Search

The purpose of this study was to compare results from five commercial hair testing laboratories conducting workplace drug testing with regard to bias, precision, selectivity and decontamination efficiency. Nine blind hair specimens, including cocaine-positive drug user specimens (some contaminated with methamphetamine) and negative specimens contaminated with cocaine, were submitted in up to five replicates to five different laboratories. All laboratories correctly identified cocaine in all specimens from drug users. For an undamaged hair specimen from a cocaine user, within-laboratory Coefficients of Variation (CVs) of 5–22% (median 8%) were reported, showing that it is possible to produce a homogenous proficiency testing sample from drug user hair. Larger CVs were reported for specimens composed of blended hair (up to 29%) and curly/damaged hair (19–67%). Quantitative results appeared to be method-dependent, and the reported cocaine concentrations varied up to 5-fold between the laboratories, making interlaboratory comparisons difficult. All laboratories reported at least one positive result in specimens contaminated with cocaine powder, followed by sweat and shampoo treatments. Benzoylecgonine, norcocaine, cocaethylene and hydroxylated cocaine metabolites were all detected in cocaine powder-contaminated specimens. This indicates that current industry standards for analyzing and reporting positive cocaine results are not completely effective at identifying external contamination. Metabolite ratios between meta- or para-hydroxy-cocaine and cocaine were 6- and 10-fold lower in contaminated specimens compared to those observed in cocaine user specimens, supporting their potential use in distinguishing samples positive due to contamination and drug use.

The market for products containing cannabidiol (CBD) is booming globally. However, the pharmacokinetics of CBD in different oral formulations and the impact of CBD use on urine drug testing outcomes for cannabis (e.g., 11-nor-9-carboxy-Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol (Δ9-THCCOOH)) are understudied. This study characterized the urinary pharmacokinetics of CBD (100 mg) following vaporization or oral administration (including three formulations: gelcap, pharmacy-grade syrup and or Epidiolex) as well as vaporized CBD-dominant cannabis (containing 100 mg CBD and 3.7 mg Δ9-THC) in healthy adults (n = 18). A subset of participants (n = 6) orally administered CBD syrup following overnight fasting (versus low-fat breakfast). Urine specimens were collected before and for 58 h after dosing on a residential research unit. Immunoassay (IA) screening (cutoffs: 20, 50 and 100 ng/mL) for Δ9-THCCOOH was performed, and quantitation of cannabinoids was completed via LC–MS-MS. Urinary CBD concentrations (ng/mL) were higher after oral (mean Cmax: 734; mean Tmax: 4.7 h, n = 18) versus vaporized CBD (mean Cmax: 240; mean Tmax: 1.3 h, n = 18), and oral dose formulation significantly impacted mean Cmax (Epidiolex = 1,274 ng/mL, capsule = 776 ng/mL, syrup = 151 ng/mL, n = 6/group) with little difference in Tmax. Overnight fasting had limited impact on CBD excretion in urine, and there was no evidence of CBD conversion to Δ8- or Δ9-THC in any route or formulation in which pure CBD was administered. Following acute administration of vaporized CBD-dominant cannabis, 3 of 18 participants provided a total of six urine samples in which Δ9-THCCOOH concentrations ≥15 ng/mL. All six specimens screened positive at a 20 ng/mL IA cutoff, and two of six screened positive at a 50 ng/mL cutoff. These data show that absorption/elimination of CBD is impacted by drug formulation, route of administration and gastric contents. Although pure CBD is unlikely to impact drug testing, it is possible that hemp products containing low amounts of Δ9-THC may produce a cannabis-positive urine drug test.

Products containing cannabinoids such as cannabidiol (CBD) have proliferated since 2018, when the Agriculture Improvement Act removed hemp (ie, cannabis containing0.3% Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol [THC]) from the US controlled substances list. Topical cannabinoid products can be purchased nationwide at retail stores and over the internet, yet research on these products is scarce.To evaluate the cannabinoid content (ie, CBD and THC) and label accuracy of topical cannabinoid products and to quantify their therapeutic and nontherapeutic claims.Product inclusion criteria included designation as hemp products, intended for topical or transdermal application, and purported to contain cannabinoids (eg, CBD). All unique products available at each retail store were purchased. Online products were identified via Google using relevant keywords (eg, hemp or CBD topical). Various products (eg, lotions and patches) were purchased from retail stores (eg, pharmacies, grocery stores, and cosmetic or beauty stores) in Baltimore, Maryland, and online. Data analysis was performed from March to June 2022.Labeled and actual total amounts of CBD and THC, measured via gas chromatography-mass spectrometry. Therapeutic and nontherapeutic claims and references to the US Food and Drug Administration were quantified.A total of 105 products were purchased, 45 from retail locations and 60 online. Of the 89 products that listed a total amount of CBD on the label, 18% (16 products) were overlabeled (ie, contained10% less CBD than advertised), 58% (52 products) were underlabeled (ie, contained10% more CBD than advertised), and 24% (21 products) were accurately labeled. The median (range) percentage deviation between the actual total amount of CBD and the labeled amount was 21% (-75% to 93%) for in-store products and 10% (-96% to 121%) for online products, indicating that products contained more CBD than advertised overall. THC was detected in 37 of 105 products (35%), although all contained less than 0.3% THC. Among the 37 THC-containing products, 4 (11%) were labeled as THC free, 14 (38%) indicated they contained less than 0.3% THC, and 19 (51%) did not reference THC on the label. Overall, 28% of products (29 products) made therapeutic claims, 14% (15 products) made cosmetic claims, and only 47% (49 products) noted that they were not Food and Drug Administration approved.In a case series of topical cannabinoid products purchased online and at popular retail stores, products were often inaccurately labeled for CBD and many contained THC. These findings suggest that clinical studies are needed to determine whether topical cannabinoid products with THC can produce psychoactive effects or positive drug tests for cannabis.

Given the recent popularity of cannabidiol (CBD) use and the emergence of ∆8-tetrahydrocannabinol (∆8-THC), the prevalence and concentrations of these and other cannabinoids were investigated in 2,000 regulated and 4,000 non-regulated specimens from workplace drug testing. All specimens were screened using liquid chromatography coupled to mass spectrometry (LC–MS-MS) for the presence of 7-hydroxy-CBD (7-OH-CBD) and ∆9-tetrahydrocannabinol-9-carboxylic acid (∆9-THC-COOH), with a cutoff of 2 ng/mL. Specimens screening positive by LC–MS-MS were analyzed by immunoassay at 20, 50 and 100 ng/mL cutoffs and by an LC–MS-MS confirmation method for 11 cannabinoids and metabolites with a 1 ng/mL cutoff. Using a 1 ng/mL cutoff, 98 (4.9%) regulated and 331 (8.3%) non-regulated specimens were positive for ∆9-THC-COOH. Of these, 64% had concentrations below 15 ng/mL. Similarly, 59 (3.0%) regulated and 162 (4.2%) non-regulated specimens were positive for 7-OH-CBD (n = 210), CBD (n = 120) and/or 7-carboxy-cannabidiol (CBD-COOH, n = 120). The median concentrations of 7-OH-CBD, CBD and CBD-COOH in those 221 specimens were 6.3, 1.1 and 1.2 ng/mL, respectively. ∆8-Tetrahydrocannabinol-9-carboxylic acid (∆8-THC-COOH) was identified in 76 (1.3%) specimens. Parent ∆8-THC is a minor cannabinoid in marijuana, which appears to account for the typically low ∆8-THC-COOH concentrations (median 3.4 ng/mL) in most positive specimens. However, elevated concentrations suggested the use of ∆8-THC-containing products in some cases (range 1.0–415 ng/mL). Although 93% agreement was observed between confirmatory LC–MS-MS (15 ng/mL cutoff) and immunoassay (50 ng/mL cutoff), a false-negative specimen (66 ng/mL ∆9-THC-COOH) was identified.

