Optimizing screening cutoffs for drugs of abuse in hair using immunoassay for forensic applications.

IF 2.1 4区 医学 Q3 MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL
Arianna Giorgetti, Jennifer P Pascali, Guido Pelletti, Marco Garagnani, Raffaella Roffi, Marialuisa Grech, Paolo Fais
{"title":"Optimizing screening cutoffs for drugs of abuse in hair using immunoassay for forensic applications.","authors":"Arianna Giorgetti, Jennifer P Pascali, Guido Pelletti, Marco Garagnani, Raffaella Roffi, Marialuisa Grech, Paolo Fais","doi":"10.17219/acem/183124","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>In forensic toxicology, positive immunoassay (IA) test results do not hold forensic validity and need to be confirmed with mass spectrometry (MS). On the other hand, a negative result is a strong indication that the drug and/or the drug metabolites are not present in the sample and that confirmatory analyses are not necessary. Consequently, a negative IA result must have forensic validity since it can be admitted in court during a trial.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Screening cutoffs for the analysis of hair samples using immunoassays (IAs) were retrospectively optimized based on the Society of Hair Testing (SoHT) confirmation cutoffs and the utility of the test for forensic applications was discussed.</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>Hair samples taken from 150 patients with a history of drug addiction were analyzed with ILab 650, Werfen (Milan, Italy) using DRI® reagents. Confirmatory analyses were subsequently performed using the ACQUITY UPLC® System, Waters Corporation (Milford, USA). Screening cutoffs were retrospectively optimized using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 162 single positive results were obtained for confirmatory analysis (10 for amphetamines/methamphetamines, 11 for MDMA, 37 for cocaine, 40 for THC, 33 for methadone, and 31 for opiates). The optimized screening cutoffs were 0.27 IA ng/mg for amphetamines, 0.51 IA ng/mg for MDMA, 0.59 IA ng/mg for cocaine, 0.14 IA ng/mg for cannabinoids, 0.63 IA ng/mg for methadone, and 0.26 IA ng/mg for opiates. An area under the curve (AUC) greater than 0.95 was obtained with very high sensitivity and specificity for all drugs.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The presented screening method proved to be a useful technique on hair samples for the classes of drugs most commonly found in Italy and Europe and can be applied to forensic analysis.</p>","PeriodicalId":7306,"journal":{"name":"Advances in Clinical and Experimental Medicine","volume":" ","pages":"75-82"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Advances in Clinical and Experimental Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17219/acem/183124","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: In forensic toxicology, positive immunoassay (IA) test results do not hold forensic validity and need to be confirmed with mass spectrometry (MS). On the other hand, a negative result is a strong indication that the drug and/or the drug metabolites are not present in the sample and that confirmatory analyses are not necessary. Consequently, a negative IA result must have forensic validity since it can be admitted in court during a trial.

Objectives: Screening cutoffs for the analysis of hair samples using immunoassays (IAs) were retrospectively optimized based on the Society of Hair Testing (SoHT) confirmation cutoffs and the utility of the test for forensic applications was discussed.

Material and methods: Hair samples taken from 150 patients with a history of drug addiction were analyzed with ILab 650, Werfen (Milan, Italy) using DRI® reagents. Confirmatory analyses were subsequently performed using the ACQUITY UPLC® System, Waters Corporation (Milford, USA). Screening cutoffs were retrospectively optimized using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis.

Results: A total of 162 single positive results were obtained for confirmatory analysis (10 for amphetamines/methamphetamines, 11 for MDMA, 37 for cocaine, 40 for THC, 33 for methadone, and 31 for opiates). The optimized screening cutoffs were 0.27 IA ng/mg for amphetamines, 0.51 IA ng/mg for MDMA, 0.59 IA ng/mg for cocaine, 0.14 IA ng/mg for cannabinoids, 0.63 IA ng/mg for methadone, and 0.26 IA ng/mg for opiates. An area under the curve (AUC) greater than 0.95 was obtained with very high sensitivity and specificity for all drugs.

