this review is to summarize and to describe the methodologies for the quantitative analysis of cannabinoids in oral fluid that have previously been investigated. A systematic search for articles was performed of four different databases, using the descriptor "cannabinoids and oral fluid". Forty-seven studies that examined quantitative methods were identified. The analytical data described in these articles, including oral fluid collection, sample preparation, cannabinoids recovery and extraction efficiency, detection instruments, and quantification limits, were analyzed. The discussion of these particular features of cannabinoid analysis in oral fluid could help to improve or to develop methods for use in Forensic Toxicology.

Cannabinoids in Oral Fluid: Limiting Potential Sources of Cannabidiol Conversion to Δ9- and Δ8-Tetrahydrocannabinol

In late 2019 the National Laboratory Certification Program (NLCP) published an article reporting on the potential analytical conversion of 7-carboxy-cannabidiol (CBD-COOH) to 11-nor-9-carboxy-Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol-9-carboxylic acid (THC-COOH) in urine samples. (1) The same conversion is possible in oral fluid with the parent analyte cannabidiol (CBD) converting to Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol (Δ9-THC) and Δ8-tetrahydrocannabinol (Δ8-THC) under strong acidic conditions. With the recent rise in states legalizing the use of THC and the availability of products containing only CBD, unless the analytical in vitro conversions are controlled, the detection of Δ9-THC or Δ8-THC in oral fluid may not clarify whether the donor was using a CBD product, licit or illicit THC product. Authentic oral fluid samples submitted for cannabinoid analysis were subjected to multiple sample preparation procedures and extraction methods to determine the conditions that allow CBD to convert to THC. CBD single analyte controls prepared from a certified THC-free source were added to the batch to monitor the rate of conversion. Samples were prepared using a base hydrolysis, solid phase extraction, derivatization, and analysis by liquid chromatography with tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS-MS). The base hydrolysis and derivatization were tested independently and did not contribute to the conversion rate. Adjusting the pH of the sample preparation and extraction from pH 2.0 to pH 5.0 changed the conversion rate from 5% to 1%. A pH of 6.0 was not strong enough to extract the cannabinoids efficiently. Removing the acid component of the preparation and extraction procedure eliminated the conversion to THC; however, this did reduce the analyte recovery depending on which extraction column was used. Processing time also contributed to the conversion rate. With smaller trial runs, conversion was not always seen but with larger validation batches low level conversion of 1-2% was observed. A fully validated LC-MS-MS method utilizing solid-phase extraction was developed for CBD, Δ9-THC, Δ8-THC, and cannabinol (CBN). The method specifically targets those analytes found in oral fluid after CBD administration and those that are seen during in vitro CBD conversion. CBD administration was performed using a certified THC-free CBD control.

Quantitation of Δ8-THC, Δ9-THC, Cannabidiol, and Ten Other Cannabinoids and Metabolites in Oral Fluid by HPLC-MS/MS

Quantitative analysis of Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol (Δ9-THC) in oral fluid has gained increasing interest in clinical and forensic toxicology laboratories. New medicinal and/or recreational cannabinoid products require laboratories to distinguish different patterns of cannabinoid use. This study validated a high-performance liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (HPLC-MS/MS) method for 13 different cannabinoids, including (-)-trans-Δ8-tetrahydrocannabinol (Δ8-THC), (-)-trans-Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol (Δ9-THC), cannabidiol (CBD), Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinolic acid-A (Δ9-THCA-A), cannabidiolic acid (CBDA), 11-hydroxy-Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol (11-OH-Δ9-THC), 11-nor-9-carboxy-Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol (Δ9-THCCOOH), tetrahydrocannabivarin (THCV), cannabidivarin (CBDV), cannabidiorcol (CBD-C1), cannabichromene (CBC), cannabinol (CBN) and cannabigerol (CBG) in oral fluid. Baseline separation was achieved in the entire quantitation range between Δ9-THC and its isomer Δ8-THC. The quantitation range of Δ9-THC, Δ8-THC, and CBD was from 0.1 ng/mL to 800 ng/mL. Two hundred human subject oral fluid samples were analyzed with this method after solid phase extraction (SPE). Among the 200 human subject oral fluid samples, all 13 cannabinoid analytes were confirmed in at least one sample. Δ8-THC was confirmed in 11 samples, with or without the present of Δ9-THC. A high concentration of 11-OH-Δ9-THC or Δ9-THCCOOH (>400 ng/mL) was confirmed in three samples. CBD, Δ9-THCA-A, THCV, CBN, and CBG were confirmed in 74, 39, 44, 107, and 112 of the 179 confirmed Δ9-THC positive samples, respectively. The quantitation of multiple cannabinoids and metabolites in oral fluid simultaneously provides valuable information for revealing cannabinoid consumption and interpreting cannabinoid-induced driving impairment.