There is limited data on the comparative pharmacokinetics of cannabidiol (CBD) across oral and vaporized formulations. This within-subject, double-blind, double-dummy, placebo-controlled laboratory study analyzed the pharmacokinetic profile of CBD, ∆9-tetrahydrocannabinol (∆9-THC) and related metabolites in blood and oral fluid (OF) after participants (n = 18) administered 100 mg of CBD in each of the following formulations: (1) oral CBD, (2) vaporized CBD and (3) vaporized CBD-dominant cannabis containing 10.5% CBD and 0.39% ∆9-THC (3.7 mg); all participants also completed a placebo condition. Oral CBD was administered in three formulations: (1) encapsulated CBD, (2) CBD suspended in pharmacy-grade syrup and (3) Epidiolex, allowing for pharmacokinetic comparisons across oral formulations (n = 6 per condition). An optional fifth experimental condition was completed for six participants in which they fasted from all food for 12 h prior to oral ingestion of 100 mg of CBD. Blood and OF samples were collected immediately before and for 57–58 h after each drug administration. Immunoassay screening and LC–MS-MS confirmatory tests were performed, the limit of quantitation was 0.5 ng/mL for ∆9-THC and 1 ng/mL for CBD. The mean Cmax and range of CBD blood concentrations for each product were as follows: vaporized CBD-dominant cannabis, 171.1 ng/mL, 40.0–665.0 ng/mL, vaporized CBD 104.6 ng/mL, 19.0–312.0 ng/mL and oral CBD, 13.7 ng/mL, 0.0–50.0 ng/mL. Of the three oral formulations, Epidiolex produced the greatest peak concentration of CBD (20.5 ng/mL, 8.0–37.0 ng/mL) relative to the capsule (17.8 ng/mL, 2.0–50.0 ng/mL) and syrup (2.8 ng/mL, 0–7.0 ng/mL). ∆9-THC was detected in the blood of 12/18 participants after vaporized CBD-dominant cannabis use, but neither ∆9-THC nor its metabolite THC-COOH were detected in the blood of any participants after vaporized or oral CBD-only administration. These data demonstrate that different oral and vaporized formulations produce substantial variability in the pharmacokinetics of CBD and that CBD alone is unlikely to convert to ∆9-THC or produce positive drug tests for ∆9-THC or its metabolite.

Introduction Behavioral economics provides a framework for quantifying drug abuse potential that can inform public health risk, clinical treatment, and research. Hypothetical purchase task (HPT) questionnaires may provide a low-cost and sensitive method by which to measure and predict the appeal of pharmaceutical drugs that differ by formulation. However, the validity of this type of analysis must be empirically established by comparing the “essential value” (EV) of different drugs across subgroups. Procedures This pilot study used HPT assessments and the Exponential Model of Demand to quantify the EV of opioid medications—specifically, easily tampered formulations versus (vs.) abuse-deterrent formulations—in patients with a history of opioid abuse. Main findings Participants had more inelastic demand for opioid pills than for cigarettes and alcohol. Participants with experience manipulating pills (M group) had more inelastic demand for standard pills vs. participants with no manipulation experience (NM group), and the M group had a more elastic demand for the abuse-deterrent opioid pill than for the standard pill. There was no effect of formulation in the NM group and there was no difference in demand elasticity for abuse-deterrent pills between the two groups. There was a positive correlation between the EVs of different drugs, and between some behavioral economic indices and treatment variables. Conclusions Our results suggest that HPTs may provide a sensitive measure of abuse potential that can distinguish between different formulations in at-risk populations.

Oral cannabis products (a.k.a. “edibles”) have increased in popularity in recent years. Most prior controlled pharmacokinetic evaluations of cannabis have focused on smoked cannabis and included males who were frequent cannabis users. In this study, 17 healthy adults (8 females), with no cannabis use in at least the past 2 months, completed 4 double-blind outpatient sessions where they consumed cannabis brownies containing Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) doses of 0, 10, 25 or 50 mg. Whole blood and oral fluid specimens were collected at baseline and for 8 h post-brownie ingestion. Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) and liquid chromatography–tandem mass spectrometry (LC–MS-MS) were used to measure THC and relevant metabolites. In whole blood, concentrations of THC and 11-hydroxy-THC (11-OH-THC) peaked 1.5–2 h after brownie consumption, decreased steadily thereafter, and typically returned to baseline within 8 h. Blood concentrations for 11-nor-9-carboxy-Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THCCOOH) and THCCOOH-glucuronide were higher than THC and 11-OH-THC and these metabolites were often still detected 8 h post-brownie consumption. Women displayed higher peak concentrations for THC and all metabolites in whole blood compared to men, at least partially owing to their lower body weight/body mass index. Detection of THC in oral fluid was immediate and appeared to reflect the degree of cannabis deposition in the oral cavity, not levels of THC circulating in the blood. THC concentrations were substantially higher in oral fluid than in blood; the opposite trend was observed for THCCOOH. Agreement between ELISA and LC–MS-MS results was high (i.e., over 90%) for blood THCCOOH and oral fluid THC but comparatively low for oral fluid THCCOOH (i.e., 67%). Following oral consumption of cannabis, THC was detected in blood much later, and at far lower peak concentrations, compared to what has been observed with inhaled cannabis. These results are important given the widespread use of toxicological testing to detect recent use of cannabis and/or to identify cannabis intoxication.

The pharmacokinetic profile of oral cocaine has not been fully characterized and prospective data on oral bioavailability are limited. A within-subject study was performed to characterize the bioavailability and pharmacokinetics of oral cocaine. Fourteen healthy inpatient participants (six males) with current histories of cocaine use were administered two oral doses (100 and 200 mg) and one intravenous (IV) dose (40 mg) of cocaine during three separate dosing sessions. Plasma samples were collected for up to 24 h after dosing and analyzed for cocaine and metabolites by gas chromatography-mass spectrometry. Pharmacokinetic parameters were calculated by non-compartmental analysis, and a two-factor model was used to assess for dose and sex differences. The mean ± SEM oral cocaine bioavailability was 0.32 ± 0.04 after 100 and 0.45 ± 0.06 after 200 mg oral cocaine. Volume of distribution (V(d)) and clearance (CL) were both greatest after 100 mg oral (V(d) = 4.2 L/kg; CL = 116.2 mL/[min kg]) compared to 200 mg oral (V(d) = 2.9 L/kg; CL = 87.5 mL/[min kg]) and 40 mg IV (V(d) = 1.3 L/kg; CL = 32.7 mL/[min kg]). Oral cocaine area-under-thecurve (AUC) and peak concentration increased in a dose-related manner. AUC metabolite-to-parent ratios of benzoylecgonine and ecgonine methyl ester were significantly higher after oral compared to IV administration and highest after the lower oral dose. In addition, minor metabolites were detected in higher concentrations after oral compared to IV cocaine. Oral cocaine produced a pharmacokinetic profile different from IV cocaine, which appears as a rightward and downward shift in the concentration–time profile. Cocaine bioavailability values were similar to previous estimates. Oral cocaine also produced a unique metabolic profile, with greater concentrations of major and minor metabolites.

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) considers the development of abuse-deterrent formulations of solid oral dosage forms a public health priority and has outlined a series of premarket studies that should be performed prior to submitting an application to the Agency. Category 1 studies are performed to characterize whether the abuse-deterrent properties of a new formulation can be easily defeated. Study protocols are designed to evaluate common abuse patterns of prescription medications as well as more advanced methods that have been reported on drug abuse websites and forums. Because FDA believes Category 1 testing should fully characterize the abuse-deterrent characteristics of an investigational formulation, Category 1 testing is time consuming and requires specialized laboratory resources as well as advanced knowledge of prescription medication abuse. Recent Advisory Committee meetings at FDA have shown that Category 1 tests play a critical role in FDA's evaluation of an investigational formulation. In this article, we will provide a general overview of the methods of manipulation and routes of administration commonly utilized by prescription drug abusers, how those methods and routes are evaluated in a laboratory setting, and discuss data intake, analysis, and reporting to satisfy FDA's Category 1 testing requirements.

Background: US FDA guidance recommends measuring the degree of effort needed to manipulate abuse-deterrent (AD) opioids. The ALERRT® instrument (PinneyAssociates; Bethesda, MD) uses visual analog scales to assess the labor, effort, and resources necessary to physically compromise AD product candidates in standardized settings. Objective: Use the ALERRT® instrument for testing morphine abuse-deterrent, extended-release, injection-molded tablets (ADER-IMT) 60 and 100 mg and the comparators immediate-release (IR) morphine sulfate 30 mg and extended-release (ER) morphine sulfate 60 mg. Methods: Four technicians tested the products using 10 household tools. The ALERRT instrument quantified effort (all tools) and time (3 preselected tools) required for manipulation. Results: Morphine-ADER-IMT 60 and 100 mg were difficult to manipulate, as demonstrated by high scores (mean range, 71.0−99.0 and 77.0−99.5, respectively). IR and ER morphine sulfate were easy to manipulate (low scores; mean range, 2.0−14.8 a...

