Reliability of roadside oral fluid testing devices for ∆9 -tetrahydrocannabinol (∆9 -THC) detection

Driving under the influence of cannabis (DUIC) is increasing worldwide, and cannabis is the most prevalent drug after alcohol in impaired driving cases, emphasizing the need for a reliable traffic enforcement strategy. ∆9 -tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) detection in oral fluid has great potential for identifying recent cannabis use; however, additional data are needed on the sensitivities, specificities, and efficiencies of different oral fluid devices for detecting cannabinoids at the roadside by police during routine traffic safety enforcement efforts. At the roadside, 8945 oral fluid THC screening tests were performed with four devices: AquilaScan®, Dräger DrugTest®, WipeAlyser Reader®, and Druglizer®. A total of 530 samples screened positive for THC (5.9%) and were analyzed by liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry at multiple cutoff concentrations (2 ng/mL, 10 ng/mL, and manufacturers' recommended device cutoffs) to investigate device performance. Results varied substantially, with sensitivities of 0%-96.8%, specificities of 89.8%-98.5%, and efficiencies of 84.3%-97.8%. The Dräger DrugTest® outperformed the other devices with a 96.8% sensitivity, 97.1% specificity, and 97.0% efficiency at a 5-ng/mL LC-MS/MS confirmation cutoff. The WipeAlyser Reader® had good performance with a 91.4% sensitivity, 97.2% specificity, and 96.4% efficiency. AquilaScan® and Druglizer® had unacceptable performance for cannabinoid detection, highlighted by sensitivity <13%. The choice of roadside oral fluid testing device must offer good analytical performance for cannabinoids because of its high prevalence of use and impact on road safety.

Implementation of the first comprehensive state oral fluid drug testing program for roadside screening and laboratory testing in DUID cases-A 5-year review

Oral fluid (OF) is a valuable specimen for driving under the influence of drugs (DUID) applications. This study demonstrates the implementation of the first comprehensive OF drug testing program in the United States, including approved roadside screening OF devices for law enforcement and validated liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS-MS) confirmation methods. Three roadside OF screening devices were evaluated: the Dräger DrugTest® 5000, Abbott SoToxa®, and Randox Evidence MultiSTAT™. Two qualitative LC-MS-MS confirmation methods were validated per ASB Standard 036. The first method utilized an automated dispersive pipette extraction extraction using Integra and Hamilton STARlet platforms for drugs of abuse. The second method used a liquid-liquid extraction to detect cannabinoids. The prevalence of drugs in blood and OF was monitored over 5 years of casework. Calibration curves were analyzed with each batch to monitor OF concentrations for research purposes. Three roadside OF screening devices were deemed fit for purpose. Devices demonstrated appropriate sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, and accuracy above 80% for targeted drugs except for benzodiazepines (DrugTest® 5000) and amphetamine (SoToxa®). The validated LC-MS-MS OF confirmation methods met the National Safety Council-recommended cutoffs for 18/21 (86%) of the targets. Over 5 years of casework, THC and cocaine were detected at a positivity rate of 90% and 97% in OF versus 75% and 44% in blood, respectively. OF:blood ratios exceeded unity for parent drugs. Median concentrations of THC in OF and blood were 31 and 3.5 ng/mL, respectively. OF is a viable alternative or supplemental specimen for DUID investigations. Collecting OF close to the driving event increases the opportunity to identify pharmacologically active substances, and when combined with blood analysis results, an elevated OF:blood ratio provides valuable information for DUID investigation purposes.

Analysis of 2,5-dimethoxy-amphetamines and 2,5-dimethoxy-phenethylamines aiming their determination in biological matrices: a review

PURPOSE

The present review aims to provide an overview of methods for the quantification of 2,5-dimethoxy-amphetamines and -phenethylamines in different biological matrices, both traditional and alternative ones.

METHODS

A complete literature search was carried out with PubMed, Scopus and the World Wide Web using relevant keywords, e.g., designer drugs, amphetamines, phenethylamines, and biological matrices.

RESULTS

Synthetic phenethylamines represent one of the largest classes of "designer drugs", obtained through chemical structure modifications of psychoactive substances to increase their pharmacological activities. This practice is also favored by the fact that every new synthetic compound is not considered illegal by existing legislation. Generally, in a toxicological laboratory, the first monitoring of drugs of abuse is made by rapid screening tests that sometimes can occur in false positive or false negative results. To reduce evaluation errors, it is mandatory to submit the positive samples to confirmatory methods, such as gas chromatography or liquid chromatography combined to mass spectrometry, for a more specific qualitative and quantitative analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

This review highlights the great need for updated comprehensive analytical methods, particularly when analyzing biological matrices, both traditional and alternative ones, for the search of newly emerging designer drugs.