Azo coupling-based derivatization method for high-sensitivity liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry analysis of tetrahydrocannabinol and other aromatic compounds

An azo coupling-based derivatization method is reported for high-sensitivity liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) quantitation of tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) and other aromatic compounds, i.e. phenols and amines. Through the azo coupling of a diazonium to an analyte, it produces a derivatized analyte which has enhanced ionization efficiency and results in high-response fragments in tandem mass spectrometry. The derivatization method was applied to six typical aromatic compounds using three different diazonium salts as derivatization reagents, demonstrating its applicability to a variety of analytes and reagents. The derivatization reaction can be directly carried out in neat samples, and after derivatization the samples can be immediately sent to the LC-MS/MS instrument for analysis. These advantages facilitate a one-step sample preparation procedure that can be completed in less than one hour, allowing for a "derivatize & shoot" lab workflow. The derivatization method was applied to establish an LC-MS/MS assay for the quantitation of THC in human breath samples. The derivatization conditions were studied in this application, including the effects of acidity, organic solvent, and diazonium concentration in the reaction. The THC derivatization assay was validated and achieved a limit of quantitation (LOQ) of 0.50 pg/ml using either of the two regio-isomers of the azo-derivative of THC (THC-DRV). To prove that the derivatization method has compatibility with complex-matrix samples, a THC derivatization assay for serum samples was established, in which the azo coupling reaction was directly carried out in crude protein-precipitated supernatants. An LOQ of 5.0 pg/ml was achieved. In addition, excellent correlation between THC derivatization and non-derivatization assays was found in the analysis of whole blood samples.

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.

Using ambient mass spectrometry and LC–MS/MS for the rapid detection and identification of multiple illicit street drugs

In this study the recently developed technique of thermal desorption electrospray ionization/mass spectrometry (TD–ESI/MS) was applied to the rapid analysis of multiple controlled substances. With the reallocation of mass spectral resources [from a standard ESI source coupled with liquid chromatography (LC) to an ambient TD–ESI source], this direct-analysis technique allows the identification of a wider range of illicit drugs through a dual-working mode (pretreatment-free qualitative screening/conventional quantitative confirmation). Through 60-MRM (multiple reaction monitoring) analysis—in which the MS/MS process was programmed to sequentially scan 60 precursor ion/product ion transitions and, thereby, identify 30 compounds (two precursor/product ion transitions per compound)—of a four-component (drug) standard, the signal intensity ratios of each drug transition were comparable with those obtained through 8-MRM analysis, demonstrating the selectivity of TD–ESI/MS for the detection of multiple drugs. The consecutive analyses of tablets containing different active components occurred with no cross-contamination or interference from sample to sample, demonstrating the reliability of the TD–ESI/MS technique for rapid sampling (two samples min⁻¹). The active ingredients in seized drug materials could be detected even when they represented less than 2 mg g⁻¹ of the total sample weight, demonstrating the sensitivity of TD–ESI/MS. Combining the ability to rapidly identify multiple drugs with the “plug-and-play” design of the interchangeable ion source, TD–ESI/MS has great potential for use as a pretreatment-free qualitative screening tool for laboratories currently using LC–MS/MS techniques to analyze illicit drugs.

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.