Most research on cannabis pharmacokinetics has evaluated inhaled cannabis, but oral (“edible”) preparations comprise an increasing segment of the cannabis market. To assess oral cannabis pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics, healthy adults (N = 6 per dose) were administered cannabis brownies containing 10, 25 or 50 mg 9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC). Whole blood and oral fluid specimens were obtained at baseline and then for 9 days post-exposure; 6 days in a residential research setting and 3 days as outpatients. Measures of subjective, cardiovascular and performance effects were obtained at baseline and for 8 h post-ingestion. The mean Cmax for THC in whole blood was 1, 3.5 and 3.3 ng/mL for the 10, 25 and 50 mg THC doses, respectively. The mean maximum concentration (Cmax) and mean time to maximum concentration (Tmax) of 11-OH-THC in whole blood were similar to THC. Cmax blood concentrations of THCCOOH were generally higher than THC and had longer Tmax values. The mean Tmax for THC in oral fluid occurred immediately following oral dose administration, and appear to reflect local topical residue rather than systemic bioavailbility. Mean Cmax oral fluid concentrations of THCCOOH were lower than THC, erratic over time and mean Tmax occurred at longer times than THC. The window of THC detection ranged from 0 to 22 h for whole blood (limit of quantitation (LOQ) = 0.5 ng/mL) and 1.9 to 22 h for oral fluid (LOQ = 1.0 ng/mL). Subjective drug and cognitive performance effects were generally dose dependent, peaked at 1.5–3 h post-administration, and lasted 6–8 h. Whole blood cannabinoid concentrations were significantly correlated with subjective drug effects. Correlations between blood cannabinoids and cognitive performance measures, and between oral fluid and all pharmacodynamic outcomes were either non-significant or not orderly by dose. Quantitative levels of cannabinoids in whole blood and oral fluid were low compared with levels observed following inhalation of cannabis. The route of administration is important for interpretation of cannabinoid toxicology.

Cannabis products in which cannabidiol (CBD) is the primary chemical constituent (CBD-dominant) are increasingly popular and widely available. The impact of CBD exposure on urine drug testing has not been well studied. This study characterized the urinary pharmacokinetic profile of 100-mg oral and vaporized CBD, vaporized CBD-dominant cannabis (100-mg CBD; 3.7-mg ∆9-THC) and placebo in healthy adults (n = 6) using a within-subjects crossover design. Urine specimens were collected before and for 5 days after drug administration. Immunoassay (IA) screening (cutoffs of 20, 50 and 100 ng/mL) and LC–MS-MS confirmatory tests (cutoff of 15 ng/mL) for 11-nor-9-carboxy-∆9-tetrahydrocannabinol (∆9-THCCOOH) were performed; urine was also analyzed for CBD and other cannabinoids. Urinary concentrations of CBD were higher after oral (mean Cmax: 776 ng/mL) versus vaporized CBD (mean Cmax: 261 ng/mL). CBD concentrations peaked 5 h after oral CBD ingestion and within 1 h after inhalation of vaporized CBD. After pure CBD administration, only 1 out of 218 urine specimens screened positive for ∆9-THCCOOH (20-ng/mL IA cutoff) and no specimens exceeded the 15-ng/mL confirmatory cutoff. After inhalation of CBD-dominant cannabis vapor, nine samples screened positive at the 20-ng/mL IA cutoff, and two of those samples screened positive at the 50-ng/mL IA cutoff. Four samples that screened positive (two at 20 ng/mL and two at 50 ng/mL) confirmed positive with concentrations of ∆9-THCCOOH exceeding 15 ng/mL. These data indicate that acute dosing of pure CBD will not result in a positive urine drug test using current federal workplace drug testing guidelines (50-ng/mL IA cutoff with 15-ng/mL confirmatory cutoff). However, CBD products that also contain ∆9-THC may produce positive urine results for ∆9-THCCOOH. Accurate labeling and regulation of ∆9-THC content in CBD/hemp products are needed to prevent unexpected positive drug tests and unintended drug effects.

Kratom use appears to be increasing across the United States, increasing attention to deaths in which kratom use was detected. Most such deaths have been ascribed to fentanyl, heroin, benzodiazepines, prescription opioids, cocaine and other causes (e.g., homicide, suicide and various preexisting diseases). Because kratom has certain opioid-like effects (e.g., pain relief), and is used by some people as a substitute for opioids for pain or addiction, kratom has been compared to "narcotic-like opioids" (e.g., morphine) with respect to risk of death despite evidence that its primary alkaloid, mitragynine, carries little of the signature respiratory depressing effects of morphine-like opioids. This commentary summarizes animal toxicology data, surveys and mortality data associated with opioids and kratom to provide a basis for estimating relative mortality risk. Population-level mortality estimates attributed to opioids as compared to kratom, and the per user mortality risks of opioids as compared to kratom are provided. By any of our assessments, it appears that the risk of overdose death is >1000 times greater for opioids than for kratom. The limitations of the mortality risk estimate warrants caution in individuals with unknown factors such as use of other substances and medications, or other preexisting conditions. More research on kratom safety and risks is needed, as is regulation of commercial kratom products to ensure that consumers are informed by FDA labeling and that kratom products are not contaminated or adulterated with other substances.

Prescription opioid misuse and abuse in the United States (US) is epidemic and is a major burden on health-care resources and costs to society. The need to significantly reduce the risks of prescription opioid misuse and abuse must be balanced with the important needs of patients with chronic pain who may benefit from treatment with opioids. The use of abuse-deterrent formulations (ADFs) of prescription opioids is one approach that could reduce the risk of prescription opioid abuse and misuse while maintaining access to opioids. ADF opioids have properties that make their abuse more difficult, less attractive, or less rewarding. In 2015, the US Food and Drug Administration issued final guidance to industry for the development of ADF opioids that recommended specific studies be conducted to demonstrate the abuse-deterrent properties of new opioid formulations. The technologies and the preclinical and clinical development of ADF opioids are rapidly evolving. This review provides an overview of the required testing for product labeling that includes language about the abuse-deterrent features of an ADF opioid. The objective of this review is to inform and help health-care providers understand the unique development of extended-release ADF opioids and their place in the treatment of patients with pain.

Oxymorphone (OM), a prescription opioid and metabolite of oxycodone, was included in the recently published proposed revisions to the Mandatory Guidelines for Federal Workplace Drug Testing Programs. To facilitate toxicological interpretation, this study characterized the time course of OM and its metabolite, noroxymorphone (NOM), in hydrolyzed and non-hydrolyzed urine specimens. Twelve healthy subjects were administered a single 10 mg controlled-release OM dose, followed by a periodic collection of pooled urine specimens for 54 h following administration. Analysis for free and total OM and NOM was conducted by liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS-MS), at a 50 ng/mL limit of quantitation (LOQ). Following enzymatic hydrolysis, OM and NOM were detected in 89.9% and 13.5% specimens, respectively. Without hydrolysis, OM was detected in 8.1% specimens, and NOM was not detected. The mean ratio of hydrolyzed OM to NOM was 41.6. OM was frequently detected in the first pooled collection 0-2 h post-dose, appearing at a mean of 2.4 h. NOM appeared at a mean of 8.3 h. The period of detection at the 50 ng/mL threshold averaged 50.7 h for OM and 11.0 h for NOM. These data support that OM analysis conducted using a 50 ng/mL threshold should include hydrolysis or optimize sensitivity for conjugated OM.

Hydromorphone (HM), a prescription opioid and metabolite of morphine and hydrocodone, has been included in proposed revisions to the Mandatory Guidelines for Federal Workplace Drug Testing Programs. This study characterized the time course of HM in hydrolyzed and non-hydrolyzed urine specimens. Twelve healthy subjects were administered a single 8 mg controlled-release HM dose, followed by periodic collection of pooled urine specimens for 54 h following administration. Analysis of total and free HM was conducted by liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry at a 50 ng/mL limit of quantitation. Detection periods were determined over a range of thresholds from 50 to 2,000 ng/mL. HM was detected in 85.3% and 47.6% of hydrolyzed and non-hydrolyzed post-dose specimens, respectively. Initial detection of total HM was frequently observed in the first 4-6 h following dosing. The period of detection at the 50 ng/mL threshold averaged 52.3 h for total HM and 38.0 h for free HM. These data support that HM detection is optimized by using low thresholds (50-100 ng/mL) and including conjugated HM in the analysis.

