Affiliation:
1. Chemistry and Drug Metabolism Section, Intramural Research Program, National Institute on Drug Abuse, National Institutes of Health, Baltimore
2. Program in Toxicology, University of Maryland Baltimore, Baltimore, USA
Abstract
Abstract
BACKGROUND
Oral fluid (OF) testing offers noninvasive sample collection for on-site drug testing; however, to date, test performance for Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) detection has had unacceptable diagnostic sensitivity. On-site tests must accurately identify cannabis exposure because this drug accounts for the highest prevalence in workplace drug testing and driving under the influence of drugs (DUID) programs.
METHODS
Ten cannabis smokers (9 males, 1 female) provided written informed consent to participate in this institutional review board–approved study and smoked 1 6.8%-THC cigarette ad libitum. OF was collected with the Draeger DrugTest® 5000 test cassette and Quantisal™ device 0.5 h before and up to 22 h after smoking. Test cassettes were analyzed within 15 min (n = 66), and Quantisal GC-MS THC results obtained within 24 h. Final THC detection times and test performances were assessed at different cannabinoid cutoffs.
RESULTS
Diagnostic sensitivity, diagnostic specificity, and efficiency at DrugTest 5000's 5 μg/L screening cutoff and various THC confirmation cutoffs were 86.2–90.7, 75.0–77.8, and 84.8–87.9%, respectively. Last detection times were >22 h, longer than previously suggested. Confirmation of 11-nor-9-carboxy-THC, absent in THC smoke, minimized the potential for passive OF contamination and still provided 22-h windows of detection, appropriate for workplace drug testing, whereas confirmation of cannabidiol, and/or cannabinol yielded shorter 6-h windows of detection, appropriate for DUID OF testing.
CONCLUSIONS
The DrugTest 5000 on-site device provided high diagnostic sensitivity for detection of cannabinoid exposure, and the selection of OF confirmation analytes and cutoffs provided appropriate windows of detection to meet the goals of different drug testing programs.
Publisher
Oxford University Press (OUP)
Subject
Biochemistry, medical,Clinical Biochemistry
Reference18 articles.
1. United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC). World drug report 2011. http://www.unodc.org/documents/data-and-analysis/WDR2011/WDR2011-web.pdf (Accessed March 2012).
2. SAMHSA. Results from the 2010 national survey on drug use and health: summary of national findings. Rockville (MD): SAMHSA; 2011. NSDUH series H-41, HHS publication no. (SMA) 11-4658. http://www.samhsa.gov/data/NSDUH/2k10NSDUH/2k10Results.htm (Accessed August 2012).
3. The prevalence of drugs in injured drivers;Drummer;Forensic Sci Int,2012
4. Lacey
JH
, Kelley-BakerT, Furr-HoldenD, VoasRB, RomanoE, RamirezA et al. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration Office of Behavioral Safety Research. 2007 national roadside survey of alcohol and drug use by drivers: drug results. http://www.nhtsa.gov/Driving+Safety/Research+&+Evaluation/2007+National+Roadside+Survey+of+Alcohol+and+Drug+Use+by+Drivers (Accessed March 2012).
5. An evaluation of selected oral fluid point-of-collection drug-testing devices;Crouch;J Anal Toxicol,2005
Cited by
42 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献