Next Article in Journal
Solving the Mind-Body Problem Through Two Distinct Concepts: Internal-Mental Existence and Internal Mental Reality
Previous Article in Journal
Differences Between Men and Women with Total Laryngectomy
 
 
Journal of Mind and Medical Sciences is published by MDPI from Volume 12 Issue 1 (2025). Previous articles were published by another publisher in Open Access under a CC-BY (or CC-BY-NC-ND) licence, and they are hosted by MDPI on mdpi.com as a courtesy and upon agreement with Valparaiso University (ValpoScholar).
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Review

Toxicological Analysis of Some Drugs of Abuse in Biological Samples

by
Anne Marie Ciobanu
1,
Daniela Baconi
2,*,
Cristian Bălălău
3,
Carolina Negrei
2,
Miriana Stan
2 and
Maria Bârcă
1
1
Medicines Control, Faculty of Pharmacy, Carol Davila University of Medicine and Pharmacy, 050474 Bucharest, Romania
2
Department of Toxicology, Faculty of Pharmacy, Carol Davila University of Medicine and Pharmacy, 050474 Bucharest, Romania
3
Faculty of General Medicine, St. Pantelimon Hospital, Carol Davila University of Medicine and Pharmacy, 050474 Bucharest, Romania
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
J. Mind Med. Sci. 2015, 2(2), 108-127; https://doi.org/10.22543/2392-7674.1018
Submission received: 11 March 2015 / Revised: 11 April 2015 / Accepted: 17 June 2015 / Published: 4 November 2015

Abstract

:
Consumption of drugs of abuse is a scourge of modern world. Abuse, drug addiction and their consequences are one of the major current problems of European society because of the significant repercussions in individual, family, social and economic level. In this context, toxicological analysis of the drugs of abuse in biological samples is a useful tool for: diagnosis of drug addiction, checking an auto-response, mandatory screening in some treatment programs, identification of a substance in the case of an overdose, determining compliance of the treatment. The present paper aims to address the needs of healthcare professionals involved in drugs addiction treatment through systematic presentation of information regarding their toxicological analysis. Basically, it is a tool that help you to select the suitable biological sample and the right collecting time, as well as the proper analysis technique, depending on the purpose of analysis, pharmacokinetic characteristics of the drugs of abuse, available equipment and staff expertise.

Introduction

Consumption of drugs of abuse is a scourge of modern world, regardless the fact that we are talking about high-risk drugs or about the off label use of certain authorized medicinal products. It is a large-scale, multifactorial, dynamic phenomenon which affects all the age groups, but predominantly the one between 14 and 35 years old. Abuse and drug addiction, as well as their consequences are one of the major problems in the current European society [1,2,3]. This is due to their significant repercussions in individual, family and social level (crime, social marginalization, and death due to overdose or by suicide) as well as in the economic level: dependence treatment costs but also the costs of the therapy for viral and bacterial infections associated with the intravenous consumption (AIDS, HVC, or reappearance of TBC) [4,5]. Given the major risks associated with the drugs of abuse, their analysis in biological samples is a useful tool for:
-
Initial diagnosis of drug addiction
-
Checking an auto-response, a declaration
-
Mandatory screening in some treatment programs
-
Screening as a method of tracking drug effects over time
-
Identification of the substance in case of an overdose
-
Determination of treatment compliance

