We developed a rapid, sensitive, and simple-to-use multi-analyte diagnostic device for the detection of drugs of abuse in urine: the ONTRAK TESTCUP. No sample or reagent handling is necessary with this device, and the device also serves as the sample collection cup. The TESTCUP contains immunochromatographic reagents that qualitatively and simultaneously detect the presence of benzoylecgonine, morphine, and cannabinoids (delta9-tetrahydrocannabinol [THC] in urine. It is based on the principle of competition between the drug in the sample and membrane- immobilized drug conjugate for antidrug antibodies coated on blue-dyed microparticles. Each drug assay has its own strip, which contains an antibody specific to benzoylecgonine, morphine, or THC. A sample is collected in the TESTCUP, a lid is placed on it, and a chamber at the top of the cup is filled with urine by inverting the cup for 5 s. Urine proceeds down immunochromatographic strips, and the assays are developed. In approximately 3-5 min, the Test Valid bars appear, a decal is removed from the detection window, and the results are interpreted. The appearance of a colored bar at the detection window for each drug indicates a negative result. The absence of color in any specific drug detection window indicates a positive result for that drug. If a positive result is obtained, the same device (cup) can be used for gas chromatographic-mass spectrometric (GC-MS) confirmation. When the precision of the TESTCUP was evaluated, the results obtained were as follows: for urine controls containing drug at 50% of its cutoff concentration, the results were greater than or equal to 96, 98, and 96% negative for benzoylecgonine, morphine, and THC, respectively; for urine controls containing drug at 120% of its cutoff concentration, the results were greater than or equal to 97, 100, and 98% positive for benzoylecgonine, morphine, and THC, respectively. The correlations of clinical sample results using the TESTCUP versus results by GC-MS and the ONTRAK and OnLine assays were assessed. There was 100% agreement between samples prescreened positive by GC-MS and positive by TESTCUP for all three assays. There was 100% agreement between TESTCUP and ONTRAK results and between TESTCUP and OnLine results when testing clinical samples positive and negative for cocaine (benzoylecgonine) or THC. Greater than 99% agreement was observed between TESTCUP and ONTRAK results and between TESTCUP and OnLine results when testing clinical samples positive and negative for morphine. The cross-reactivity of the TESTCUP assay to related drugs and drug metabolites was also determined, and the results were similar to those of the ONTRAK and OnLine assays.

No abstract

Nitrite ion has been identified as the active ingredient of two commercial adulterants that could cause discrepant results between the immunoassay screening and gas chromatographic-mass spectrometric (GC-MS) confirmation of 11-nor-delta9-tetrahydrocannabinol-9-carboxylic acid (THCCOOH) in urine. Procedures to chemically convert the nitrite ion at the beginning of sample preparation for GC-MS analysis may not overcome all nitrite adulteration cases because portions of the THCCOOH might have been lost between the time of sample collection and the time of analysis. This study was conducted to further investigate the influence of both urine sample matrix and the duration of nitrite exposure on nitrite interference of THCCOOH detection. Forty clinical "THC-positive samples" that had been screened and confirmed positive for the presence of THCCOOH were spiked with 0.15M or 0.3M of nitrite. The levels of THCCOOH at various time intervals after nitrite spiking were monitored by instrument-based cannabinoids immunoassays (Syva EMIT d.a.u. and/or Roche Abuscreen ONLINE assays) and by an onsite THC immunoassay (Roche ONTRAK TESTSTIK). Results from this report demonstrate that the two outstanding "urine specimen factors" that dictated the effectiveness of the nitrite adulteration were urinary pH and the original drug concentration before nitrite spiking. Significant decreases in the immunoassay results could be observed within 4 h of nitrite treatment in the majority of samples with acidic urinary pH values. Regardless of their original concentration of THCCOOH (GC-MS ranging from 33 to 488 ng/mL), all of the 20 samples that had acidic pH values gave negative immunoassay results 1 day after nitrite adulteration. In contrast, the immunoassay results of samples with neutral or basic pH values were less affected by nitrite exposure in the same studies. Approximately two-thirds of the samples with pH values greater than 7.0 remained immunoassay-positive 3 days after nitrite spiking. Nevertheless, some of the adulterated urine that showed no change in immunoassay results might exhibit significant decrease in GC-MS recoveries even with bisulfite treatment, collaborating with the observations that a portion of samples screened positive with THC immunoassay in the laboratory could fail to confirm with GC-MS analysis. The decrease or loss of immunoassay detectable cannabinoid cross-reactives in acidic "THC-positive samples" can be attenuated by chemically increasing the pH value of the samples to the basic pH range.