Introduction The use and availability of oral and inhalable products containing cannabidiol (CBD) as the principal constituent has increased with expanded cannabis/hemp legalization. However, few controlled clinical laboratory studies have evaluated the pharmacodynamic effects of oral or vaporized CBD or CBD-dominant cannabis. Methods Eighteen healthy adults (9 men; 9 women) completed four, double-blind, double-dummy, drug administration sessions. Sessions were separated by ≥1 week and included self-administration of 100 mg oral CBD, 100 mg vaporized CBD, vaporized CBD-dominant cannabis (100 mg CBD; 3.7 mg THC), and placebo. Study outcomes included: subjective drug effects, vital signs, cognitive/psychomotor performance, and whole blood THC and CBD concentrations. Results Vaporized CBD and CBD-dominant cannabis increased ratings on several subjective items (e.g., Like Drug Effect) relative to placebo. Subjective effects did not differ between oral CBD and placebo and were generally higher for CBD-dominant cannabis compared to vaporized CBD. CBD did not increase ratings for several items typically associated with acute cannabis/THC exposure (e.g., Paranoid). Women reported qualitatively higher ratings for Pleasant Drug Effect than men after vaporized CBD and CBD-dominant cannabis use. CBD-dominant cannabis increased heart rate compared to placebo. Cognitive/psychomotor impairment was not observed in any drug condition. Conclusions Vaporized CBD and CBD-dominant cannabis produced discriminable subjective drug effects, which were sometimes stronger in women, but did not produce cognitive/psychomotor impairment. Subjective effects of oral CBD did not differ from placebo. Future research should further elucidate the subjective effects of various types of CBD products (e.g., inhaled, oral, topical), which appear to be distinct from THC-dominant products.

As cannabis has become more accessible, use of alternative methods for cannabis administration such as vaporizers has become more prevalent. Most prior controlled pharmacokinetic evaluations have examined smoked cannabis in frequent (often daily) cannabis users. This study characterized the urinary excretion profile of 11-nor-9-carboxy-Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THCCOOH), the primary analytical outcome for detection of cannabis use, among infrequent cannabis users following controlled administration of both smoked and vaporized cannabis. Healthy adults (N = 17), with a mean of 398 (range 30–1,825) days since last cannabis use, smoked and vaporized cannabis containing 0, 10, and 25 mg of Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) across six outpatient sessions. Urinary concentrations of THCCOOH were measured at baseline and for 8 h after cannabis administration. Sensitivity, specificity, and agreement between three immunoassays (IA) for THCCOOH (with cutoffs of 20, 50, and 100 ng/mL) and gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC/MS) results (confirmatory concentration of 15 ng/mL) were assessed. THCCOOH concentrations peaked 4–6 h after cannabis administration. Median maximum concentrations (Cmax) for THCCOOH were qualitatively higher after administration of vaporized cannabis compared to equal doses of smoked cannabis. Urine THCCOOH concentrations were substantially lower in this study relative to prior examinations of experienced cannabis users. The highest agreement between IA and GC/MS was observed at the 50 ng/mL IA cutoff while sensitivity and specificity were highest at the 20 and 100 ng/mL IA cutoffs, respectively. Using federal workplace drug-testing criteria (IA cutoff of 50 ng/mL and GC/MS concentration ≥15 ng/mL) urine specimens tested positive in 47% of vaporized sessions and 21% of smoked sessions with active THC doses (N = 68). Urinary concentrations of THCCOOH are dissimilar after administration of smoked and vaporized cannabis, with qualitatively higher concentrations observed after vaporization. Infrequent users of cannabis may excrete relatively low concentrations of THCCOOH following acute inhalation of smoked or vaporized cannabis.

Currently, an unprecedented number of individuals can legally access cannabis. Vaporization is increasingly popular as a method to self-administer cannabis, partly due to perception of reduced harm compared with smoking. Few controlled laboratory studies of cannabis have used vaporization as a delivery method or evaluated the acute effects of cannabis among infrequent cannabis users. This study compared the concentrations of cannabinoids in whole blood and oral fluid after administration of smoked and vaporized cannabis in healthy adults who were infrequent users of cannabis. Seventeen healthy adults, with no past-month cannabis use, self-administered smoked or vaporized cannabis containing Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) doses of 0, 10 and 25 mg in six double-blind outpatient sessions. Whole blood and oral fluid specimens were obtained at baseline and for 8 h after cannabis administration. Cannabinoid concentrations were assessed with enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) and liquid chromatography–tandem mass spectrometry (LC–MS-MS) methods. Sensitivity, specificity and agreement between ELISA and LC–MS-MS results were assessed. Subjective, cognitive performance and cardiovascular effects were assessed. The highest concentrations of cannabinoids in both whole blood and oral fluid were typically observed at the first time point (+10 min) after drug administration. In blood, THC, 11-OH-THC, THCCOOH and THCCOOH-glucuronide concentrations were dose-dependent for both methods of administration, but higher following vaporization compared with smoking. THC was detected longer in oral fluid compared to blood and THCCOOH detection in oral fluid was rare and highly erratic. For whole blood, greater detection sensitivity for ELISA testing was observed in vaporized conditions. Conversely, for oral fluid, greater sensitivity was observed in smoked sessions. Blood and/or oral fluid cannabinoid concentrations were weakly to moderately correlated with pharmacodynamic outcomes. Cannabis pharmacokinetics vary by method of inhalation and biological matrix being tested. Vaporization appears to be a more efficient method of delivery compared with smoking.

The increasing use of highly potent strains of cannabis prompted this new evaluation of human toxicology and subjective effects following passive exposure to cannabis smoke. The study was designed to produce extreme cannabis smoke exposure conditions tolerable to drug-free nonsmokers. Six experienced cannabis users smoked cannabis cigarettes [5.3% Δ(9)-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) in Session 1 and 11.3% THC in Sessions 2 and 3] in a closed chamber. Six nonsmokers were seated alternately with smokers during exposure sessions of 1 h duration. Sessions 1 and 2 were conducted with no ventilation and ventilation was employed in Session 3. Oral fluid, whole blood and subjective effect measures were obtained before and at multiple time points after each session. Oral fluid was analyzed by ELISA (4 ng/mL cutoff concentration) and by LC-MS-MS (limit of quantitation) for THC (1 ng/mL) and total THCCOOH (0.02 ng/mL). Blood was analyzed by LC-MS-MS (0.5 ng/mL) for THC, 11-OH-THC and free THCCOOH. Positive tests for THC in oral fluid and blood were obtained for nonsmokers up to 3 h following exposure. Ratings of subjective effects correlated with the degree of exposure. Subjective effect measures and amounts of THC absorbed by nonsmokers (relative to smokers) indicated that extreme secondhand cannabis smoke exposure mimicked, though to a lesser extent, active cannabis smoking.

Oxycodone (OC) is recommended to be included as an analyte tested in the proposed Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA's) Mandatory Guidelines for Federal Workplace Drug Testing Programs using Oral Fluid (OF) Specimens. This study demonstrates the time course of OC and metabolites, noroxycodone (NOC), oxymorphone (OM) and noroxymorphone (NOM), in near-simultaneous paired OF and whole blood (BL) specimens by liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS-MS) (limit of detection = 1 ng/mL OF, 5 ng/mL BL). A single dose of OC 20 mg controlled-release was administered to 12 healthy subjects followed by specimen collections for 52 h. Analyte prevalence was as follows: OF, OC > NOC > OM; and BL, OC > NOC > NOM. OC and NOC were frequently detected within 15-30 min in OF and 30 min to 2 h in BL. NOM and OM appeared between 1.5-5 h post-dose. The mean OF-to-BL (OF:BL) ratios and correlations were 5.4 for OC (r = 0.719) and 1.0 for NOC (r = 0.651). The period of detection for OF exceeded BL by ∼2-fold at similar cutoff concentrations. At a 1 ng/mL cutoff for OF, the mean detection time was 34 h for OC and NOC. These data provide new information that should facilitate interpretation of OC test results.

US FDA guidance recommends measuring the degree of effort needed to manipulate abuse-deterrent (AD) opioids. The ALERRTUse the ALERRTFour technicians tested the products using 10 household tools. The ALERRT instrument quantified effort (all tools) and time (3 preselected tools) required for manipulation.Morphine-ADER-IMT 60 and 100 mg were difficult to manipulate, as demonstrated by high scores (mean range, 71.0-99.0 and 77.0-99.5, respectively). IR and ER morphine sulfate were easy to manipulate (low scores; mean range, 2.0-14.8 and 2.3-17.5, respectively). Statistically significant mean differences between morphine-ADER-IMT and comparators' ALERRT scores were observed. Manipulations of morphine-ADER-IMT 60 and 100 mg for 300 seconds failed to produce substantial powdering. Manipulations of IR morphine sulfate (mean range, 65.5-175.8 seconds) and ER morphine sulfate (49.3-163.0 seconds) produced substantial to complete powdering in 92% of tablets.Morphine-ADER-IMT was extremely difficult to manipulate versus non-AD formulations of morphine. The ALERRT system differentiated the degree of effort for manipulation of morphine-ADER-IMT and non-AD morphine formulations, indicating sensitivity of this instrument as part of Category 1 testing. By measuring the degree of effort required for manipulation, the ALERRT instrument provides an empirical assessment into the relative difficulty of manipulating opioid analgesics for abuse.