Discussion

Toxicological analysis represents the whole analytical processes through which the presence of a toxic substance in an analysed sample is determined. It includes the physicochemical methods for the isolation, identification and quantification of toxic substances in the air, water, soil, food, delict objects and organic products for the prevention or diagnosis of intoxications [6,7,8,9].
Drugs of abuse are those substances which, as a result of pleasant effects they produce, are used for other purposes than the ones they are intended to. For example, the therapeutic effect in the benzodiazepines case or the industrial use in volatile solvents case. Drugs of abuse are those substances whose possession, transport or storage is restricted by law, due to potential harmful effect on the consumer and include materials manufactured under license, as well as illicit products manufactured in clandestine laboratories or natural products [10,11,12,13,14].
The methodology of toxicological analyses of drugs of abuse is developed based on:
-
Type of sample used
-
Scope of analysis
-
Pharmacokinetic features and biotransformation of the illicit substance
-
Available equipment and reagents
-
Staff expertise
-
Costs.
  • Biological samples. Depending on the purpose of the analysis, the substances of abuse may be determined from different biological samples.
  • Blood/plasma: first choice for the quantitative determination of drugs; therapeutic levels in the blood are low but, when they are consumed abusively, the concentrations may be 2-3 times higher.
  • Urine: first choice for screening of drugs of abuse. It is available in sufficient quantity and substances or metabolites are present in relatively high concentrations.
  • Hair: it is used for the determination of the history of an abuse substance consumption. Detection is possible at10-14 days to 90 days after ingestion.
  • Saliva: it is used for the screening of drugs of abuse consumed within the last 24 hours.
  • Meconium: reveals maternal history of drugs of abuse consumption in the last 20 weeks of pregnancy and allow the choice of therapy for mother and new-born.
  • Breast milk: it is used for the determination of the exposure extent of the infant to drugs of abuse.
For example, in Table 1 are presented the chromatographic techniques used for the analysis of methadone cited in the literature, grouped according to biological samples in which the determination is carried out [15,16].
The detection time of abuse substances is varying in different biological samples. For example, drugs of abuse are detected in saliva within minutes after consumption and in urine only after 4-8 hours [17,18,19].
Biological samples matrix is very complex and contains other endogenous or exogenous substances in addition to substances of interest. This is the reason that, in most cases, is necessary to use specific isolation procedures [20,21,22,23,24].
  • Procedures for extraction of drugs of abuse from biological samples:
The liquid - liquid extraction (LLS): the method used for emergency analysis and for unknown analysis when substances with physico-chemical properties must be extracted. This process facilitates the extraction of a drug from aqueous solutions in organic solvents and involves a relatively high consumption of solvents and multiple operations of extraction and separation.
Solid phase extraction (SPE): the aim of this method is the extraction, purification, and, sometimes, the concentration of non-volatile or semi-volatile substances for analysis. It involves passing aqueous solution through a column with silica based desiccant, active carbon and resins. It is a more expensive process and often less sensitive [25,26,27,28,29].

