Clinical Chemistry Link to Randox Laboratories Web Site
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

Clinical Chemistry 49: 1114-1124, 2003; 10.1373/49.7.1114
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit an electronic Letter to
the Editor about this paper
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (12)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Gustafson, R. A.
Right arrow Articles by Huestis, M. A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Gustafson, R. A.
Right arrow Articles by Huestis, M. A.
Related Collections
Right arrow Drug Monitoring and Toxicology
(Clinical Chemistry. 2003;49:1114-1124.)
© 2003 American Association for Clinical Chemistry, Inc.

Urinary Cannabinoid Detection Times after Controlled Oral Administration of {Delta}9-Tetrahydrocannabinol to Humans

Richard A. Gustafson1, Barry Levine2, Peter R. Stout3, Kevin L. Klette4, M.P. George5, Eric T. Moolchan1 and Marilyn A. Huestis1,a

1 Chemistry and Drug Metabolism, Intramural Research Program, National Institute on Drug Abuse, National Institutes of Health, 5500 Nathan Shock Dr., Baltimore, MD 21224.

2 Office of the Chief Medical Examiner, 111 Penn St., Baltimore, MD 21201.

3 Aegis Sciences Corp., 345 Hill Ave., Nashville, TN 37210.

4 Navy Drug Screening Laboratory, PO Box 113, Bldg. H-2033, Naval Air Station, Jacksonville, FL 32212.

5 Quest Diagnostics, Inc., 506 East State Pkwy., Schaumburg, IL 60173.

aAuthor for correspondence. Fax 410-550-2971; e-mail mhuestis{at}intra.nida.nih.gov.

Background: Urinary cannabinoid excretion and immunoassay performance were evaluated by semiquantitative immunoassay and gas chromatography–mass spectrometry (GC/MS) analysis of metabolite concentrations in 4381 urine specimens collected before, during, and after controlled oral administration of tetrahydrocannabinol (THC).

Methods: Seven individuals received 0, 0.39, 0.47, 7.5, and 14.8 mg THC/day in this double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized, clinical study conducted on a closed research ward. THC doses (hemp oils with various THC concentrations and the therapeutic drug Marinol®) were administered three times daily for 5 days. All urine voids were collected over the 10-week study and later tested by Emit II®, DRI®, and CEDIA® immunoassays and by GC/MS. Detection rates, detection times, and sensitivities, specificities, and efficiencies of the immunoassays were determined.

Results: At the federally mandated immunoassay cutoff (50 µg/L), mean detection rates were <0.2% during ingestion of the two low doses typical of current hemp oil THC concentrations. The two high doses produced mean detection rates of 23–46% with intermittent positive tests up to 118 h. Maximum metabolite concentrations were 5.4–38.2 µg/L for the low doses and 19.0–436 µg/L for the high doses. Emit II, DRI, and CEDIA immunoassays had similar performance efficiencies of 92.8%, 95.2%, and 93.9%, respectively, but differed in sensitivity and specificity.

Conclusions: The use of cannabinoid-containing foodstuffs and cannabinoid-based therapeutics, and continued abuse of oral cannabis require scientific data for accurate interpretation of cannabinoid tests and for making reliable administrative drug-testing policy. At the federally mandated cannabinoid cutoffs, it is possible but unlikely for a urine specimen to test positive after ingestion of manufacturer-recommended doses of low-THC hemp oils. Urine tests have a high likelihood of being positive after Marinol therapy. The Emit II and DRI assays had adequate sensitivity and specificity, but the CEDIA assay failed to detect many true-positive specimens.




The following articles in journals at HighWire Press have cited this article:


Home page
 Annals of Clinical & Laboratory ScienceHome page
G. M. Reisfield, E. Salazar, and R. L. Bertholf
Rational Use and Interpretation of Urine Drug Testing in Chronic Opioid Therapy
Ann. Clin. Lab. Sci., January 1, 2007; 37(4): 301 - 314.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Clin. Chem.Home page
M. A. ElSohly
Practical Challenges to Positive Drug Tests for Marijuana
Clin. Chem., July 1, 2003; 49(7): 1037 - 1038.
[Full Text] [PDF]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2003 by the American Association for Clinical Chemistry.