Opioids are increasingly prescribed to provide effective therapy for chronic noncancer pain, but increased use also means an increased risk of abuse. Primary care physicians treating patients with chronic noncancer pain are concerned about adverse events and risk of abuse and dependence associated with opioids, yet many prescribers do not follow established guidelines for the use of these agents, either through unawareness or in the mistaken belief that urine toxicology testing is all that is needed to monitor compliance and thwart abuse. Although there is no foolproof way to identify an abuser and prevent abuse, the best way to minimize the risk of abuse is to follow established guidelines for the use of opioids. These guidelines entail a careful assessment of the patient, the painful condition to be treated, and the estimated level of risk of abuse based on several factors: history of abuse and current or past psychiatric disorders; design of a therapeutic regimen that includes both pharmacotherapeutic and nonpharmacologic modalities; a formal written agreement with the patient that defines treatment expectations and responsibilities; selection of an appropriate agent, including consideration of formulations designed to deter tampering and abuse; initiation of treatment at a low dosage with titration in gradual increments as needed to achieve effective analgesia; regular reassessment to watch for signs of abuse, to perform drug monitoring, and to adjust medication as needed; and established protocols for actions to be taken in case of suspected abuse. By following these guidelines, physicians can prescribe opioids to provide effective analgesia while reducing the likelihood of abuse.

Increased cannabis potency has renewed concerns that secondhand exposure to cannabis smoke can produce positive drug tests. A systematic study was conducted of smoke exposure on drug-free participants. Six experienced cannabis users smoked cannabis cigarettes (5.3% THC in Session 1 and 11.3% THC in Sessions 2 and 3) in a sealed chamber. Six non-smokers were seated with smokers in an alternating manner. Sessions 1 and 2 were conducted with no ventilation and ventilation was employed in Session 3. Non-smoking participant specimens (collected 0‐34 h) were analyzed with four immunoassays at different cutoff concentrations (20, 50, 75 and 100 ng/mL) and by GC-MS (LOQ 5 0.75 ng/mL). No presumptive positives occurred for non-smokers at 100 and 75 ng/mL; a single positive occurred at 50 ng/mL; and multiple positives occurred at 20 ng/ mL. Maximum THCCOOH concentrations by GC-MS for non-smokers ranged from 1.3 to 57.5 ng/mL. THCCOOH concentrations generally increased with THC potency, but room ventilation substantially reduced exposure levels. These results demonstrate that extreme cannabis smoke exposure can produce positive urine tests at commonly utilized cutoff concentrations. However, positive tests are likely to be rare, limited to the hours immediately post-exposure, and occur only under environmental circumstances where exposure is obvious.

Zolpidem (Ambien(®)) is the most prescribed insomnia treatment in the USA; however, little is known about zolpidem metabolite excretion in chronic pain patients. As zolpidem is extensively metabolized in vivo to zolpidem 4-phenyl carboxylic acid (ZCA), metabolite detection may provide improved accuracy for compliance determinations, thereby improving clinical decisions. Zolpidem and ZCA were extracted from 1 mL human urine by mixed-mode solid-phase extraction. Samples were analyzed by LC-MS-MS using positive electrospray ionization with multiple reaction monitoring mode employed for detection and quantification. Gradient chromatographic separation was achieved with a reversed-phase column in a rapid 1.8 min analysis. The assay was linear from 4 to 1,000 µg/L for zolpidem and 4 to 10,000 µg/L for ZCA. Interday recovery (bias) and imprecision (n = 20) were 100-107% of target and 2.4-3.7% relative standard deviation, respectively. Extraction efficiencies were 78-90%. Pain compliance samples (n = 3,142) were de-identified and analyzed for zolpidem and ZCA. Zolpidem was detected greater than limit of quantification in 720 specimens (22.9%), while ZCA was detected in 1,579 specimens (50.3%). Only five specimens contained zolpidem alone. ZCA was observed without parent zolpidem in 864 specimens, thereby increasing population detection rates by 27.5%. Addition of a zolpidem metabolite to compliance determinations substantially improved detection for zolpidem intake and also should prove useful in clinical and forensic settings.

The use of opioids for patients with chronic noncancer pain has increased dramatically, and with increasing use there is increasing concern about the potential for abuse and addiction during long-term treatment. Clinicians should avoid viewing formal or subjective risk assessment as a means of classifying patients into 2 distinct categories: compliant patients and substance abusers. The provider who perceives a patient as compliant may have a complacent attitude toward aberrant drug-related behavior, presuming that these signs reflect inadequately controlled pain, to be addressed by dose escalation. The provider who perceives a patient as a substance abuser may refuse to provide treatment for pain, leaving the patient to seek either illicit drugs or prescribed treatment from another provider. In fact, in seemingly compliant patients, any noncompliant use of opioids presents a safety risk regardless of the explanations offered. Even in known or suspected drug abusers, chronic pain warrants the use of adequate pharmacotherapy, although treatment in such cases may exclude drugs with high abuse potential. Thus, all aberrant drug-related behavior should be addressed within a treatment plan that combines adequate pain care with suitable interventions for the aberrant behavior, following current best practice strategies. This approach is consistent with the approach taken with other health conditions, such as diabetes or hypertension, for which it is understood that noncompliance with therapy presents a risk of harm.

Assessing and mitigating the abuse liability (AL) of analgesics is an urgent clinical and societal problem. Analgesics have traditionally been assessed in randomized clinical trials (RCTs) designed to demonstrate analgesic efficacy relative to placebo or an active comparator. In these trials, rigorous, prospectively designed assessment for AL is generally not performed. The Initiative on Methods, Measurement, and Pain Assessment in Clinical Trials (IMMPACT) convened a consensus meeting to review the available evidence and discuss methods for improving the assessment of the AL of analgesics in clinical trials in patients with pain. Recommendations for improved assessment include: (1) performing trials that include individuals with diverse risks of abuse; (2) improving the assessment of AL in clinical trials (eg, training study personnel in the principles of abuse and addiction behaviors, designing the trial to assess AL outcomes as primary or secondary outcome measures depending on the trial objectives); (3) performing standardized assessment of outcomes, including targeted observations by study personnel and using structured adverse events query forms that ask all subjects specifically for certain symptoms (such as euphoria and craving); and (4) collecting detailed information about events of potential concern (eg, unexpected urine drug testing results, loss of study medication, and dropping out of the trial). The authors also propose a research agenda for improving the assessment of AL in future trials.

Hydrocodone (HC) is a highly misused prescription drugs in the USA. Interpretation of urine tests for HC is complicated by its metabolism to two metabolites, hydromorphone (HM) and dihydrocodeine (DHC), which are also available commercially and are misused. Currently, there is interest in including HC and HM in the federal workplace drug-testing programs. This study characterized the disposition of HC in human urine. Twelve healthy, drug-free, adults were administered a single, oral 20 mg immediate-release dose of HC in a controlled clinical setting. Urine specimens were collected at timed intervals for up to 52 h and analyzed by LC-MS-MS (limit of quantitation = 50 ng/mL) with and without enzymatic hydrolysis. All specimens were also analyzed for creatinine and specific gravity (SG). HC and norhydrocodone (NHC) appeared within 2 h followed by HM and DHC. Peak concentrations of HC and metabolites occurred at 3-9 h. Peak hydrolyzed concentrations were in the order: NHCHCHMDHC. Only HM was excreted extensively as a conjugated metabolite. At a cutoff concentration of 50 ng/mL, detection times were ∼28 h for HC, 40 h for NHC, 26 h for HM and 16 h for DHC. Some specimens did not contain HC, but most contained NHC, thereby facilitating interpretation that HC was the administered drug. Creatinine and SG measures were highly correlated. Creatinine corrections of HC urinary data had variable effects of lowering or raising concentrations. These data suggest that drug-testing requirements for HC should include a hydrolysis step and a test for HM.