Testing of substances of abuse extracted from biological samples

The tests for substances of abuse shall be sub-divided into two types of analytical procedures:
-
Screening tests: are quick, simple and requires a minimum previous processing of the sample. Examples: immunoassays, Thin Layer Chromatography (TLC).
-
Confirmatory tests: are performant, sensitive, selective methods that reduce the number of false- positive / false-negative results. Examples: Gas Chromatography-Mass Spectrometry (GCMS), High performance liquid chromatography (HPLC), Liquid chromatography-Mass Spectrometry (LCMS).
  • Screening methods for the determination of drugs of abuse: thin layer chromatography, immunoassay
For the toxicological screening of drugs of abuse simple, quick and inexpensive analytical methods are required. Screening methods plays an important role in the forensic medicine laboratories, both in the analysis of incriminated objects as well as in the analysis of biological samples. Due to the large diversity of samples it is practically impossible to use extraction methods and sophisticated and time- consuming instrumental techniques for analysis of all samples. Therefore, it is absolutely necessary to use simple screening tests to restrict further research area [30,31,32,33].
The conditions that have to be met by a method of analysis to be used as screening test:
-
easy to performed
-
quick
-
not require a complicated and unaffordable equipment
-
require few usual reagents
-
not require highly qualified personnel
-
inexpensive
-
able to be performed also outside a lab
-
require a minimum processing of the samples.
The interpretation of screening tests results is a complex process, which requires an overview on limitations raised by the analysis method, by pharmacokinetic and biotransformation characteristics of the incriminated substance, but also by psychological, physiological and pathological pattern of the patient (including history of drug dependence) [34]. A negative result does not necessarily indicate the absence of the substance, that can be present but at a level below the detection limit of the method. A true-positive result from a screening test will not indicate the dose, the time or the route of administration, and it doesn’t make the difference between an occasional or a chronic administration. That’s why, it is recommended to use more specific and performant analytical methods for confirming the screening test results [35,36,37,38].
Screening tests are used in several purposes: forensic (analysis of incriminated samples), clinical or medical care (admission in substitution treatment, compliance of treatment, testing abstinence during therapy), occupational medicine, doping tests. The most commonly used screening tests at the present time are thin-layer chromatography (TLC) and immunoassays.
Thin-layer chromatography (TLC) is a wide spread technique used for the separation and identification of substances. It is used to analyse bulk active substances, pharmaceutical products, but also illicit substances or biological samples. Conventional TLC is a fast and low-cost method for qualitative analysis. Requires a minimum and readily available equipment, and experimental techniques are easily acquired. These determinations are not expensive, and can be carried out in laboratories with limited facilities [39,40,41,42].
The Committee of Systematic Toxicological Examination of the International Association of Forensic Toxicologists (TIAFT), recommends 10 separation systems to identify medicinal substances and drugs of abuse, depending on their acid-base character. The correspondence between the different psycho-active substances and TIAFT recommended systems is shown in Table 5.
Immunoassays are commonly used as screening tests for testing drugs of abuse. Often, they are not making any discrimination between the related compounds, so the results obtained are likely to be cross-reactive. For this reason, such methods are followed by confirmation using performant separation technique such as GC-MS for qualitative analysis and HPLC for quantitative analysis.
Used on a larger scale, the immunoassays methods are based on the antigen - antibody reaction. The quality of antibody is critical for the sensitivity, precision and accuracy of the determination. In order to generate a measurable signal, the immunoassay technique uses a specific antibody for the identified compound or class of compounds and a labelled form of the same compound or the antibody. The labelling may be done with a radioisotope in case of radioimmunoassay (RIA), an active enzyme in case of enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) or a fluorescent compound in case of fluorescence immunoassay (FIAS) [43,44,45,46]. Polarization Immunoassay (FPIA) use fluorescein attached to one compound (antigen) as marker. When it is bound to antibody, fluorescein molecular rotation slows down and leads to changes in the polarization of fluorescent emission. The polarization p is inversely proportional to the concentration of the unbound compound. The main advantage is the exceptional stability of the FPIA reagents, which enable the tracing of the calibration curve valid for longer time and the automation of the determination [47].
In the immunoassay methods, the biological sample requires a minimum previous preparation (e.g. simple centrifugation in the case of urine). After the initial immunoassay test of the screening program, usually we proceed to identify the particular compound involved using performant separation methods from complex matrices as biological samples [48,49,50].
2.
Toxicological examination of the drugs of abuse - confirmatory methods
In order to eliminate false positive or false negative screening tests, toxicological analysis is continued with confirmatory tests.
Confirmatory tests:
-
Are effective methods, sensitive, selective, accurate, reproducible;
-
Are performant column chromatographic methods: GC-MS, HPLC, LC-MS;
-
Requires a laborious sample preparation stage;
-
Requires expensive equipment and highly qualified personnel;
-
Are analysed with higher costs.
Chromatography is a method of separating components of a mixture on the basis of their different distribution between two phases, one of which is stationary - generally fixed on a support (glass or aluminium plate, paper sheet, steel column, etc.) and other, mobile, which moves in relation to the fixed phase. This conducted to a different migration of the components leading to their separation. The mobile phase is gas in GC-MS methods and liquid in HPLC and LC-MS methods. The chromatography is used both for qualitative and quantitative determination of the chemical substances. The identification is based on the time required for the migration of the substance into the separation system. The assay is based on the proportionality of the amount to the peak area [51].

Confirmatory Tests - gas chromatography coupled with mass spectrometry (GC-MS)

The GC-MS is the gold standard for a reliable identification of the drugs of abuse in all kinds of samples. It combines the advantages of gas chromatography with those of mass-spectrometry. Mass spectrometry is an analytical technique used to identify organic substances, based on pattern recognition's of fragments resulting from the ionization.
The mass spectrum recorded is compared with libraries of mass spectrum. In table 6 are listed a few GC-MS methods for heroin and its metabolites analysis in biological samples.