Suitability of SoToxa® Oral Fluid Screening Over Time: Re-examination of Drugged Driving in Wisconsin

Drug impaired driver detection is a critical element of traffic safety. However, shifting drug use patterns over time and geography may limit long-term reliability of assay-based screening tools. In this work, we compare qualitative results from the Abbott SoToxa® oral fluid (OF) screening device to Quantisal™ OF and whole blood. Our objective was to examine these three qualitative toxicological approaches, scope applicability of OF collection at the roadside, and compare to a previous analysis of SoToxa® in Wisconsin. OF specimens were screened with the SoToxa® for six drugs or drug classes including amphetamine, benzodiazepines, cocaine, methamphetamine, opioids, and tetrahydrocannabinol (THC). OF and blood specimens were collected from 106 participants. Quantisal™ OF and blood specimens were screened for drugs on ultra-performance liquid chromatography coupled to quadrupole time-of-flight high-resolution mass spectrometry (UPLC-QToF-HRMS) using a data independent acquisition mode. UPLC-QToF-HRMS data was compared to comprehensive spectral libraries and drugs were qualitatively identified. Drug Recognition Expert evaluations were performed, and face sheets submitted for 21 participants in this work. In general, the SoToxa® results were consistent with the combined qualitative results observed in Quantisal™ OF specimens and whole blood specimens. Limitations were uncovered for benzodiazepines, opioids, and THC. The SoToxa® benzodiazepine assay has high cutoff concentrations for diazepam and clonazepam, limiting its sensitivity and positive predictive value when considering these drugs. SoToxa® opioid screening did not detect fentanyl, which is increasingly prevalent among drug users. Finally, ∆9-THC and its major metabolite 11-nor-9-carboxy-∆9-THC are lipophilic, limiting partitioning into oral fluid. Despite these limitations, the SoToxa® instrument may be useful in assisting law enforcement with identifying individuals driving under the influence of drugs and establishing probable cause at roadside for making impaired driving arrests. Furthermore, Quantisal™ OF may be useful as screening specimens due to their ease of collection and results consistent with whole blood.

Evaluation of the diagnostic performance of an oral fluid screening test device for substance abuse at traffic controls

INTRODUCTION

The aim of this study was to evaluate the analytical performance of the Kite Biotechnology Oral fluid (OF) screening test device, which is used for roadside screening of cannabis, opiates, amphetamines, methamphetamine, 3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine (MDMA), cocaine and benzodiazepines by comparing samples with matched plasma samples, analysed via liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) for confirmation.

METHODS

OF and plasma samples were obtained simultaneously from a total of 100 subjects. OF samples were analysed by OF screening test based on immunochromatography. The OF screening test cut-off values were 50 ng/mL for amphetamines (d-amphetamine) and methamphetamine/MDMA (d-methamphetamine), 30 ng/mL for cocaine (benzoylecgonine), 40 ng/mL for opiates (morphine), 20 ng/mL for benzodiazepines (nordazepam), and 25 ng/mL for cannabis (Δ⁹-tetrahydrocannabinol). LC-MS/MS method validation was performed according to the CLSI C62-A recommendations with the following parameters: matrix effect, lower limit of quantification (LLOQ), linearity, intra-day and inter-day precision and accuracy.

RESULTS

The overall specificity, accuracy and negative predictive values (NPV) were acceptable and met the DRUID standard of >80%. The OF screening test device showed good sensitivity for cocaine, amphetamines and opiates, whereas it indicated poor sensitivity for methamphetamine/MDMA (66.7%) and failed to detect cannabis and benzodiazepines.

CONCLUSION

The present study is the first report to evaluate the Kite Biotechnology OF screening test device. The diagnostic performance of the OF screening test device was acceptable for opiates, cocaine and amphetamines, but it was insufficient for methamphetamine/MDMA, benzodiazepines and cannabis because of sensitivity issues.