Background In an effort to address the continuing problem of prescription opioid abuse, manufacturers are incorporating new technologies into formulations that are designed to deter product tampering and misuse. Standards for laboratory assessment of tamper deterrent properties of new formulations have not previously been developed. Methods Experimental designs were developed for the in vitro laboratory assessment of the tamper deterrent properties of reformulated oxycodone. Given that an exhaustive study of all potential tampering methods was impractical; this model was developed to evaluate the product in an incremental fashion with iterative changes that were amenable to objective and replicable laboratory testing. Results A description of the model is provided along with pertinent examples involving assessment of reformulated oxycodone with comparisons to the original formulation. Physical and chemical procedures were developed that relate to “real-world” scenarios that may be applied to opioid formulations. Test results were interpreted in relation to the relative ease or difficulty of the manipulation as compared to control materials and the amount and purity of active drug that could be accessed. Results from some of the tests were designed to be useful in predicting whether specific tampering methods would facilitate or deter drug administration by different routes of administration. Conclusions This model, developed to assess the tamper deterrent properties of reformulated oxycodone, should have application in the assessment of other drug formulations designed to exhibit tamper deterrence properties.

The ongoing epidemic of prescription opioid abuse in the United States has prompted interest in semi-synthetic opioids in the federal workplace drug testing program. This study characterized the metabolism and disposition of oxycodone (OC) in human urine. Twelve healthy adults were administered a single oral 20 mg dose of OC in a controlled clinical setting. Urine specimens were collected at timed intervals up to 52 h and analyzed by liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (limit of quantitation: 50 ng/mL) for OC, oxymorphone (OM), noroxycodone (NOC) and noroxymorphone (NOM) with and without enzymatic hydrolysis. OC and NOC appeared in urine within 2 h, followed by OM and NOM. Peak concentrations of OC and metabolites occurred between 3 and 19 h. Mean peak concentrations in hydrolyzed urine were in the following order: NOCOCOMNOM. Only OM appeared to be excreted extensively as a conjugated metabolite. OC concentrations declined more quickly than NOC and OM. At a cutoff concentration of 50 ng/mL, detection times were approximately 30 h for OC and 40 h for NOC and OM. Some specimens did not contain OC, but most contained NOC, thereby facilitating interpretation that OC was the administered drug; however, five specimens contained only OM. These data provide information that should facilitate the selection of appropriate test parameters for OC in urine and assist in the interpretation of test results.

Abuse-deterrent formulations are one strategy for mitigating the epidemic of prescription opioid abuse. Regulatory guidance documents describe the requirements for developing abuse-deterrent formulations of novel drugs and formulations; however, they do not address “abuse-deterrence equivalence” for generic formulations. As generics may be produced with different excipients and formulations compared to reference drugs, differences in their properties may impact their abuse-deterrent features. Currently, it is unclear what specific studies are needed to support generic abuse-deterrence claims. This commentary outlines several recommendations on the in vitro and in vivo testing required, including the conditions for conducting a human abuse potential study.

Propoxyphene is an opioid analgesic that was surrounded by controversy concerning its safety and efficacy during its lifespan in the US market. Propoxyphene was withdrawn in November of 2010 from the US market and is still being detected one year post-withdrawal in urine specimens from the pain management population. In this study, the prevalence of propoxyphene was determined in a total of 417,914 urine specimens collected from 630 clinics involved in pain management located in 24 states during the period of January 1, 2010, through December 31, 2011. Propoxyphene and norpropoxyphene were measured in urine by a validated liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry procedure with a lower limit of quantitation of 50 ng/mL. The positivity rate for propoxyphene prevalence declined sharply between November and December of 2010 and further declined at a gradual rate, ending in a prevalence of 0.27% (one out of every 370 specimens, n = 25,658) for the month of December 2011. The presented data provide evidence of the dramatic decline in the use of propoxyphene products since their removal from the medical market, and may be beneficial to US urine drug testing programs determining the need for continual monitoring of propoxyphene levels.

A clinical study was conducted to compare the use of oral fluid to urine for compliance monitoring of pain patients. Patients (n = 133) undergoing treatment for chronic pain at four clinics participated in the study and provided paired oral fluid and urine specimens. Oral fluid specimens were collected with Quantisal(TM) saliva collection devices immediately following urine collection. Oral fluid specimens were analyzed for 42 drugs and/or metabolites by validated liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry procedures. Accompanying urine specimens were initially screened by immunoassay and non-negative results were confirmed. Of the 1544 paired tests, 329 (21.3%) drug analytes were positive, and 984 (63.7%) were negative for both specimens resulting in an overall agreement of 85%. There were 83 (5.4%) analyte results that were positive in oral fluid and negative in urine, and 148 (9.6%) were negative in oral fluid and positive in urine for an overall disagreement of 15%. Cohen's Kappa value was 0.64, indicating "substantial" agreement. The primary exceptions to agreement were the lower detection rates for hydromorphone, oxymorphone, and benzodiazepines in oral fluid compared to urine. The authors conclude that, overall, oral fluid tests produced comparable results to urine tests with some minor differences in detection rates for different drug classes.

Although current abuse of barbiturates is low compared with other classes of abused drugs, their narrow margin of safety, risk of dependence, and abuse liability remain a health concern. Limited information is available on the disposition of barbiturates in different biologic matrices.The authors conducted a clinical study of the disposition of barbiturates in oral fluid, plasma, and urine after single-dose administration to healthy subjects.Three parallel groups of 15 subjects were administered a single oral dose of one barbiturate: butalbital (50 mg), Phenobarbital (30 mg), or sodium secobarbital (100 mg). Subjects remained at the clinic for two confinement periods; the first was -1 to 36 hours postdose and again at 48 to 52 hours. Oral fluid specimens were collected by bilateral collection (Intercept; one on each side of the mouth simultaneously). Blood specimens were obtained by venipuncture and urine specimens were collected through separate collection pools of varying periods. Oral fluid specimens were analyzed for barbiturates by liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectroscopy with a limit of quantitation of 8 ng/mL. Plasma and urine specimens were analyzed by gas chromatography-mass spectroscopy with a limit of quantitation of 100 ng/mL.Barbiturate side effects included dizziness, drowsiness, and somnolence. All effects resolved spontaneously without medical intervention. The three barbiturates were detectable in oral fluid and plasma within 15 to 60 minutes of administration and in the first urine pooled collection at 2 hours. Butalbital and Phenobarbital remained detectable in all specimens through 48 to 52 hours, whereas secobarbital was frequently negative in the last collection. Oral fluid to plasma ratios appeared stable over the 1- to 48-hour collection period.This study demonstrated that single, oral therapeutic doses of butalbital, Phenobarbital, and secobarbital were excreted in readily detectable concentrations in oral fluid over a period of approximately 2 days. Oral fluid patterns of appearance and elimination were similar to that observed for plasma and urine.

Importance Vaporization is an increasingly popular method for cannabis administration, and policy changes have increased adult access to cannabis drastically. Controlled examinations of cannabis vaporization among adults with infrequent current cannabis use patterns (>30 days since last use) are needed. Objective To evaluate the acute dose effects of smoked and vaporized cannabis using controlled administration methods. Design, Setting, and Participants This within-participant, double-blind, crossover study was conducted from June 2016 to January 2017 at the Behavioral Pharmacology Research Unit, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, and included 17 healthy adults. Six smoked and vaporized outpatient experimental sessions (1-week washout between sessions) were completed in clusters (order counterbalanced across participants); dose order was randomized within each cluster. Interventions Cannabis containing Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) doses of 0 mg, 10 mg, and 25 mg was vaporized and smoked by each participant. Main Outcomes and Measures Change from baseline scores for subjective drug effects, cognitive and psychomotor performance, vital signs, and blood THC concentration. Results The sample included 17 healthy adults (mean [SD] age, 27.3 [5.7] years; 9 men and 8 women) with no cannabis use in the prior month (mean [SD] days since last cannabis use, 398 [437] days). Inhalation of cannabis containing 10 mg of THC produced discriminative drug effects (mean [SD] ratings on a 100-point visual analog scale, smoked: 46 [26]; vaporized: 69 [26]) and modest impairment of cognitive functioning. The 25-mg dose produced significant drug effects (mean [SD] ratings, smoked: 66 [29]; vaporized: 78 [24]), increased incidence of adverse effects, and pronounced impairment of cognitive and psychomotor ability (eg, significant decreased task performance compared with placebo in vaporized conditions). Vaporized cannabis resulted in qualitatively stronger drug effects for most pharmacodynamic outcomes and higher peak concentrations of THC in blood, compared with equal doses of smoked cannabis (25-mg dose: smoked, 10.2 ng/mL; vaporized, 14.4 ng/mL). Blood THC concentrations and heart rate peaked within 30 minutes after cannabis administration and returned to baseline within 3 to 4 hours. Several subjective drug effects and observed cognitive and psychomotor impairments persisted for up to 6 hours on average. Conclusions and Relevance Vaporized and smoked cannabis produced dose-orderly drug effects, which were stronger when vaporized. These data can inform regulatory and clinical decisions surrounding the use of cannabis among adults with little or no prior cannabis exposure. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03676166.