Applications and challenges in using LC–MS/MS assays for quantitative doping analysis

LC–MS/MS is useful for qualitative and quantitative analysis of ‘doped’ biological samples from athletes. LC–MS/MS-based assays at low-mass resolution allow fast and sensitive screening and quantification of targeted analytes that are based on preselected diagnostic precursor–product ion pairs. Whereas LC coupled with high-resolution/high-accuracy MS can be used for identification and quantification, both have advantages and challenges for routine analysis. Here, we review the literature regarding various quantification methods for measuring prohibited substances in athletes as they pertain to World Anti-Doping Agency regulations.

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.

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.

Nonsmoker Exposure to Secondhand Cannabis Smoke. III. Oral Fluid and Blood Drug Concentrations and Corresponding Subjective Effects

The increasing use of highly potent strains of cannabis prompted this new evaluation of human toxicology and subjective effects following passive exposure to cannabis smoke. The study was designed to produce extreme cannabis smoke exposure conditions tolerable to drug-free nonsmokers. Six experienced cannabis users smoked cannabis cigarettes [5.3% Δ(9)-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) in Session 1 and 11.3% THC in Sessions 2 and 3] in a closed chamber. Six nonsmokers were seated alternately with smokers during exposure sessions of 1 h duration. Sessions 1 and 2 were conducted with no ventilation and ventilation was employed in Session 3. Oral fluid, whole blood and subjective effect measures were obtained before and at multiple time points after each session. Oral fluid was analyzed by ELISA (4 ng/mL cutoff concentration) and by LC-MS-MS (limit of quantitation) for THC (1 ng/mL) and total THCCOOH (0.02 ng/mL). Blood was analyzed by LC-MS-MS (0.5 ng/mL) for THC, 11-OH-THC and free THCCOOH. Positive tests for THC in oral fluid and blood were obtained for nonsmokers up to 3 h following exposure. Ratings of subjective effects correlated with the degree of exposure. Subjective effect measures and amounts of THC absorbed by nonsmokers (relative to smokers) indicated that extreme secondhand cannabis smoke exposure mimicked, though to a lesser extent, active cannabis smoking.

Quantification of 11-nor-9-carboxy-δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol in human oral fluid by gas chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry

A sensitive and specific method for the quantification of 11-nor-9-carboxy-Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THCCOOH) in oral fluid collected with the Quantisal and Oral-Eze devices was developed and fully validated. Extracted analytes were derivatized with hexafluoroisopropanol and trifluoroacetic anhydride and quantified by gas chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry with negative chemical ionization. Standard curves, using linear least-squares regression with 1/x weighting were linear from 10 to 1000 ng/L with coefficients of determination >0.998 for both collection devices. Bias was 89.2%-112.6%, total imprecision 4.0%-5.1% coefficient of variation, and extraction efficiency >79.8% across the linear range for Quantisal-collected specimens. Bias was 84.6%-109.3%, total imprecision 3.6%-7.3% coefficient of variation, and extraction efficiency >92.6% for specimens collected with the Oral-Eze device at all 3 quality control concentrations (10, 120, and 750 ng/L). This effective high-throughput method reduces analysis time by 9 minutes per sample compared with our current 2-dimensional gas chromatography-mass spectrometry method and extends the capability of quantifying this important oral fluid analyte to gas chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry. This method was applied to the analysis of oral fluid specimens collected from individuals participating in controlled cannabis studies and will be effective for distinguishing passive environmental contamination from active cannabis smoking.

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.

Evaluation of Δ(9) -tetrahydrocannabinol detection using DrugWipe5S(®) screening and oral fluid quantification after Quantisal™ collection for roadside drug detection via a controlled study with chronic cannabis users