The adulteration of urine specimens with nitrite ion hasseen shown to mask the gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS) confirmation testing of marijuana use. This study was designed to further investigate the effect of nitrite adulteration on the detection of five commonly abused drugs by immunoassay screening and GC-MS analysis. The drugs tested are cocaine metabolite (benzoylecgonine), morphine, 11-nor-delta-tetrahydrocannabinol-9-carboxylic acid (THCCOOH), amphetamine, and phencyclidine. The immunoassays evaluated included the instrument-based Abuscreen ONLINE assays, the on-site Abuscreen ONTRAK assays, and the one-step ONTRAK TESTCUP-5 assay. Multianalyte standards containing various levels of drugs were used to test the influence of both potassium and sodium nitrite. In the ONLINE immunoassays, the presence of up to 1.0M nitrite in the multianalyte standards had no significant effect for benzoylecgonine, morphine, and phencyclidine assays. With a high concentration of nitrite, ONLINE became more sensitive for amphetamine (detected more drug than what was expected) and less sensitive for THCCOOH (detected less drug than what was expected). No effects of nitrite were observed on the results of the Abuscreen ONTRAK assays. Similarly, no effects were observed on the absolute qualitative results of the TESTCUP-5 when testing the nitrite-adulterated standards. However, the produced intensities of the signals that indicate the negative test results were slightly lowered in the THC and phencyclidine assays. The presence of 1.0M of nitrite did not show dramatic interference with the GC-MS analysis of benzoylecgonine, morphine, amphetamine, and phencyclidine. In contrast, nitrite ion significantly interfered with the detection of THCCOOH by GC-MS. The presence of 0.03M of nitrite ion resulted in significant loss in the recovery of THCCOOH and its internal standard by GC-MS. The problem of nitrite adulteration could be alleviated by sodium bisulfite treatment even when the specimens were spiked with 1.0M of nitrite ion. Although bisulfite treatment decomposed all nitrite ions in the sample to recover the remaining THCCOOH by GC-MS, the net recovery of THCCOOH depended on urinary pH and time and conditions of sample storage. The presence of nitrite concentrations that might arise from all possible natural sources, including microorganisms, pathological conditions, and medications, did not interfere with the GC-MS analysis of THCCOOH.

This article presents the use of caprylic acid (CA) to precipitate impurities from the protein A capture column elution pool for the purification of monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) with the objective of developing a two chromatography step antibody purification process. A CA-induced impurity precipitation in the protein A column elution pool was evaluated as an alternative method to polishing chromatography techniques for use in the purification of mAbs. Parameters including pH, CA concentrations, mixing time, mAb concentrations, buffer systems, and incubation temperatures were evaluated on their impacts on the impurity removal, high-molecular weight (HMW) formation and precipitation step yield. Both pH and CA concentration, but not mAb concentrations and buffer systems, are key parameters that can affect host-cell proteins (HCPs) clearance, HMW species, and yield. CA precipitation removes HCPs and some HMW species to the acceptable levels under the optimal conditions. The CA precipitation process is robust at 15-25°C. For all five mAbs tested in this study, the optimal CA concentration range is 0.5-1.0%, while the pH range is from 5.0 to 6.0. A purification process using two chromatography steps (protein A capture column and ion exchange polishing column) in combination with CA-based impurity precipitation step can be used as a robust downstream process for mAb molecules with a broad range of isoelectric points. Residual CA can be effectively removed by the subsequent polishing cation exchange chromatography.