Clinical Chemistry Siemens Point of Care - Urinalysis
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

Clinical Chemistry 53: 702-710, 2007. First published March 1, 2007; 10.1373/clinchem.2006.081547
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow 081547.Supplemental data
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
clinchem.2006.081547v1
53/4/702    most recent
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
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 ISI Web of Science (2)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Peters, F. T.
Right arrow Articles by Maurer, H. H.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Peters, F. T.
Right arrow Articles by Maurer, H. H.
Related Collections
Right arrow Drug Monitoring and Toxicology
(Clinical Chemistry. 2007;53:702-710.)
© 2007 American Association for Clinical Chemistry, Inc.

Drug Monitoring and Toxicology

Negative-Ion Chemical Ionization Gas Chromatography–Mass Spectrometry Assay for Enantioselective Measurement of Amphetamines in Oral Fluid: Application to a Controlled Study with MDMA and Driving Under the Influence Cases

Frank T. Peters1, Nele Samyn2, Thomas Kraemer1, Wim J. Riedel3 and Hans H. Maurer1,a

1 Department of Experimental and Clinical Toxicology, Saarland University, Homburg (Saar), Germany.
2 National Institute of Criminalistics and Criminology, Brussels, Belgium.
3 Experimental Psychopharmacology Unit, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands

aAddress correspondence to this author at: Institute of Pharmacology and Toxicology, Homburg, D-66421, Germany. Fax +49-6841-16-26051; e-mail hans.maurer{at}uniklinikum-saarland.de.

Background: Enantioselective analysis of amphetamine (AM), methamphetamine (MA), 3,4-methylenedioxyamphetamine (MDA), 3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine (MDMA), and 3,4-methylenedioxyethylamphetamine (MDEA) helps interpret toxicological results. Methods have been described for various matrices, but so far not for oral fluid, a matrix of increasing importance in testing for drugs of abuse, especially in the context of driving under the influence of drugs (DUID).

Methods: After dilution with 200 µL carbonate buffer (pH 9), oral fluid samples (10–50 µL) were derivatized with S-heptafluorobutyrylprolyl chloride. The resulting diastereomers were extracted into 100 µL of cyclohexane, separated by gas chromatography (HP-5MS column), and detected by mass spectrometry in the negative-ion chemical ionization mode (GC-NICI-MS). The method was validated and applied to samples from a controlled study with MDMA and from authentic DUID cases.

Results: The derivatized AM, MA, MDA, MDMA, and MDEA enantiomers were well separated from each other. The method was linear from 5–250 µg/L per enantiomer of MDA and from 25–1250 µg/L per enantiomer of AM, MA, MDMA, and MDEA. With the exception of MDEA, analytical recoveries, repeatability, and intermediate precision were within required limits. The analyte concentrations and enantiomer ratios in the application samples correlated only weakly with corresponding published plasma data.

Conclusions: This sensitive, reliable, and fast GC-NICI-MS assay enantioselectively measures AM, MA, MDA, and MDMA in oral fluid samples. Prediction of plasma concentrations and enantiomer ratios from respective oral fluid data is not possible.






HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2007 by the American Association for Clinical Chemistry.