Oral fluid (OF) is potentially useful to detect driving under the influence of drugs because of its ease of sampling. While cannabis is the most prevalent drug in Europe, sensitivity issues for Δ(9) -tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) screening and problems during OF collection are observed. The ability of a recently improved OF screening device - the DrugWipe5S(®) , to detect recent THC use in chronic cannabis smokers, was studied. Ten subjects participated in a double-blind placebo-controlled study. The subjects smoked two subsequent doses of THC; 300 µg/kg and 150 µg/kg with a pause of 75 min using a Volcano vapourizer. DrugWipe5S(®) screening and OF collection using the Quantisal™ device were performed at baseline, 5 min after each administration and 80 min after the last inhalation. Blood samples were drawn simultaneously. The screening devices (n = 80) were evaluated visually after 8 min, while the corresponding OF and serum samples were analyzed respectively with ultra performance liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (UPLC-MS/MS) or gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS). Neat OF THC concentrations ranged from 12 361 ng/g 5 min after smoking down to 34 ng/g 80 min later. Under placebo conditions, a median THC concentration of 8 ng/g OF (0-746 ng/g) and < 1 ng/ mL serum (0-7.8 ng/mL) was observed. The DrugWipe5S(®) was positive just after smoking (90%); however, sensitivity rapidly decreased within 1.5 h (50%). Sensitivity of DrugWipe5S(®) should be improved. As chronic cannabis users have high residual THC concentrations in their serum and OF, confirmation cut-offs should be set according to the aim of detecting recent drug use or establishing zero tolerance.

Molecularly imprinted polymer for selective determination of Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol and 11-nor-Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol carboxylic acid using LC-MS/MS in urine and oral fluid

The use of molecularly imprinted polymers (MIPs) for solid phase extraction (MISPE) allows a rapid and selective extraction compared with traditional methods. Determination of Δ(9)-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) and 11-nor-Δ(9)-tetrahydrocannabinol carboxylic acid (THC-COOH) in oral fluid (OF) and urine was performed using homemade MISPEs for sample clean-up and liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS). Cylindrical MISPE shaped pills were synthesized using catechin as a mimic template. MISPEs were added to 0.5 mL OF or urine sample and sonicated 30 min for adsorption of analytes. For desorption, the MISPE was transfered to a clean tube, and sonicated for 15 min with 2 mL acetone:acetonitrile (3:1, v/v). The elution solvent was evaporated and reconstituted in mobile phase. Chromatographic separation was performed using a SunFire C18 (2.5 μm; 2.1 × 20 mm) column, and formic acid 0.1% and acetonitrile as mobile phase, with a total run time of 5 min. The method was fully validated including selectivity (no endogenous or exogenous interferences), linearity (1-500 ng/mL in OF, and 2.5-500 ng/mL in urine), limit of detection (0.75 and 1 ng/mL in OF and urine, respectively), imprecision (%CV <12.3%), accuracy (98.2-107.0% of target), extraction recovery (15.9-53.5%), process efficiency (10.1-46.2%), and matrix effect (<-55%). Analytes were stable for 72 h in the autosampler. Dilution 1:10 was assured in OF, and Quantisal™ matrix effect showed ion suppression (<-80.4%). The method was applied to the analysis of 20 OF and 11 urine specimens. This is the first method for determination of THC and THC-COOH in OF using MISPE technology.

Current knowledge on cannabinoids in oral fluid

Oral fluid (OF) is a new biological matrix for clinical and forensic drug testing, offering non-invasive and directly observable sample collection reducing adulteration potential, ease of multiple sample collections, lower biohazard risk during collection, recent exposure identification, and stronger correlation with blood than urine concentrations. Because cannabinoids are usually the most prevalent analytes in illicit drug testing, application of OF drug testing requires sufficient scientific data to support sensitive and specific OF cannabinoid detection. This review presents current knowledge of OF cannabinoids, evaluating pharmacokinetic properties, detection windows, and correlation with other biological matrices and impairment from field applications and controlled drug administration studies. In addition, onsite screening technologies, confirmatory analytical methods, drug stability, and effects of sample collection procedure, adulterants, and passive environmental exposure are reviewed. Delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol OF concentrations could be >1000 µg/L shortly after smoking, whereas minor cannabinoids are detected at 10-fold and metabolites at 1000-fold lower concentrations. OF research over the past decade demonstrated that appropriate interpretation of test results requires a comprehensive understanding of distinct elimination profiles and detection windows for different cannabinoids, which are influenced by administration route, dose, and drug use history. Thus, each drug testing program should establish cut-off criteria, collection/analysis procedures, and storage conditions tailored to its purposes. Building a scientific basis for OF testing is ongoing, with continuing OF cannabinoids research on passive environmental exposure, drug use history, donor physiological conditions, and oral cavity metabolism needed to better understand mechanisms of cannabinoid OF disposition and expand OF drug testing applicability. Published 2013. This article is a U.S. Government work and is in the public domain in the USA.