Confirmatory Tests – High Performance Liquid Chromatography (HPLC)

HPLC method is the first choise for the quantitative determination of drugs of abuse in all kinds of samples. Quantitative determination is based on proportionality between peak area and amount of the analyte in the sample. In Table 7 several HPLC methods for analysis of the heroin and its metabolites in biological samples are presented [52].

Confirmation Tests - liquid chromatography coupled with mass spectrometry (LC-MS)

Liquid chromatography coupled with mass spectrometry is a modern hyphenated technique which combines the advantages of HPLC with those of mass-spectrometry. The mass spectrum recorded is compared with libraries of mass spectrum. It is used for both qualitative and quantitative determination, having as advantages the selectivity and the increased sensitivity [53].
In Table 8 a few LC-MS methods for analysis of the methadone and its metabolites in biological samples are listed [54].

Conclusions

The methodology of a toxicological analysis of the substances of abuse shall be developed on the basis of: test sample type, analysis purpose, pharmacokinetic and biotransformation particularities of substance, equipment and reagents available, stuff expertise, cost.
Immunoassays offers a flexible approach of the analyses of drugs of abuse from different biological samples and represents a convenient method and a quick screening test for a large number of samples, with different matrixes. A true-positive result of an initial screening test, will not indicate on its own the dose, the time or the route of administration and it will not make the difference between an occasional administration or a chronic one.
Screening tests require subsequently performing confirmation tests for removing false positiveâ/ false negative results. Confirmation tests are modern chromatographic techniques (GC-MS, HPLC, LC- MS), high-performance, sensitive, selective, accurate. Confirmation tests have as disadvantages: time- consuming step for the processing of the samples, expensive equipment, highly qualified staff and high cost.
The identification and the assay of drugs of abuse and their metabolites in biological samples provides to the specialists (doctors, authorities in the field of health, representatives of law) an objective tool for the diagnostic of abuse or for the monitoring of addictions treatment. Interpretation of the results is a complex process and requires an overview of: the analysis method, pharmacokinetic and biotransformation particularities of the substance, clinical pattern of the patient (including history of drug dependence).

Acknowledgments

This paper is supported by Sectoral Operational Programme Human Resources Development (SOP HRD), financed from the European Social Fund and by the Romanian Government under the contract number POSDRU/159/1.5/S/132395.

