Search

With recent evolution of cannabis legalization around the world and multiplication of cannabis derived products, identifying and qualifying cannabis consumption has a proven interest. Although blood, plasma, and urine are common matrices widely used in toxicology laboratories, oral fluid presents specific advantages. In the context of doping tests, addiction consultation or roadside checks, where other matrices are impractical to collect or can be adulterated, oral fluid is a promising matrix that allows a non-invasive, rapid, and monitored self-sampling. However, available devices required a consequent volume of oral fluid, more than 250 µL, sometimes difficult to collect. We present here a fully optimized quantitative method for seven cannabinoids, including four metabolites, in oral fluid, Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol, 11-hydroxy-Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol and 11-nor-9-carboxy-Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol; cannabidiol, 7-hydroxy and 7-carboxycannabidiol; and cannabinol. After self-collection of 20 µL using an accurate and precise volumetric absorptive microsampling device (VAMS ® ), cannabinoids were derivatized with 2-fluoro-1-methylpyridinium p-toluenesulfonate to increase sensitivity. The successive steps of the proposed method, including biosampling, 1 h sample preparation with derivatization, and acquisition by ultrahigh-performance liquid chromatography coupled to high-resolution mass spectrometry, were fully optimized. A limit of quantification of 0.5 ng/mL (≈10 pg per sampling) was thus targeted, adapted to the legal threshold required by the authorities and to clinical monitoring. Applied to six cannabis consumers, the proposed method made it possible to quantify in 20 µL oral fluid samples, Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol ranging from 0.5 to 6236 ng/mL, cannabidiol from 0.6 to 190 ng/mL and cannabinol from 0.5 to 118 ng/mL., Competing Interests: Declarations. Ethics approval: The observational study was conducted in accordance with ethical guidelines established in the Declaration of Helsinki and the French legislation. Our ethics internal review board examined and approved the study design in a meeting on August 4 2023. The decision mentioned that the study did not fell within the scope of Loi Jardé (arrêté du 3 mai 2017 fixant la liste des recherches mentionnées au 2° de l’article L. 1121–1 du code de la santé publique) because it was a secondary analysis of a previous collection. The previously collected urinary and salivary samples were collected in non-treatment seeking healthy volunteers, who gave a written informed consent and were recruited among University of Paris students by word of mouth. Informed consent: Informed consent was obtained from all volunteers. Competing interests: The authors declare no competing interests., (© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH, DE part of Springer Nature.)

Background: Currently, urine and blood are the only matrices authorized for antidoping testing by the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA). Although the usefulness of urine and blood is proven, issues remain for monitoring some drug classes and for drugs prohibited only in competition. The alternative matrix oral fluid (OF) may offer solutions to some of these issues. OF collection is easy, noninvasive, and sex neutral and is directly observed, limiting potential adulteration, a major problem for urine testing. OF is used to monitor drug intake in workplace, clinical toxicology, criminal justice, and driving under the influence of drugs programs and potentially could complement urine and blood for antidoping testing in sports., Content: This review outlines the present state of knowledge and the advantages and limitations of OF testing for each of the WADA drug classes and the research needed to advance OF testing as a viable alternative for antidoping testing., Summary: Doping agents are either prohibited at all times or prohibited in competition only. Few OF data from controlled drug administration studies are available for substances banned at all times, whereas for some agents prohibited only in competition, sufficient data may be available to suggest appropriate analytes and cutoffs (analytical threshold concentrations) to identify recent drug use. Additional research is needed to characterize the disposition of many banned substances into OF; OF collection methods and doping agent stability in OF also require investigation to allow the accurate interpretation of OF tests for antidoping monitoring.

Background: Oral Δ(9)-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) is effective for attenuating cannabis withdrawal and may benefit treatment of cannabis use disorders. Oral fluid (OF) cannabinoid testing, increasing in forensic and workplace settings, could be valuable for monitoring during cannabis treatment., Methods: Eleven cannabis smokers resided on a closed research unit for 51 days and received daily 0, 30, 60, and 120 mg of oral THC in divided doses for 5 days. There was a 5-puff smoked cannabis challenge on the fifth day. Each medication session was separated by 9 days of ad libitum cannabis smoking. OF was collected the evening before and throughout oral THC sessions and analyzed by 2-dimensional GC-MS for THC, cannabidiol (CBD), cannabinol (CBN), 11-hydroxy-THC (11-OH-THC), and 11-nor-9-carboxy-THC (THCCOOH)., Results: During all oral THC administrations, THC OF concentrations decreased to ≤ 78.2, 33.2, and 1.4 μg/L by 24, 48, and 72 h, respectively. CBN also decreased over time, with concentrations 10-fold lower than THC, with none detected beyond 69 h. CBD and 11-OH-THC were rarely detected, only within 19 and 1.6 h after smoking, respectively. THCCOOH OF concentrations were dose dependent and increased over time during 120-mg THC dosing. After cannabis smoking, THC, CBN, and THCCOOH concentrations showed a significant dose effect and decreased significantly over time., Conclusions: Oral THC dosing significantly affected OF THCCOOH but minimally contributed to THC OF concentrations; prior ad libitum smoking was the primary source of THC, CBD, and CBN. Higher cannabinoid concentrations following active oral THC administrations vs placebo suggest a compensatory effect of THC tolerance on smoking topography.