Recent advances in LC–MS/MS analysis of Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol and its metabolites in biological matrices

Cannabis is the most widely used illicit drug in the world. The pharmacological properties of Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol also make it a promising molecule in the treatment of different pathologies. Understanding the PKs and PDs of this drug requires the determination of the concentration of Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol and metabolites in biological matrices. For this purpose many analytical methodologies using mass spectrometric detection have been developed. In recent years, LC–MS/MS has become the gold standard in analysis of tetrahydrocannabinol and its metabolites due to the high selectivity and sensitivity, but above all, due to the ability to determine free and conjugate analytes in one run.

Oral fluid cannabinoid concentrations following controlled smoked cannabis in chronic frequent and occasional smokers

Oral fluid (OF) is an alternative biological matrix for monitoring cannabis intake in drug testing, and drugged driving (DUID) programs, but OF cannabinoid test interpretation is challenging. Controlled cannabinoid administration studies provide a scientific database for interpreting cannabinoid OF tests. We compared differences in OF cannabinoid concentrations from 19 h before to 30 h after smoking a 6.8% THC cigarette in chronic frequent and occasional cannabis smokers. OF was collected with the Statsure Saliva Sampler™ OF device. 2D-GC-MS was used to quantify cannabinoids in 357 OF specimens; 65 had inadequate OF volume within 3 h after smoking. All OF specimens were THC-positive for up to 13.5 h after smoking, without significant differences between frequent and occasional smokers over 30 h. Cannabidiol (CBD) and cannabinol (CBN) had short median last detection times (2.5-4 h for CBD and 6-8 h for CBN) in both groups. THCCOOH was detected in 25 and 212 occasional and frequent smokers' OF samples, respectively. THCCOOH provided longer detection windows than THC in all frequent smokers. As THCCOOH is not present in cannabis smoke, its presence in OF minimizes the potential for false positive results from passive environmental smoke exposure, and can identify oral THC ingestion, while OF THC cannot. THC ≥ 1 μg/L, in addition to CBD ≥ 1 μg/L or CBN ≥ 1 μg/L suggested recent cannabis intake (≤13.5 h), important for DUID cases, whereas THC ≥ 1 μg/L or THC ≥ 2 μg/L cutoffs had longer detection windows (≥30 h), important for workplace testing. THCCOOH windows of detection for chronic, frequent cannabis smokers extended beyond 30 h, while they were shorter (0-24 h) for occasional cannabis smokers.

Cannabinoids in exhaled breath following controlled administration of smoked cannabis

BACKGROUND

Δ(9)-Tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), 11-nor-9-carboxy-THC (THCCOOH), and cannabinol (CBN) were measured in breath following controlled cannabis smoking to characterize the time course and windows of detection of breath cannabinoids.

METHODS

Exhaled breath was collected from chronic (≥4 times per week) and occasional (<twice per week) smokers before and after smoking a 6.8% THC cigarette. Sample analysis included methanol extraction from breath pads, solid-phase extraction, and liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry quantification.

RESULTS

THC was the major cannabinoid in breath; no sample contained THCCOOH and only 1 contained CBN. Among chronic smokers (n = 13), all breath samples were positive for THC at 0.89 h, 76.9% at 1.38 h, and 53.8% at 2.38 h, and only 1 sample was positive at 4.2 h after smoking. Among occasional smokers (n = 11), 90.9% of breath samples were THC-positive at 0.95 h and 63.6% at 1.49 h. One occasional smoker had no detectable THC. Analyte recovery from breath pads by methanolic extraction was 84.2%-97.4%. Limits of quantification were 50 pg/pad for THC and CBN and 100 pg/pad for THCCOOH. Solid-phase extraction efficiency was 46.6%-52.1% (THC) and 76.3%-83.8% (THCCOOH, CBN). Matrix effects were -34.6% to 12.3%. Cannabinoids fortified onto breath pads were stable (≤18.2% concentration change) for 8 h at room temperature and -20°C storage for 6 months.

