Evaluating the Sensitivity, Selectivity, and Cross-Reactivity of Lateral Flow Immunoassay Xylazine Test Strips.

IF 1.8 Q3 MEDICAL LABORATORY TECHNOLOGY
Lena Scott, Katherine Davis, Ju Nyeong Park, Saman Majeed
{"title":"Evaluating the Sensitivity, Selectivity, and Cross-Reactivity of Lateral Flow Immunoassay Xylazine Test Strips.","authors":"Lena Scott, Katherine Davis, Ju Nyeong Park, Saman Majeed","doi":"10.1093/jalm/jfaf037","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The rise of xylazine-adulterated substances poses significant public health risks due to their severe side effects, creating an urgent need for reliable detection methods. Lateral flow immunoassay-based xylazine test strips (XTS) have emerged as a potential harm reduction tool for quick, easy, and field-based drug checking, but their effectiveness remains underexplored. Although commercial XTS from multiple vendors are available, the lack of regulatory standards raises concerns regarding their accuracy.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This study evaluated the performance of commercially available XTS from 7 different vendors to investigate the interproduct comparison of sensitivity, precision, cross-reactivity, and stability over changes in human urine pH and extended storage under ambient and extreme temperature conditions.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>All test strips maintained their sensitivity, reproducibility, and effectiveness despite urinary pH fluctuation and storage temperatures over 6 weeks. However, concentration-dependent false-positive results were observed when the strips were tested with drugs and adulterants commonly encountered in seized samples. Interfering compounds including lidocaine, levamisole, ketamine, methamphetamine, diphenhydramine, promethazine, and cetirizine displayed varying degrees of cross-reactivity with different XTS.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This study underscores the variability in performance among commercially available XTS, highlighting their implications for use in harm reduction and forensic settings. While XTS are capable of detecting xylazine at low concentrations, the potential for false-positive results due to cross-reactivity with other drugs necessitates caution in their interpretation. Hence, XTS may serve as a viable harm reduction tool, provided that their cross-reactivity limitations are thoroughly documented and they are incorporated as part of a broader harm reduction strategy.</p>","PeriodicalId":46361,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Applied Laboratory Medicine","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Applied Laboratory Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jalm/jfaf037","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MEDICAL LABORATORY TECHNOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The rise of xylazine-adulterated substances poses significant public health risks due to their severe side effects, creating an urgent need for reliable detection methods. Lateral flow immunoassay-based xylazine test strips (XTS) have emerged as a potential harm reduction tool for quick, easy, and field-based drug checking, but their effectiveness remains underexplored. Although commercial XTS from multiple vendors are available, the lack of regulatory standards raises concerns regarding their accuracy.

Methods: This study evaluated the performance of commercially available XTS from 7 different vendors to investigate the interproduct comparison of sensitivity, precision, cross-reactivity, and stability over changes in human urine pH and extended storage under ambient and extreme temperature conditions.

Results: All test strips maintained their sensitivity, reproducibility, and effectiveness despite urinary pH fluctuation and storage temperatures over 6 weeks. However, concentration-dependent false-positive results were observed when the strips were tested with drugs and adulterants commonly encountered in seized samples. Interfering compounds including lidocaine, levamisole, ketamine, methamphetamine, diphenhydramine, promethazine, and cetirizine displayed varying degrees of cross-reactivity with different XTS.

Conclusions: This study underscores the variability in performance among commercially available XTS, highlighting their implications for use in harm reduction and forensic settings. While XTS are capable of detecting xylazine at low concentrations, the potential for false-positive results due to cross-reactivity with other drugs necessitates caution in their interpretation. Hence, XTS may serve as a viable harm reduction tool, provided that their cross-reactivity limitations are thoroughly documented and they are incorporated as part of a broader harm reduction strategy.

背景:掺杂异丙嗪的药物因其严重的副作用而对公众健康构成重大威胁,因此迫切需要可靠的检测方法。基于侧流免疫测定的甲基异丙嗪试纸(XTS)已成为一种潜在的减少危害的工具,可用于快速、简便的现场药物检查,但其有效性仍未得到充分探索。虽然有多家供应商提供商用 XTS,但由于缺乏监管标准,人们对其准确性表示担忧:本研究评估了 7 家不同供应商提供的市售 XTS 的性能,以调查产品间灵敏度、精确度、交叉反应性和稳定性在人体尿液 pH 值变化以及在环境和极端温度条件下长期储存时的比较情况:结果:尽管尿液 pH 值会发生变化,储存温度也会升高,但所有试纸都能在 6 周内保持灵敏度、再现性和有效性。然而,当使用缉获样本中常见的药物和掺杂物对试纸进行检测时,会出现浓度依赖性假阳性结果。包括利多卡因、左旋咪唑、氯胺酮、甲基苯丙胺、苯海拉明、异丙嗪和西替利嗪在内的干扰化合物与不同的 XTS 呈不同程度的交叉反应:本研究强调了市售 XTS 的性能差异,突出了它们在减低危害和法医环境中使用的意义。虽然 XTS 能够检测出低浓度的甲苯噻嗪,但由于与其他药物的交叉反应可能导致假阳性结果,因此在解释时必须谨慎。因此,XTS 可以作为一种可行的减低危害工具,但必须彻底记录其交叉反应的局限性,并将其作为更广泛的减低危害战略的一部分。
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
Journal of Applied Laboratory Medicine
Journal of Applied Laboratory Medicine MEDICAL LABORATORY TECHNOLOGY-
CiteScore
3.70
自引率
5.00%
发文量
137
×
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