References

  1. Concheiro, M.; Gray, T.R.; Shakleya, D.M.; Huestis, M.A. High-throughput simultaneous analysis of buprenorphine, methadone, cocaine, opiates, nicotine, and metabolites in oral fluid by liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry. Anal Bioanal Chem. 2010, 398, 915–924. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  2. Hoja, H.; Marquet, P.; Verneuil, B.; Lotfi, H.; Penicaut, B.; Lachatre, G. Applications of liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry in analytical toxicology: A review. J. Anal. Toxicol. 1997, 21, 116–126. [Google Scholar]
  3. Brunet, B.R.; Allan, J.B.; Karl, B.S.; Patrick, M.; Marilyn, A.H. Development and validation of a solid- phase extraction gas chromatography–mass spectrometry method for the simultaneous quantification of methadone, heroin, cocaine and metabolites in sweat. Anal Bioanal Chem. 2008, 392, 115–127. [Google Scholar]
  4. Dams, R.; Murphy, C.M.; Lambert, W.E.; Huestis, M.A. Urine drug testing for opioids, cocaine, and metabolites by direct injection liquid chromatography/tandem mass spectrometry. Rapid Commun. Mass Spectrom. 2003, 17, 1665–1670. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  5. Cheng, Y.; Neue, U.D.; Woods, L.L. Novel high-performance liquid chromatographic and solid-phase extraction methods for quantitating methadone and its metabolite in spiked human urine. Journal of Chromatography B. 1999, 729, 19–31. [Google Scholar]
  6. De Giovanni, N.; Rossi, S.S. Simultaneous detection of cocaine and heroin metabolites in urine by solid-phase extraction and gas chromatography-mass spectrometry. J. Chromatography B 1994, 658, 69–73. [Google Scholar]
  7. ***. Available online: http://what-when-how.com/forensic-sciences/presumptive-chemical-tests/.
  8. *** Recommended Methods for the Detection and Assay of heroin, Cannabinoids, Cocaine, Amphetamine, Metamphetamine and Ring-Substituted Amphetamine Derivatives in Biological Specimens. United Nations International Drug Control Programme (UNIDCDP): New York, NY, USA, 1995.
  9. Aitken, C.G. Sampling— How big a sample? J. Forensic Sci. 1999, 44, 750–760. [Google Scholar]
  10. Baconi, D. Toxicomanii— Note de curs, Ed. Tehnoplast Company SRL: Bucureşti, 2005. [Google Scholar]
  11. Baconi, D.; Bălălău, C. Toxicologia substanţelor de abuz, Ed. Universitară Carol Davila: Bucureşti, 2013. [Google Scholar]
  12. Bourquin, D.; Lehman, T.; Hämmig, R.; Bührer, M.; Brenneisen, R. High-performance liquid chromatographic monitoring of intravenously administered diacetylmorphine and morphine and their metabolites in human plasma. J. Chromatography B 1997, 694, 233–238. [Google Scholar]
  13. Choo, R.E.; Lauren, M. Jansson KS, Marilyn AH. A Validated Liquid Chromatography–Atmospheric Pressure Chemical Ionization-Tandem Mass Spectrometric Method for the Quantification of Methadone, 2-Ethylidene-1,5-dimethyl-3,3- diphenylpyrrolidine (EDDP), and 2-Ethyl-5-methyl- 3,3-diphenylpyroline (EMDP) in Human Breast Milk. J Anal Toxicol. 2007, 31, 265–269. [Google Scholar]
  14. Choo, R.E.; Constance, M.M.; Hendree, E.J.; Marilyn, A.H. Determination of methadone, 2-ethylidene- 1,5-dimethyl-3,3- diphenylpyrrolidine, 2-ethyl-5-methyl-3,3-diphenylpyraline and methadol in meconium by liquid chromatography atmospheric pressure chemical ionization tandem mass spectrometry. J. Chromatogr. B 2005, 814, 369–373. [Google Scholar]
  15. Danielson, T.J.; Mozayani, A.; Sanchez, L.A. Methadone and methadone metabolites in postmortem specimens. Forensic Sci Med Pathol 2008, 4, 170–174. [Google Scholar]
  16. de Castroa, A.; Marta, C.; Diaa, M.S.; Marilyn, A.H. Development and validation of a liquid chromatography mass spectrometry assay for the simultaneous quantification of methadone, cocaine, opiates and metabolites in human umbilical cord. J. Chromatogr. B 2009, 877, 3065–3071. [Google Scholar]
  17. Etter, M.L.; George, K.G.; Eichhorst, J.; Lehotay, D.C. Determination of free and protein-bound methadone and its major metabolite EDDP: Enantiomeric separation and quantitation by LC/MS/MS. Clinical Biochemistry 2005, 38, 1095–1102. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  18. Flanagan, R.J.; Braithwaite, R.A.; Brown, S.S.; Widdop, B.; de Wolff, F.A. Basic Analytical Toxicology; World Health Organization: Geneva, 1995. [Google Scholar]
  19. Foster, D.J.; Andrew, A.S.; Jason, M.W.; Felix, B. Population pharmacokinetics of (R)-, (S)- and racmethadone in methadone maintenance patients. Br J Clin Pharmacol, 2004, 57, 742–755. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  20. Foster, D.J.; Somogyi, A.A.; Bochner, F. Stereoselective quantification of methadone and its major oxidative metabolite, 2-ethylidene-1,5-dimethyl-3,3-diphenylpyrrolidine, in human urine using high-performance liquid chromatography. Journal of Chromatography B, 2000; 744, 165–176. [Google Scholar]