A threshold LC-MS/MS method for 92 analytes in oral fluid collected with the Quantisal® device

A study of impaired driving rates in the province of Québec is currently planned following the legalization of recreational cannabis in Canada. Oral fluid (OF) samples are to be collected with a Quantisal® device and sent to the laboratory for analysis. In order to prepare for this project, a qualitative decision point analysis method monitoring for the presence of 97 drugs and metabolites in OF was developed and validated. This high throughput method uses incubation with a precipitation solvent (acetone:acetonitrile 30:70 v:v) to boost drug recovery from the collecting device and improve stability of benzodiazepines (e.g., α-hydroxyalprazolam, clonazepam, 7-aminoclonazepam, flunitrazepam, 7-aminoflunitrazepam, N-desmethylflunitrazepam, nitrazepam). The Quantisal® device has polyglycol in its stabilizing buffer, but timed use of the mass spectrometer waste valve proved sufficient to avoid the glycol interferences for nearly all analytes. Interferences from OF matrices and 140 potentially interfering compounds, carryover, ion ratios, stability, recovery, reproducibility, robustness, false positive rate, false negative rate, selectivity, sensitivity and reliability rates were tested in the validation process. Five of the targeted analytes (olanzapine, oxazepam, 7-aminoclonazepam, flunitrazepam and nitrazepam) did not meet the set validation criteria but will be monitored for identification purposes (no comparison to a cut-off level). Blind internal proficiency testing was performed, where six OF samples were tested and analytes were classified as "negative", "likely positive" or "positive" with success. The final validated OF qualitative decision point method covers 92 analytes, and the presence of 5 additional analytes is screened in this high throughput analysis.

Interpol review of toxicology 2016-2019

This review paper covers the forensic-relevant literature in toxicology from 2016 to 2019 as a part of the 19th Interpol International Forensic Science Managers Symposium. The review papers are also available at the Interpol website at: https://www.interpol.int/content/download/14458/file/Interpol%20Review%20.Papers%202019.pdf.

The utility of delta 9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) measures obtained from oral fluid samples in traffic safety

Objective: Blood and/or urine are typical drug detection matrices used by law enforcement. There are some concerns about using oral fluid (OF) in the identification of drivers potentially impaired by cannabis, particularly regarding their accuracy when compared to blood. The study objectives were to (1) examine the accuracy of predicting delta 9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) in blood from THC measured in OF and (2) examine factors influencing prediction accuracy. Methods: Using data from the 2007 and 2013-2014 National Roadside Survey (NRS) of Alcohol and Drug Use, 7,517 drivers with known laboratory results in both OF and blood were included in this study. OF samples were collected using the Quantisal® device and analyzed at the same private laboratory in both the 2007 and 2013-2014 NRS. The Quantisal device has consistently shown to collect 1 mL ±10%. Descriptive statistical analyses were used to examine and compare the distribution of THC concentrations in OF and blood. A hurdle model was applied to examine factors influencing the accuracy of the THC_blood predictions based on THC_OF while accounting for the decisions of cannabis consumption. We estimated the number of true positives (TPs), false positives (FPs), true negatives (TNs), false negatives (FNs), sensitivity, specificity, and positive predicted value (PPV). Results: This study found that THC measured in OF (THC_OF) is a good predictor of THC measured in blood (THC_blood), in particular when THC_OF > 0 ng/mL is used to predict being positive for THC_blood (THC_blood > 0 ng/mL). However, as blood and OF concentrations depart from 0 ng/mL, the proportion of TPs (sensitivity) decreases, which might be a concern for law enforcement. The likelihood of accurately predicting THC_blood from THC_OF is lower for drivers who were simultaneously using cannabis and other drugs. Conclusions: The findings of this study are based on THC measures obtained in a laboratory, which may not be the same as those conducted by police using point-of-care devices. However, this study is unique due to its large sample of drivers obtained in similar roadside locations and times to actual law enforcement activities. Though a positive THC_OF may assist law enforcement in probable cause for a blood draw, efforts to develop reliable methods to detect drug impairment based on OF should continue.

A review of drug abuse in recently reported cases of driving under the influence of drugs (DUID) in Asia, USA, and Europe

Driving Under the Influence of Drugs (DUID) is considered a serious issue related to the abuse of illegal drugs. DUID cases, including deaths, are being continuously reported in Asia, USA, and Europe. This literature review focuses on illegal drug abuse in recent DUID cases reported in Asia, USA, and Europe. To determine illegal drug abuse in DUID suspects, previous studies collected and analyzed biological samples, such as blood, urine, oral fluids, and hair. In addition, there were forensic autopsies and surveys for investigation of illegal drugs in DUID cases and drivers. In previous studies, ketamine, morphine, methamphetamine (MA), and khat were mainly reported in Asia, whereas amphetamine, benzodiazepines (BZDs), and cannabinoids were mainly reported in USA, and synthetic cannabinoids (SCs), opiates, and cocaine were mainly reported in Europe. Since DUID suspects related to illegal drugs have been frequently reported in Asia, USA, and Europe, there is a need to plan for national monitoring for drivers or motor vehicles to regulate and prevent drug abuse and relevant DUID cases.