CONCLUSIONS

Breath may offer an alternative matrix for identifying recent driving under the influence of cannabis, but currently sensitivity is limited to a short detection window (0.5-2 h).

Simultaneous quantification of Δ(9)-tetrahydrocannabinol, 11-nor-9-carboxy-tetrahydrocannabinol, cannabidiol and cannabinol in oral fluid by microflow-liquid chromatography-high resolution mass spectrometry

Δ(9)-Tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) is the primary target in oral fluid (OF) for detecting cannabis intake. However, additional biomarkers are needed to solve interpretation issues, such as the possibility of passive inhalation by identifying 11-nor-9-carboxy-THC (THCCOOH), and determining recent cannabis smoking by identifying cannabidiol (CBD) and/or cannabinol (CBN). We developed and comprehensively validated a microflow liquid chromatography (LC)-high resolution mass spectrometry method for simultaneous quantification of THC, THCCOOH, CBD and CBN in OF collected with the Oral-Eze(®) and Quantisal™ devices. One milliliter OF-buffer solution (0.25mL OF and 0.5mL of Oral-Eze buffer, 1:3 dilution, or 0.75mL Quantisal buffer, 1:4 dilution) had proteins precipitated, and the supernatant subjected to CEREX™ Polycrom™ THC solid-phase extraction (SPE). Microflow LC reverse-phase separation was achieved with a gradient mobile phase of 10mM ammonium acetate pH 6 and acetonitrile over 10min. We employed a Q Exactive high resolution mass spectrometer, with compounds identified and quantified by targeted-MSMS experiments. The assay was linear 0.5-50ng/mL for THC, CBD and CBN, and 15-500pg/mL for THCCOOH. Intra- and inter-day and total imprecision were <10.8%CV and bias 86.5-104.9%. Extraction efficiency was 52.4-109.2%, process efficiency 12.2-88.9% and matrix effect ranged from -86 to -6.9%. All analytes were stable for 24h at 5°C on the autosampler. The method was applied to authentic OF specimens collected with Quantisal and Oral-Eze devices. This method provides a rapid simultaneous quantification of THCCOOH and THC, CBD, CBN, with good selectivity and sensitivity, providing the opportunity to improve interpretation of cannabinoid OF results by eliminating the possibility of passive inhalation and providing markers of recent cannabis smoking.

11-Nor-9-carboxy-∆9-tetrahydrocannabinol quantification in human oral fluid by liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry

Currently, ∆9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) is the analyte quantified for oral fluid cannabinoid monitoring. The potential for false-positive oral fluid cannabinoid results from passive exposure to THC-laden cannabis smoke raises concerns for this promising new monitoring technology. Oral fluid 11-nor-9-carboxy-∆9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THCCOOH) is proposed as a marker of cannabis intake since it is not present in cannabis smoke and was not measureable in oral fluid collected from subjects passively exposed to cannabis. THCCOOH concentrations are in the picogram per milliliter range in oral fluid and pose considerable analytical challenges. A liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LCMSMS) method was developed and validated for quantifying THCCOOH in 1 mL Quantisal-collected oral fluid. After solid phase extraction, chromatography was performed on a Kinetex C18 column with a gradient of 0.01% acetic acid in water and 0.01% acetic acid in methanol with a 0.5-mL/min flow rate. THCCOOH was monitored in negative mode electrospray ionization and multiple reaction monitoring mass spectrometry. The THCCOOH linear range was 12-1,020 pg/mL (R(2) > 0.995). Mean extraction efficiencies and matrix effects evaluated at low and high quality control (QC) concentrations were 40.8-65.1 and -2.4-11.5%, respectively (n = 10). Analytical recoveries (bias) and total imprecision at low, mid, and high QCs were 85.0-113.3 and 6.6-8.4% coefficient of variation, respectively (n = 20). This is the first oral fluid THCCOOH LCMSMS triple quadrupole method not requiring derivatization to achieve a <15 pg/mL limit of quantification. The assay is applicable for the workplace, driving under the influence of drugs, drug treatment, and pain management testing.

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.