  21. Fríguls, B.; Joya, X.; García-Algar, O.; Pallás, C.R.; Vall, O.; Pichini, S. A comprehensive review of assay methods to determine drugs in breast milk and the safety of breastfeeding when taking drugs. Anal Bioanal Chem. 2010, 397, 1157–1179. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  22. Gergov, M.; Nokua, P.; Viori, E.; Ojanpero, I. Simultaneous screening and quantification of opioid drugs in post-mortem blood and urine by LCMS. Forensic Science International 2009, 36–43. [Google Scholar]
  23. Gheorghe, M.; Bălălău, D.; Ilie, M.; Baconi, D.L.; Ciobanu, A.M. Component analysis of illicit heroin samples by GC-MS method. Farmacia 2008, LVI (5), 577–582. [Google Scholar]
  24. Gheorghe, M.; Bălălău, D.; Ilie, M.; Baconi, D.L.; Ciobanu, A.M. Qualitative analysis of confiscated illegal drugs by thin-layer chromatography. Farmacia 2008, LVI (5), 541–546. [Google Scholar]
  25. Girod, C.; Staub, C. Methadone and EDDP in hair from human subjects following a maintenance program: Results of a pilot study. Forensic Science International 2001, 117, 175–184. [Google Scholar]
  26. Goldberger, B.A.; Darwin, W.D.; Grant, T.M.; Allen, A.C.; Caplan, Y.H.; Cone, E.J. Measurement of Heroin and Its Metabolites by Isotope-Dilution Electron-Impact Mass Spectrometry. Clin. Chem. 1993, 39, 670–675. [Google Scholar]
  27. Hallinan, R.; Raya, J.; Byrne, A.; Kingsley, A.; Attia, J. Therapeutic thresholds in methadone maintenance treatment: A receiver operating characteristic analysis. Drug and Alcohol Dependence 2006, 81, 129–136. [Google Scholar]
  28. Jansson, L.M.; Robin, E.C.; Harrow, C.; Martha, V.; Schroeder, J.R.; Lowe, R.; Huestis, M.A. Concentrations of Methadone in Breast Milk and Plasma in the Immediate Perinatal Period. J Hum Lact. 2007, 23, 184–190. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  29. Katagi, M.; Nishikawa, M.; Tatsuno, M.; Miki, A.; Tsuchihashi, H. Column-switching high-performance liquid chromatography–electrospray ionization mass spectrometry for identification of heroin metabolites in human urine. Journal of Chromatography B 2001, 751, 177–185. [Google Scholar]
  30. Kelly, T.; Doble, P.; Dawson, M. Chiral analysis of methadone and its major metabolites (EDDP and EMDP) by liquid cromatography-mass spectrometry. J Chromatogr B Analyt Technol Biomed Life Sci. 2005, 814, 315–323. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  31. Kintz, P.; Julie, E.; Marion, V.; Vincent, C. Interpretation of hair findings in children after methadone poisoning. Forensic Science International 2009, 196, 51–54. [Google Scholar]
  32. Larson, M.E.; Thomas, M.R. Quantification of a Methadone Metabolite (EDDP) in Urine: Assessment of Compliance. Clinical Medicine & Research 2009, 7, 134–141. [Google Scholar]
  33. Lehotay, D.C.; George, S.; Etter, M.L.; Graybiel, K.; Eichhorst, J.C.; Fern, B.; Wildenboer, W.; Selby, P.; Kapur, B. Free and bound enantiomers of methadone and its metabolite, EDDP in methadone maintenance treatment: Relationship to dosage? Clinical Biochemistry 2005, 38, 1088–1094. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  34. Liang, H.R.; Foltz, R.L.; Meng, M.; Bennett, P. Method development and validation for quantitative determination of methadone enantiomers in human plasma by liquid chromatography/tandem mass spectrometry. J. Chromatogr. B. 2004, 806, 191–198. [Google Scholar]
  35. Low, A.S.; Taylor, R.B. Analysis of common opiates and heroin metabolites in urine by high- performance liquid chromatography. J. Chromatography B. 1995, 663, 225–233. [Google Scholar]
  36. Lucas, C.S.; Bermejob, A.M.; Tabernerob, M.J.; Fernándezb, P.; Strano-Rossic, S. Use of solid-phase microextraction (SPME) for the determination of methadone and EDDP in human hair by GC–MS. Forensic Science International 2000, 107, 225–232. [Google Scholar]
  37. Moeller, M.R.; Feya, P.; Wennig, R. Simultaneous determination of drugs of abuse (opiates, cocaine and amphetamine) in human hair by and its application to a methadone treatment program. Forensic Science International 1993, 63, 185–206. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Moffat, A.C.; Osselton, M.D.; Widdop, B. (Eds.) Clarke’s analysis of drugs and poisons, 3 rd; Pharmaceutical Press, 2004. [Google Scholar]
  39. Moore, C.; Guzaldo, F.; Hussain, M.J.; Lewis, D. Determination of methadone in urine using ion trap GC/MS in positive ion chemical ionization mode. Forensic Science International 2001, 119, 155–160. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  40. Nanovskaya, T.N.; Sujal, V.D.; Ilona, A.N.; Zharikova, O.L.; Gary, D.V.H.; Mahmoud, S.A. Methadone metabolism by human placenta. Biochemical Pharmacology 2004, 68, 583–591. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Nikolaou, P.D.; Papoutsis, I.I.; Atta-Politou, J.; Athanaselis, S.A.; Spiliopoulou, C.A.; Calokerinos, A.C.; Maravelias, C.P. Validated method for the simultaneous determination of methadone and its main metabolites (EDDP and EMDP) in plasma of umbilical cord blood by gas chromatography–mass spectrometry. J. Chromatogr. B 2008, 867, 219–225. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  42. Didier, O.; Rudaz, S.; Chevalley, A.-F.; Mino, A.; Deglon, J.-J.; Baland, L.; Veuthey, J.-L. Enantioselective analysis of methadone in saliva by liquid chromatography–mass spectrometry. J. Chromatogr. A 2000, 871, 163–172. [Google Scholar]