Conclusions: The presented screening method proved to be a useful technique on hair samples for the classes of drugs most commonly found in Italy and Europe and can be applied to forensic analysis.

利用免疫测定法优化法医应用中毛发中滥用药物的筛选临界值。
背景:在法医毒理学中,免疫测定(IA)阳性检测结果不具有法医效力,需要用质谱法(MS)进行确认。另一方面,阴性结果则充分说明样本中不存在药物和/或药物代谢物,因此无需进行确证分析。因此,阴性的 IA 结果必须具有法医效力,因为它可以在审判中被法庭采纳:材料与方法:使用 DRI® 试剂对 150 名有吸毒史的患者的毛发样本进行了分析,样本来自 Werfen 公司的 ILab 650(意大利米兰)。随后使用沃特世公司(美国米尔福德)的 ACQUITY UPLC® 系统进行了确证分析。使用接收器操作特征(ROC)分析对筛查截断点进行了回顾性优化:确证分析共获得 162 个单一阳性结果(苯丙胺/甲基苯丙胺 10 个、亚甲二氧基甲基苯丙胺 11 个、可卡因 37 个、四氢大麻酚 40 个、美沙酮 33 个和阿片剂 31 个)。优化筛选临界值为:苯丙胺 0.27 IA 纳克/毫克,摇头丸 0.51 IA 纳克/毫克,可卡因 0.59 IA 纳克/毫克,大麻素 0.14 IA 纳克/毫克,美沙酮 0.63 IA 纳克/毫克,阿片剂 0.26 IA 纳克/毫克。对所有药物的灵敏度和特异性都非常高,曲线下面积(AUC)大于 0.95:结论:事实证明,所介绍的筛选方法是一种有用的技术,可用于毛发样本对意大利和欧洲最常见的毒品类别进行筛选,并可应用于法医分析。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Advances in Clinical and Experimental Medicine
Advances in Clinical and Experimental Medicine MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL-
CiteScore
3.70
自引率
4.80%
发文量
153
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Advances in Clinical and Experimental Medicine has been published by the Wroclaw Medical University since 1992. Establishing the medical journal was the idea of Prof. Bogumił Halawa, Chair of the Department of Cardiology, and was fully supported by the Rector of Wroclaw Medical University, Prof. Zbigniew Knapik. Prof. Halawa was also the first editor-in-chief, between 1992-1997. The journal, then entitled "Postępy Medycyny Klinicznej i Doświadczalnej", appeared quarterly. Prof. Leszek Paradowski was editor-in-chief from 1997-1999. In 1998 he initiated alterations in the profile and cover design of the journal which were accepted by the Editorial Board. The title was changed to Advances in Clinical and Experimental Medicine. Articles in English were welcomed. A number of outstanding representatives of medical science from Poland and abroad were invited to participate in the newly established International Editorial Staff. Prof. Antonina Harłozińska-Szmyrka was editor-in-chief in years 2000-2005, in years 2006-2007 once again prof. Leszek Paradowski and prof. Maria Podolak-Dawidziak was editor-in-chief in years 2008-2016. Since 2017 the editor-in chief is prof. Maciej Bagłaj. Since July 2005, original papers have been published only in English. Case reports are no longer accepted. The manuscripts are reviewed by two independent reviewers and a statistical reviewer, and English texts are proofread by a native speaker. The journal has been indexed in several databases: Scopus, Ulrich’sTM International Periodicals Directory, Index Copernicus and since 2007 in Thomson Reuters databases: Science Citation Index Expanded i Journal Citation Reports/Science Edition. In 2010 the journal obtained Impact Factor which is now 1.179 pts. Articles published in the journal are worth 15 points among Polish journals according to the Polish Committee for Scientific Research and 169.43 points according to the Index Copernicus. Since November 7, 2012, Advances in Clinical and Experimental Medicine has been indexed and included in National Library of Medicine’s MEDLINE database. English abstracts printed in the journal are included and searchable using PubMed http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信