Clinical Chemistry
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


Clinical Chemistry 0: clinchem.2008.117093v1, 2009; 10.1373/clinchem.2008.117093
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
clinchem.2008.117093v1
55/3/454    most recent
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
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 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 Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Barnes, A. J.
Right arrow Articles by Huestis, M. A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Barnes, A. J.
Right arrow Articles by Huestis, M. A.

Received on September 2, 2008
Accepted on December 22, 2008

Drug Monitoring and Toxicology

Disposition of MDMA and Metabolites in Human Sweat Following Controlled MDMA Administration

Allan J. Barnes 1, Bruno S. De Martinis 2, David A. Gorelick 3, Robert S. Goodwin 1, Erin A. Kolbrich 1, Marilyn A. Huestis 1*

1 Chemistry and Drug Metabolism, Baltimore MD
2 Department of Pathology, Faculty of Medicine of Ribeirão Preto, University of São Paulo, Center of Legal Medicine, Ribeirão Preto, Brazil
3 Office of Scientific Director, Intramural Research Program, National Institute on Drug Abuse, NIH, Baltimore MD

* To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: mhuestis{at}intra.nida.nih.gov.

BACKGROUND: Understanding the excretion of 3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine (MDMA) and metabolites in sweat is vital for interpretation of sweat tests in drug treatment, criminal justice, and workplace programs.

METHODS: Placebo, low (1.0 mg/kg), and high (1.6 mg/kg) doses of oral MDMA were given double-blind in random order to healthy volunteers (n = 15) with histories of MDMA use. Participants resided on the closed clinical research unit for up to 7 days after each dose. Volunteers wore PharmChek® sweat patches (n = 640) before, during, and after controlled dosing. Patches were analyzed by solid phase extraction and GC-MS for MDMA, methylenedioxyamphetamine (MDA), 4-hydroxy-3-methoxyamphetamine (HMA), and 4-hydroxy-3-methoxymethamphetamine (HMMA). Limits of quantification (LOQ) were 2.5 ng/patch for MDMA and 5 ng/patch for HMA, HMMA, and MDA.

RESULTS: MDMA was the primary analyte detected in 382 patches (59.7%), with concentrations up to 3007 ng/patch. MDA was detected in 188 patches (29.4%) at <172 ng/patch, whereas no HMMA or HMA was detected; 224 patches (35.0%) and 60 patches (9.4%) were positive for MDMA and MDA, respectively, at the 25-ng/patch threshold proposed by the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration.

CONCLUSIONS: Sweat testing was shown to be an effective and reliable method for monitoring MDMA use in this controlled MDMA administration study. However, variability in sweat excretion suggests that results should be interpreted qualitatively rather than quantitatively. These data provide a scientific database for interpretation of MDMA sweat test results.







HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH
Copyright © 2009 by the American Association for Clinical Chemistry.