Urine drug testing of pain patients provides objective information to health specialists regarding patient compliance, diversion, and concurrent illicit drug use. Interpretation of urine test results for semi-synthetic opiates can be difficult because of complex biotransformations of parent drug to metabolites that are also available commercially and may be abused. Normetabolites such as norcodeine, norhydrocodone and noroxycodone are unique metabolites that are not available commercially. Consequently, detection of normetabolite in specimens not containing parent drug, provides conclusive evidence that the parent drug was consumed. The goal of this study was to evaluate the prevalence and patterns of the three normetabolites, norcodeine, norhydrocodone and noroxycodone, in urine specimens of pain patients treated with opiates. Urine specimens were hydrolyzed with beta-glucuronidase and analyzed by a validated liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry (LC/MS/MS) assay for the presence of codeine, norcodeine, morphine, hydrocodone, norhydrocodone, hydromorphone, dihydrocodeine, oxycodone, noroxycodone, and oxymorphone. The limit of quantitation (LOQ) for these analytes was 50ng/mL. The study was approved by an Institutional Review Board. Of the total specimens (N=2654) tested, 71.4% (N=1895) were positive (>or=LOQ) for one or more of the analytes. The prevalence (%) of positive results for codeine, hydrocodone and oxycodone was 1.2%, 26.1%, and 36.2%, respectively, and the prevalence of norcodeine, norhydrocodone and noroxycodone was 0.5%, 22.1%, and 31.3%, respectively. For specimens containing normetabolite, the prevalence of norcodeine, norhydrocodone and noroxycodone in the absence of parent drug was 8.6%, 7.8% and 9.4%, respectively. From one-third to two-thirds of these specimens also did not contain other metabolites that could have originated from the parent drug. Consequently, the authors conclude that inclusion of norcodeine, norhydrocodone and noroxycodone is useful in interpretation of opiate drug source and reduces potential false negatives that would occur without tests for these unique metabolites.

Excessive fluid intake can substantially dilute urinary drug concentrations and result in false-negative reports for drug users. Methods for correction ("normalization") of drug/metabolite concentrations in urine have been utilized by anti-doping laboratories, pain monitoring programs, and in environmental monitoring programs to compensate for excessive hydration, but such procedures have not been used routinely in workplace, legal, and treatment settings. We evaluated two drug normalization procedures based on specific gravity and creatinine. These corrections were applied to urine specimens collected from three distinct groups (pain patients, heroin users, and marijuana/ cocaine users). Each group was unique in characteristics, study design, and dosing conditions. The results of the two normalization procedures were highly correlated (r=0.94; range, 0.78-0.99). Increases in percent positives by specific gravity and creatinine normalization were small (0.3% and -1.0%, respectively) for heroin users (normally hydrated subjects), modest (4.2-9.8%) for pain patients (unknown hydration state), and substantial (2- to 38-fold increases) for marijuana/cocaine users (excessively hydrated subjects). Despite some limitations, these normalization procedures provide alternative means of dealing with highly dilute, dilute, and concentrated urine specimens. Drug/metabolite concentration normalization by these procedures is recommended for urine testing programs, especially as a means of coping with dilute specimens.

Chronic pain patients are frequently maintained on one or more powerful opioid medications in combination with other psychoactive medications. Urine tests provide objective information regarding patient compliance status. Little information is available on testing this unique population. The goal of this study was to characterize drug disposition patterns in urine specimens collected from a large population of pain patients. Confirmation data for 10,922 positive specimens were collated into 11 drug Classes. The number of drug/metabolites tested (#) and number of confirmed positive specimens were as follows: amphetamines (7), 160; barbiturates (5), 308; benzodiazepines (6), 2397; cannabinoids (1), 967; carisoprodol (2), 611; cocaine (1), 310; fentanyl (1), 458; meperidine (2), 58; methadone (2), 1209; opiates (7), 8996; and propoxyphene (2), 385. Subdivision into 19 distinct drug Groups allowed characterization of drug use patterns. Of the 10,922 positive specimens, 15,859 results were reported as positive in various drug Classes, and 27,197 drug/metabolites were measured by gas chromatography-mass spectrometry. The frequency of illicit drug use (cannabis, cocaine, ecstasy) was 10.8%. Being the first study of this type, these data present a large array of information on licit and illicit drug use, drug detection frequencies, drug/metabolite patterns, and multi-drug use combinations in pain patients.

Background: Understanding methamphetamine (MAMP) and amphetamine (AMP) excretion in sweat is important for interpreting sweat and hair testing results in judicial, workplace, and drug treatment settings. Methods: Participants (n = 8) received 4 10-mg (low) oral doses of sustained-release S-(+)-MAMP HCl (d-MAMP HCl) within 1 week in a double-blind, institutional review board–approved study. Five participants also received 4 20-mg (high) doses 3 weeks later. PharmChek sweat patches (n = 682) were worn for periods of 2 h to 1 week during and up to 3 weeks after dosing. The mass of MAMP and AMP in each patch was measured by GC-MS, with a limit of quantification of 2.5 ng/patch. Results: MAMP was measurable in sweat within 2 h of dosing. After low and high doses, 92.9% and 62.5% of weekly sweat patches were positive, with a median (range) MAMP of 63.0 (16.8–175) and 307 (199–607) ng MAMP/patch, respectively; AMP values were 15.5 (6.5–40.5) and 53.8 (34.0–83.4) ng AMP/patch. Patches applied 2 weeks after the drug administration week had no measurable MAMP following the low doses, and only 1 positive result following the high doses. Using criteria proposed by the Substance Abuse Mental Health Services Administration, 85.7% (low) and 62.5% (high) weekly sweat patches from the dosing week were positive for MAMP, and all patches applied after the dosing week were negative. Conclusions: These data characterize the excretion of MAMP and AMP after controlled MAMP administration and provide a framework for interpretation of MAMP sweat test results in clinical and forensic settings.

Testing oral fluid for drugs of abuse has been studied under many conditions but rarely has been evaluated in large population databases. We evaluated oral fluid tests in a database from a commercial laboratory in the United Kingdom composed of 8679 confirmed positive results. The results originated from 635,000 specimens collected over the period of May 2004 through September 2006. Oral fluid specimens were collected with the Intercept oral fluid collection device, screened by enzyme immunoassay, and confirmed by GC-MS or GC-MS-MS. The database was organized by collection settings (legal/treatment, N = 8198 specimens; and workplace, N = 481 specimens) and by drug groups (without consideration of collection setting). The drug groups were as follows (number of confirmed positives): amphetamines (468); benzodiazepines (892); buprenorphine (276); cannabinoids (725); cocaine (1443); methadone (998); and opiates (5739). The goal of the study was to provide drug/metabolite prevalence data, concentrations, and drugs/metabolite patterns encountered in oral fluid. Comparison of results by collection setting indicated differences in relative frequency, primarily for opiates and cannabinoids. Opiate positives were most frequently observed for specimens collected in legal/treatment settings, whereas cannabinoids were most frequently reported in the workplace. An array of information on drug and metabolite occurrences and concentration arose from evaluation of the data by drug groups. Amphetamine was the predominant drug reported for the Amphetamines Group; approximately 10% were also positive for MDA and/or MDMA; and methamphetamine was rarely reported. Multiple combinations of diazepam, nordiazepam, oxazepam, temazepam, chlordiazepoxide, and lorazepam were reported for the Benzodiazepine Group. Buprenorphine, an opioid treatment drug, was the predominant analyte reported, but low concentrations of norbuprenorphine were frequently reported. THC was the predominant analyte reported in the Cannabinoids Group and was frequently reported in combination with cannabidiol and cannabinol. THCCOOH was reported in only 10.8% of these specimens and was never reported in the absence of THC. HO-THC was reported in 5.7% of the specimens. In the Cocaine Group, cocaine was present, often in combination with BZE, but also as the sole analyte in 17.3% of the specimens. AEME and cocaethylene were reported in 10.4% and 5.5% of the specimens. Methadone, another opioid treatment drug, was reported in all specimens for the Methadone Group; EDDP was reported in 30.1% of the specimens. In the Opiates Group, morphine, codeine and 6-acetylmorhine were most frequently reported, often in combination. The frequency of detection of 6-acetylmorphine when morphine was present (N = 4575 specimens) was 77.5%. Surprisingly, heroin (19.0%; N = 1091 specimens) and 6-acetylcodeine (24.9%; N = 1431 specimens) were frequently reported. The results from analysis of this large oral fluid database offer a rich mixture of new information on detection frequency, drug and metabolite patterns, and concentration data on drugs of abuse.