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.

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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Increased prevalence of cannabis consumption and impaired driving are a growing public safety concern. Some states adopted per se driving laws, making it illegal to drive with more than a specified blood concentration of ∆9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) in a biological fluid (typically blood). Blood THC concentrations decrease significantly (∼90%) with delays in specimen collection, suggesting the use of alternative matrices, such as oral fluid (OF). We characterized 10 cannabinoids' concentrations, including THC metabolites, in blood and OF from 191 frequent and occasional users by liquid chromatography with tandem mass spectrometry for up to 6 h after ad libitum smoking. Subjects self-titrated when smoking placebo, 5.9 or 13.4% THC cannabis. Higher maximum blood THC concentrations (Cmax) were observed in individuals who received the 5.9% THC versus the 13.4% THC plant material. In blood, the Cmax of multiple analytes, including THC and its metabolites, were increased in frequent compared to occasional users, whereas there were no significant differences in OF Cmax. Blood THC remained detectable (≥5 ng/mL) at the final sample collection for 14% of individuals who smoked either the 5.9 or 13.4% THC cigarette, whereas 54% had detectable THC in OF when applying the same cutoff. Occasional and frequent cannabis users' profiles were compared, THC was detectable for significantly longer duration in blood and OF from frequent users. Detection rates between frequent and occasional users at multiple per se cutoffs showed larger differences in blood versus OF. Understanding cannabinoid profiles of frequent and occasional users and the subsequent impact on detectability with current drug per se driving limits is important to support forensic interpretations and the development of scientifically supported driving under the influence of cannabis laws. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A fast and sensitive methodology has been developed for the evaluation of the 3,4-methylenedioxypyrovalerone (MDPV) consumed. Based on ion mobility spectrometry (IMS), MDPV was directly determined in nasal fluids with a limit of detection (LOD) in the order of 22 ng mL, which corresponds to an absolute amount of 33 ng of MDPV per swab. MDPV was also determined after liquid-liquid microextraction (LLME) in oral fluids to avoid matrix effects, obtaining a LOD value of 4.4 ng mL in oral fluid samples. The IMS spectrum for MDPV exhibited a peak with K = 1.210 ± 0.005 cmV s at a drift time of 14.62 ms, the total analysis time being 4.5 min per oral fluid and 1.5 min per nasal fluid sample. Samples must be analyzed within 24 h following collection and dissolution in 2-propanol, based on the complementary stability studies. [Figure not available: see fulltext.] [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Oral fluid (OF) is increasingly used for clinical, forensic and work- place drug testing as an alternative to urine. Uncertainties surround- ing OF collection device performance, drug stability and testing reproducibility may be partially responsible for delays in the imple- mentation of OF testing in regulated drug testing programs. Stability of D9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) fortified and authentic specimens was examined after routine collection, transport and laboratory test- ing. Acceptable recovery and stability were observed when THC-for- tified OF (1.5 and 4.5 ng/mL) was applied to Oral-Eze devices. Neat OF samples collected with Oral-Eze, processed per the package in- sert, and fortified with THC (3 and 6 ng/mL) were stable ( +20%) at room temperature (21 - 258C), refrigerated (2 - 88C) and frozen (225 to 2158C) conditions up to 1 month, while samples collected with Intercept devices showed decreases at refrigerated and room temperatures. After long-term refrigerated or frozen storage, maxi- mum reductions in THC concentrations were 42% for Oral-Eze and 69% for Intercept. After ≥1 year frozen storage, 80.7% of laboratory specimens positive for THC (3 ng/mL cut-off ) by GC - MS were recon- firmed positive (within 25%), with an average THC decrease of 4.2%. Specimens (n 5 47) processed with Oral-Eze (diluted) and tested via enzyme immunoassay were concordant with LC - MS-MS results and showed 100% sensitivity and 95% specificity. Paired specimens col- lected with Oral-Eze and Intercept exhibited 98% overall agreement between the immunoassay test systems. Collectively, these data demonstrate consistent and reproducible recovery and stability of THC in OF after collection, transport and laboratory testing using the Oral-Eze OF Collection System. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]