HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) 074237.Supplemental data All Versions of this Article: clinchem.2006.074237v1 53/2/300    most recent Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in Web of Science Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Web of Science (6) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Øiestad, E. L. Articles by Christophersen, A. S. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Øiestad, E. L. Articles by Christophersen, A. S. Related Collections General Clinical Chemistry Drug Monitoring and Toxicology Automation and Analytical Techniques

Drug Screening of Preserved Oral Fluid by Liquid Chromatography–Tandem Mass Spectrometry

Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Division of Forensic Toxicology and Drug Abuse, Oslo, Norway.

^aAddress correspondence to this author at: Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Division of Forensic Toxicology and Drug Abuse, P.O. Box 4404 Nydalen, NO-0403 Oslo, Norway. Fax 47-23383233; e-mail elisabeth.oiestad{at}fhi.no.

Background: Oral fluid is an alternative matrix with potential applications in road-side drug screening, work-place testing, drug treatment programs, and epidemiological surveys. Development of methods for extensive drug screening in oral fluid is warranted.

Methods: We developed a liquid chromatography– tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) method for drug screening of preserved oral fluid collected with the Intercept® collection device. Samples were prepared by liquid–liquid extraction with ethylacetate/heptane (4:1). LC-separation was achieved with an Atlantis dC18-column (2.1 x 50 mm, 3 µm particle). Mass detection was performed by positive ion mode electrospray LC-MS/MS and included the following drugs/metabolites: morphine, 6-monoacetylmorphine, codeine, buprenorphine, methadone, amphetamine, methamphetamine, 3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine, 3,4-methylenedioxyamphetamine, 3,4-methylenedioxyethylamphetamine, cocaine, benzoylecgonine, -9-tetrahydrocannabinol, lysergic acid diethylamide, alprazolam, bromazepam, clonazepam, 7-aminoclonazepam, diazepam, N-desmethyldiazepam, 3-OH-diazepam, fenazepam, flunitrazepam, 7-aminoflunitrazepam, lorazepam, nitrazepam, 7-aminonitrazepam, oxazepam, zopiclone, zolpidem, carisoprodol, and meprobamat.

Results: Screening of 32 drugs was performed with a run time of 14 min. Within- and between-day relative CVs varied from 2.0% to 31.8% and from 3.6% to 39.1%, respectively. Extraction recoveries were >50% except for morphine (30%) and benzoylecgonine (0.2%). The concentrations of the lowest calibrator were 1 nmol/L (0.28 µg/L) to 500 nmol/L (68 µg/L), depending on the drug.

Conclusion: The method allowed rapid and sensitive oral fluid screening for the most commonly abused drugs in Norway and will be used for a road-side survey of drug use in normal traffic.

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

				W. M. Bosker and M. A. Huestis Oral Fluid Testing for Drugs of Abuse Clin. Chem., November 1, 2009; 55(11): 1910 - 1931. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				N. Badawi, K. W. Simonsen, A. Steentoft, I. M. Bernhoft, and K. Linnet Simultaneous Screening and Quantification of 29 Drugs of Abuse in Oral Fluid by Solid-Phase Extraction and Ultraperformance LC-MS/MS Clin. Chem., November 1, 2009; 55(11): 2004 - 2018. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]