Understanding cocaine and metabolites urinary excretion following smoking is important for interpretation of urine test results in judicial, workplace and treatment settings. In National Institute on Drug Abuse approved studies on a secure research unit, six subjects smoked placebo, 10, 20, and 40 mg cocaine with a precise dose delivery device and six different subjects smoked 42 mg cocaine in a glass pipe. Urine specimens (n = 700) were collected for up to seven days and analyzed for cocaine (COC), benzoylecgonine (BE), ecgonine methylester (EME), m-hydroxybenzoylecgonine (mOHBE), p-hydroxybenzoylecgonine (pOHBE), norbenzoylecgonine (NBE), and ecgonine (EC) by gas chromatography–mass spectrometry. Results (mean ± SE) for the 40-mg precise delivery doses are as follows: COCBEEMEmOHBEpOHBENBEECCutoff(ng/mL)10201025252550Cmax(ng/mL)4085±23039196±15694638±1548222±69540±227614±347852±211Tmax(h)2.2±0.36.6±0.95.6±1.47.8±0.54.4±1.56.0±2.09.3 ±1.3Lastpositive(h)5510616455553280 Mean Cmax for all analytes linearly increased with increasing dose. Tmax was not dose-dependent. All metabolites were detected in some subjects within 2 h. EC concentrations were significantly higher after smoked cocaine in a precise delivery coil compared to a glass “crack” pipe.

This review of the disposition of methamphetamine in oral fluid, plasma, and urine is based on a comprehensive controlled dosing study involving five healthy, drug-free research volunteers who resided on a closed clinical ward for 12 weeks. Subjects were administered four low (10 mg) and high (20 mg) daily oral doses of methamphetamine in two separate sessions. Near-simultaneous collections of oral fluid and plasma were performed on the first day of each low- and high-dose session. Thereafter, oral fluid was provided on each day of dosing by different oral fluid collection methods. All urine specimens were collected on an ad libitum basis throughout the study. Specimens were analyzed by gas-chromatography mass spectrometry for methamphetamine and the metabolite, amphetamine, with a limit of quantification of 2.5 ng/mL for each analyte. Methamphetamine and metabolite concentrations in oral fluid appeared to follow a similar time course in oral fluid as in plasma and were dose-proportional, but oral fluid concentrations exceeded plasma concentrations. Urine drug concentrations were substantially higher than those in oral fluid. Some drug accumulation was noted with daily dosing, but generally did not markedly influence detection times or detection rates of oral fluid tests. Detection times and detection rates for oral fluid and urine were determined at cessation of 4 days of dosing. Generally, detection times and rates for urine were longer than those observed for oral fluid at conventional cutoff concentrations. When contemplating selection of oral fluid as a test matrix, the advantages of oral fluid collection should be weighed against its shorter time of detection compared to that of urine.

The Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) is currently evaluating hydrocodone (HC) for inclusion in the Mandatory Guidelines for Federal Workplace Drug Testing Programs. This study evaluated the time course of HC, norhydrocodone (NHC), dihydrocodeine (DHC) and hydromorphone (HM) in paired oral fluid and whole blood specimens by liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (limit of quantitation = 1 ng/mL of oral fluid, 5 ng/mL of blood) over a 52-h period. A single dose of HC bitartrate, 20 mg, was administered to 12 subjects. Analyte prevalence was as follows: oral fluid, HCNHCDHC; and blood, HCNHC. HM was not detected in any specimen. HC was frequently detected within 15 min in oral fluid and 30 min in blood. Mean oral fluid to blood (OF : BL) ratios and correlations were 3.2 for HC (r = 0.73) and 0.7 for NHC (r = 0.42). The period of detection for oral fluid exceeded blood at all evaluated thresholds. At a 1-ng/mL threshold for oral fluid, mean detection time was 30 h for HC and 18 h for NHC and DHC. This description of HC and metabolite disposition in oral fluid following single-dose administration provides valuable interpretive guidance of HC test results.

Cannabis is the most widely used illicit drug. Many individuals are incidentally exposed to secondhand cannabis smoke, but little is known about the effects of this exposure. This report examines the physiological, subjective, and behavioral/cognitive effects of secondhand cannabis exposure, and the influence of room ventilation on these effects.Non-cannabis-using individuals were exposed to secondhand cannabis smoke from six individuals smoking cannabis (11.3% THC) ad libitum in a specially constructed chamber for 1h. Chamber ventilation was experimentally manipulated so that participants were exposed under unventilated conditions or with ventilation at a rate of 11 air exchanges/h. Physiological, subjective and behavioral/cognitive measures of cannabis exposure assessed after exposure sessions were compared to baseline measures.Exposure to secondhand cannabis smoke under unventilated conditions produced detectable cannabinoid levels in blood and urine, minor increases in heart rate, mild to moderate self-reported sedative drug effects, and impaired performance on the digit symbol substitution task (DSST). One urine specimen tested positive at using a 50 ng/ml cut-off and several specimens were positive at 20 ng/ml. Exposure under ventilated conditions resulted in much lower blood cannabinoid levels, and did not produce sedative drug effects, impairments in performance, or positive urine screen results.Room ventilation has a pronounced effect on exposure to secondhand cannabis smoke. Under extreme, unventilated conditions, secondhand cannabis smoke exposure can produce detectable levels of THC in blood and urine, minor physiological and subjective drug effects, and minor impairment on a task requiring psychomotor ability and working memory.

Detection times reported for single-dose studies may not predict detection times following repeated cocaine dosing. Although repeated cocaine administration can result in drug accumulation and extended excretion time, there is a paucity of data from controlled dosing studies with repeated drug administration. We compared detection times for cocaine and benzoylecgonine (BZE) in oral fluid and BZE in urine following single and repeated cocaine dosing. Two groups of cocaine-experienced subjects participated in these studies. The single-dose group received cocaine by intravenous, intranasal, and smoked administration. The repeated dose group received daily escalating oral cocaine doses culminating in a total of 1,250-2,000 mg. Oral fluid and urine specimens following the last dosing were analyzed by gas chromatography-mass spectrometry. Detection times were determined as the time to the last positive specimen. The effect of repeated dosing was to extend oral fluid detection times for cocaine approximately fourfold and BZE detection times sevenfold, whereas urine BZE detection times were extended twofold. Because cocaine abusers frequently self-administer higher and repeated doses, we conclude that the short detection times observed in single-dose studies underestimate the utility of oral fluid for detection of cocaine abuse in realistic settings.

Few studies compared oral fluid (OF) analysis to laboratory urinalysis (UA) in real-world criminal justice environments, and no studies had collected survey data, from either specimen providers or specimen collectors, about the overall OF collection experience. In the most comprehensive toxicological comparison study conducted to date, urine and OF specimens were collected from a sample of 223 adult probationers in Baltimore City, Maryland, between March and May 2004. In addition, probationers and probation staff were surveyed about the OF collection experience. With confirmed UA as the reference standard, the Intercept Oral Specimen Collection Device® (Intercept) was 100 percent sensitive and 99 percent specific for benzodiazepines, 92 percent sensitive and 96 percent specific for cocaine, 77 percent sensitive and 96 percent specific for opiates, 39 percent sensitive and 98 percent specific for marijuana, and 75 percent sensitive and 91 percent specific for the detection of at least one drug. Seventy-two percent of the probationers and 88 percent of the probation staff rated the Intercept experience better than the collection of urine specimens. Implications for criminal justice policy and research are discussed.

Hair testing for the determination of drug exposure has many useful applications. Drug incorporated into hair can be found for extended periods following drug exposure. There are few controlled drug administration studies investigating drug distribution into human hair. Ten volunteers participated in a 10-week controlled cocaine and codeine administration study while residing in the secure research ward. Weekly hair samples were collected by electric razor. During the low-dose week (week 4), volunteers received 75 mg/70 kg cocaine subcutaneously and 60 mg/70 kg codeine orally on alternating days, a total of three doses for each drug. Similarly, during week 7, volunteers received three doses 150 mg/70 kg cocaine and 120 mg/70 kg codeine. Maximum hair concentrations (C(max)) were found 1 to 3 weeks after low and high doses. Dose-related C(max) values of cocaine, benzoylecgonine, ecgonine methyl ester, norcocaine, cocaethylene, and codeine were found following low and high doses. Hair analysis was performed using liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry. A positive linear relationship was found between total melanin content of hair and C(max) of codeine, cocaine, and metabolites following high dosing. This study demonstrated dose-related concentrations of cocaine and metabolites in human hair following controlled cocaine administration. These data are the first demonstrating melanin-related incorporation of cocaine and metabolites into human hair following controlled cocaine administration.