scholarly journals Artificial oral fluid characterisation: Potential for use as a reference matrix in drug testing

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ivana Gavrilović ◽  
Alessandro Musenga ◽  
David Cowan ◽  
Alison Woffendin ◽  
Andrew Smart ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Drug Testing ◽  
Oral Fluid ◽  
Reference Matrix

scholarly journals Extraction and Analysis of Tetrahydrocannabinol, A Cannabis Compound in Oral Fluid

2016 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 30
Author(s):  
Wei Zhang ◽  
Jun Wang ◽  
Zhiyuan Mi ◽  
Jiangtao Su ◽  
Xiangyu You ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Drug Testing ◽  
Oral Fluid ◽  
Solid Phase ◽  
Extraction Methods ◽  
Liquid Extraction ◽  
Phase Extraction ◽  
Advantages And Disadvantages ◽  
Liquid Liquid Extraction ◽  
The Common ◽  
Common Target

Although misuse and abuse of Cannabis is well known, the health benefits have been proved by various biomedical studies. Tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) is the major active substance in leaves of Cannabis, which is the common target for drug testing. In field drug testing, oral fluid (OF) has its unique advantages over other specimens such as blood, urine, and hair. Thus the study of THC in OF is gaining popularity in Cannabis research. In this review, extraction methods are introduced in three categories, which are Liquid-Liquid Extraction (LLE), Solid Phase Extraction (SPE), and Supercritical Fluid Extraction (SFE). Examples of application with each method will be covered. Advantages and disadvantages of these methods will be compared. In addition, methods in analysis following extraction will be briefly discussed.

scholarly journals European guidelines for workplace drug testing in oral fluid

2017 ◽  
Vol 10 (3) ◽  
pp. 402-415 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michaela Brcak ◽  
Olof Beck ◽  
Tessa Bosch ◽  
Duncan Carmichael ◽  
Nadia Fucci ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Drug Testing ◽  
Oral Fluid ◽  
European Guidelines ◽  
Workplace Drug Testing

Acceptability and accuracy of oral fluid drug testing for patients on methadone maintenance

2019 ◽  
Vol 189 (2) ◽  
pp. 557-561
Author(s):  
Michael Edmund O’Callaghan ◽  
Liam Regan ◽  
Maria Wilson ◽  
Emmett Byrne ◽  
Brid Hollywood ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Drug Testing ◽  
Oral Fluid ◽  
Methadone Maintenance

Urine and oral fluid drug testing in support of pain management

2017 ◽  
Vol 54 (6) ◽  
pp. 433-445 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tai C. Kwong ◽  
Barbarajean Magnani ◽  
Christine Moore
Keyword(s):  
Pain Management ◽  
Drug Testing ◽  
Oral Fluid

scholarly journals Using biological samples in epidemiological research on drugs of abuse

2011 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Hallvard Gjerde ◽  
Elisabeth Leere Øiestad ◽  
Asbjørg S. Christophersen
Keyword(s):  
Drug Use ◽  
Drug Testing ◽  
Oral Fluid ◽  
Drugs Of Abuse ◽  
Drug Dose ◽  
Biological Matrices ◽  
Single Drug ◽  
Drug Concentrations ◽  
Frequency Of Use ◽  
Hair Samples

Blood, oral fluid (saliva), urine and hair are the most commonly used biological matrices for drug testing in epidemiological drug research. Other biological matrices may also be used for selected purposes. Blood reflects recent drug intake and may be used to assess impairment. Oral fluid reflects drug presence in blood and thereby also recent intake, but drug concentrations in this matrix cannot be used to accurately estimate concentrations in blood. Urine reflects drug use during the last few days and in some cases for a longer period, but does not indicate the dose size or frequency of use. Hair reflects drug use during several months, but is a poor matrix for detecting use of cannabis. If using a single drug dose, this can be detected in blood and urine if the sample is taken within the detection timeframes, in most cases also in oral fluid. Single drug use is most often insufficient for producing a positive test result in a sample of hair. For cocaine and amphetamine, weekly use may be needed, while for cannabis a positive result is not guaranteed even after daily use. Refusal rates are lowest for oral fluid and highest for blood and hair samples. The analytical costs are lowest for urine and highest for hair. Combined use of questionnaires/interviews and drug testing detects more drug use than when using only one of those methods and is therefore expected to give more accurate data.

scholarly journals Cannabinoid Disposition in Oral Fluid after Controlled Smoked Cannabis

2012 ◽  
Vol 58 (4) ◽  
pp. 748-756 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dayong Lee ◽  
David M Schwope ◽  
Garry Milman ◽  
Allan J Barnes ◽  
David A Gorelick ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Drug Testing ◽  
Oral Fluid ◽  
Institutional Review Board ◽  
Test Interpretation ◽  
Drug Detection ◽  
Institutional Review ◽  
Cannabis Smoking ◽  
Ad Libitum ◽  
Written Informed Consent ◽  
Median Maximum

Abstract BACKGROUND We measured Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), 11-nor-9-carboxy-THC (THCCOOH), cannabidiol (CBD), and cannabinol (CBN) disposition in oral fluid (OF) following controlled cannabis smoking to evaluate whether monitoring multiple cannabinoids in OF improved OF test interpretation. METHODS Cannabis smokers provided written informed consent for this institutional review board–approved study. OF was collected with the Quantisal™ device following ad libitum smoking of one 6.8% THC cigarette. Cannabinoids were quantified by 2-dimensional GC-MS. We evaluated 8 alternative cutoffs based on different drug testing program needs. RESULTS 10 participants provided 86 OF samples −0.5 h before and 0.25, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, and 22 h after initiation of smoking. Before smoking, OF samples of 4 and 9 participants were positive for THC and THCCOOH, respectively, but none were positive for CBD and CBN. Maximum THC, CBD, and CBN concentrations occurred within 0.5 h, with medians of 644, 30.4, and 49.0 μg/L, respectively. All samples were THC positive at 6 h (2.1–44.4 μg/L), and 4 of 6 were positive at 22 h. CBD and CBN were positive only up to 6 h in 3 (0.6–2.1 μg/L) and 4 (1.0–4.4 μg/L) participants, respectively. The median maximum THCCOOH OF concentration was 115 ng/L, with all samples positive to 6 h (14.8–263 ng/L) and 5 of 6 positive at 22 h. CONCLUSIONS By quantifying multiple cannabinoids and evaluating different analytical cutoffs after controlled cannabis smoking, we determined windows of drug detection, found suggested markers of recent smoking, and minimized the potential for passive contamination.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document