Kavinda De Silva (Presenter)
MTL
Authorship: Kavinda De Silva, Mariko Nakano, Siobhan McKenney-Hara
MTL
| Short Abstract Due to a recent increase in the demand of Oral Fluid analysis, many challenges have been set forth in developing robust cost effective assays for determination of illicit drugs. As an alternate matrix to traditional urine for monitoring drugs, oral fluids poses far more challenges due to stability, detection limits and sample clean up. A method was developed for cost effective, dilute and shoot assay with linear ranges of 1-300ng/mL for selective drugs with R2 > 0.99 was validated. |
Long Abstract
Introduction:
Due to a recent increase in the demand of Oral Fluid analysis, many challenges have been set forth in developing robust cost effective assays for determination of illicit drugs. Forensic testing on oral fluid have been increasingly appreciated due to reduction in time and simplicity of collection, reduction of adulteration and substitution. It has been challenging to develop a robust cost effective assay for the determination of illicit drugs in oral fluids.
Materials & Method
Standards and samples were diluted using 50:50 Methanol:Water diluen and t filtered using filter vials. These samples were analyzed on SCIEX 6500 QQQ coupled with Shimadzu LC. Biphenyl column from Phenomenex was used to attain best chromatographic resolutions. LC-MS/MS method was validated according to CLIA guidelines.
Results & Discussions
Analytical Measurement Range (AMR) was assessed using 8 standards in 6 replicates that were evaluated in multiple days. This assay portrayed exceptional linearity (2.5 dynamic range) and precision for the analytes in the illicit drugs panel Table 1. Intra-day and Inter-day precision was <20%. This assay did not exhibit any matrix suppression or enhancements.
Table 1: AMR
Transition name LOQ
(ng/mL) Linear range (ng/mL) Calibrator
%CV R value
6-MAM 1 Quant 1 1-300 < 8.7 0.99580
6-MAM 2 Ref 1 1 1-300 < 16.9 0.99371
Amphetamine 1 Quant 5 5-1500 < 6.5 0.99719
Amphetamine 2 Ref 1 5 5-1500 < 7.5 0.99699
Benzoylecgonine 1 Quant 1 1-300 < 9.6 0.99691
Benzoylecgonine 2 Ref 1 1 1-300 < 13.7 0.99058
MDA 1 Quant 1 1-300 < 17.3 0.99285
MDA 2 Ref 1 1 1-300 < 12.9 0.99109
MDMA 1 Quant 10 10-3000 < 5.6 0.99516
MDMA 2 Ref 1 10 10-3000 < 7.5 0.99406
Methamphetamine 1 Quant 5 5-1500 < 11.3 0.99314
Methamphetamine 2 Ref 1 5 5-1500 < 12.2 0.99344
Oxycodone 1 Quant 2.5 2.5-750 < 7.0 0.99698
Oxycodone 2 Ref 1 2.5 2.5-750 < 13.5 0.99601
Oxymorphone 1 Quant 2.5 2.5-750 < 12.8 0.99297
Oxymorphone 2 Ref 1 2.5 2.5-750 < 13.9 0.99251
Phencyclidine 1 Quant 1 1-300 < 13.3 0.99359
Phencyclidine 2 Ref 1 1 1-300 < 13.3 0.99352
THC 1 Quant 5 5-1500 < 9.0 0.99533
THC 2 Ref 1 5 5-1500 < 12.7 0.99479
Conclusion
The method described here provides a linear correlation between concentration and peak response over the therapeutic dosage range. The rapid analysis time including both sample prep and LC run time makes the proposed method very suitable for analysis of illicit drugs in oral fluids in a high throughput laboratory environment.
References & Acknowledgements:
Federal Register. 2015. 80(94) 28054-28151
Drummer, OH. Drug testing in oral fluid. Clin Biochem Rev. 2006 27; 147-59.
| Description | Y/N | Source |
| Grants | no | |
| Salary | yes | MTL |
| Board Member | no | |
| Stock | no | |
| Expenses | yes | MTL |
IP Royalty: no
| Planning to mention or discuss specific products or technology of the company(ies) listed above: | yes |