  43. Perrigo, B.J.; Joynt, B.P. Use of ELISA for the detection of common drugs of abuse in forensic whole blood samples, Can. Soc. Forensic Sci. J. 1995, 28, 261–269. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Quintela, O.; Lopez, P.; Bermejo, A.M.; Lopez-Rivadulla, M. Determination of methadone, 2- ethylidene-1,5-dimethyl-3,3-diphenylpyrrolidine and alprazolam in human plasma by liquid chromatography–electrospray ionization mass spectrometry. J. Chromatogr. B 2006, 834, 188–194. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Rosas ME, R.; Preston, K.L.; Epstein, D.H.; Moolchan, E.T.; Wainer, I.W. Quantitative determination of the enantiomers of methadone and its metabolite (EDDP) in human saliva by enantioselective liquid chromatography with mass spectrometric detection. J. Chromatogr. B 2003, 796, 355–370. [Google Scholar]
  46. Rook, E.J.; Hillebrand, M.J.; Rosing, H.; van Ree, J.M.; Beijnen, J.H. The quantitative analysis of heroin, methadone and their metabolites and the simultaneous detection of cocaine, acetylcodeine and their metabolites in human plasma by high-performance liquid chromatography coupled with tandem mass spectrometry. J. Chromatogr. B 2005, 824, 213–221. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Rosas, M.E.; Preston, K.L.; Epstein, D.H.; Moolchan, E.T.; Wainer, I.M. Quantitative determination of the enantiomers of methadone and its metabolite (EDDP) in human saliva by enantioselective liquid chromatography with mass spectrometric detection. J Chromatogr B Analyt Technol Biomed Life Sci. 2003, 796, 355–370. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Schmidt, N.; Brune, K.; Geisslinger, G. Stereoselective determination of the enantiomers of methadone in plasma using high-performance liquid chromatography, J. Chromatogr. B Biomed Sci. Appl. 1992, 583, 195–200. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Shakleya, D.M. , Dams, R.; Choo, R.E.; Jones, H.; Huestis, M.A. Simultaneous Liquid Chromatography–Mass Spectrometry Quantification of Urinary Opiates, Cocaine, and Metabolites in Opiate-Dependent Pregnant Women in Methadone-Maintenance Treatment. J Anal Toxicol. 2010, 34, 17–25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  50. Shakleya, D.M.; Jansson, L.M.; Huestis, M.A. Validation of a LC–APCI-MS/MS method for quantification of methadone, 2-ethylidene-1,5-dimethyl-3,3-diphenylpyrrolidine (EDDP) and 2-ethyl-5-methyl-3,3-diphenylpyraline (EMDP) in infant plasma following protein precipitation. J. Chromatogr. B. 2007, 856, 267–272. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  51. Umans, J.G.; Chiu, T.S.; Lipman, R.A.; Schultz, M.F.; Shin, S.U.; Inturrjsl, C.E. Determination of heroin and its metabolites by high performance liquid chromatography. J. Chromat. 1982, 233, 213–225. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  52. lase, L.; Popa, D.S.; Leucuţa, S.E.; Loghin, F. Bioanalysis of methadone in human plasma and urine by LC/MS/MS. Revue Roumaine de Chimie 2008, 53, 1157–1164. [Google Scholar]
  53. Wang, W.L.; Darwin, W.D.; Cone, E.J. Simultaneous assay of cocaine, heroin and metabolites in hair,plasma, saliva and urine by gas chromatography-mass spectrometry. J. Chromat. B 1994, 660, 279–290. [Google Scholar]
  54. Widschwendter, C.G.; Zernig, G.; Hofer, A. Quetiapine cross reactivity with urine methadone immunoassays. Int Clin Psychopharmacol 2006, 21, 81–85. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Table 1. Chromatographic analysis of methadone according to the biological samples.
Table 1. Chromatographic analysis of methadone according to the biological samples.
Jmms 02 00012 i001
Table 2. The detection time of certain substances of abuse in saliva and urine.
Table 2. The detection time of certain substances of abuse in saliva and urine.
Abuse substanceSalivaUrine
Marijuana12-24 hoursDays/wk. Depending on the frequency of use
Opioid12-24 hours2-4 days
Amphetamine24-48 hours1-2 days
Benzodiazepine24-48 hours1 week
Cocaine12-24 hours2-3 days
Table 5. TLC methods for the analysis of psycho-active substances according to TIAFT.
Table 5. TLC methods for the analysis of psycho-active substances according to TIAFT.
Jmms 02 00012 i005a
Jmms 02 00012 i005b
Table 6. GC-MS methods for heroin and its metabolites analysis in biological samples.
Table 6. GC-MS methods for heroin and its metabolites analysis in biological samples.
Jmms 02 00012 i002
Table 7. HPLC methods for analysis of the heroin and its metabolites in biological samples.
Table 7. HPLC methods for analysis of the heroin and its metabolites in biological samples.
Jmms 02 00012 i003
Table 8. LC-MS methods for methadone and its metabolites determination in biological samples.
Table 8. LC-MS methods for methadone and its metabolites determination in biological samples.
Jmms 02 00012 i004

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Ciobanu, A.M.; Baconi, D.; Bălălău, C.; Negrei, C.; Stan, M.; Bârcă, M. Toxicological Analysis of Some Drugs of Abuse in Biological Samples. J. Mind Med. Sci. 2015, 2, 108-127. https://doi.org/10.22543/2392-7674.1018

AMA Style

Ciobanu AM, Baconi D, Bălălău C, Negrei C, Stan M, Bârcă M. Toxicological Analysis of Some Drugs of Abuse in Biological Samples. Journal of Mind and Medical Sciences. 2015; 2(2):108-127. https://doi.org/10.22543/2392-7674.1018

Chicago/Turabian Style

Ciobanu, Anne Marie, Daniela Baconi, Cristian Bălălău, Carolina Negrei, Miriana Stan, and Maria Bârcă. 2015. "Toxicological Analysis of Some Drugs of Abuse in Biological Samples" Journal of Mind and Medical Sciences 2, no. 2: 108-127. https://doi.org/10.22543/2392-7674.1018

APA Style

Ciobanu, A. M., Baconi, D., Bălălău, C., Negrei, C., Stan, M., & Bârcă, M. (2015). Toxicological Analysis of Some Drugs of Abuse in Biological Samples. Journal of Mind and Medical Sciences, 2(2), 108-127. https://doi.org/10.22543/2392-7674.1018

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop