A new automated urine fentanyl immunoassay: Technical performance and clinical utility for monitoring fentanyl compliance

Snyder, Marion L.; Jarolím, Petr; Melanson, Stacy E.F.

doi:10.1016/j.cca.2011.01.029

Cited by 24 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Therefore, there is a need for a quick, sensitive, and highly specific method for the determination of fentanyl and fentanyl analogs in both seized drugs and toxicological samples. Currently, the published screening methods for fentanyls include spot tests, immunoassays, ion mobility spectrometry, and GC/MS . Other analytical techniques, such as IR, Raman, SERS, and LC/MS have also been studied .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Surface‐enhanced Raman spectroscopy, Raman, and density functional theoretical analyses of fentanyl and six analogs

Deriu

Mebel

et al. 2019

J Raman Spectroscopy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We examined fentanyl and its six analogs using wB97XD/cc‐pVTZ density functional theoretical (DFT) calculations as well as Raman and Surface‐enhanced Raman spectroscopy (SERS). The in silico DFT calculations provided the vibrational frequencies, Raman activities, and normal mode assignment for each analog. Raman spectroscopy can detect crystalline fentanyl analogs but cannot obtain bands for samples in solution. Therefore, we utilized gold/silver nanospheres and gold/silver nanostars to examine them. The gold/silver nanostars provided stronger signals for the fentanyl analogs, and their SERS spectra can easily distinguish these fentanyl analogs from nonfentanyl opioids and other common drugs of abuse using principle component analysis and other statistical tests. Overall, our results demonstrate that SERS shows great potential to distinguish fentanyl analogs and detect trace quantities of these compounds in mixtures of seized drugs.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Surface‐enhanced Raman spectroscopy, Raman, and density functional theoretical analyses of fentanyl and six analogs

Deriu

Mebel

et al. 2019

J Raman Spectroscopy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Analysis of fentanyl in biological matrices has been achieved using immunoassays; but these tests are prone to cross-reactivity issues, or are not able to detect multiple analogs [11, 13, 14]. Analytical techniques such as liquid chromatography with ultraviolet detection (LC-UV), gas chromatography with nitrogen phosphorous detection, gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS) and liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) [15] have also been used to successfully quantitate fentanyls.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of two automated solid phase extractions for the detection of ten fentanyl analogs and metabolites in human urine using liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry

Shaner

Kaplan

Hamelin

et al. 2014

Journal of Chromatography B

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Two types of automated solid phase extraction (SPE) were assessed for the determination of human exposure to fentanyls in urine. High sensitivity is required to detect these compounds following exposure because of the low dose required for therapeutic effect and the rapid clearance from the body for these compounds. To achieve this sensitivity, two acceptable methods for the detection of human exposure to seven fentanyl analogs and three metabolites were developed using either off-line 96-well plate SPE or on-line SPE. Each system offers different advantages: off-line 96-well plate SPE allows for high throughput analysis of many samples, which is needed for large sample numbers, while on-line SPE removes almost all analyst manipulation of the samples, minimizing the analyst time needed for sample preparation. Both sample preparations were coupled with reversed phase liquid chromatography and isotope dilution tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) for analyte detection. For both methods, the resulting precision was within 15%, the accuracy within 25%, and the sensitivity was comparable with the limits of detection ranging from 0.002-0.041ng/mL. Additionally, matrix effects were substantially decreased from previous reports for both extraction protocols. The results of this comparison showed that both methods were acceptable for the detection of exposures to fentanyl analogs and metabolites in urine.

show abstract

“…When 4 urine samples showing negative responses with the DRI assay were re‐analyzed after spiking with 1 or 2 ng/mL fentanyl (Figure B), the test response increased in a dose‐dependent manner even somewhat more than expected (~1.5 times the expected value). Previous studies have demonstrated considerable signal suppression with fentanyl immunoassays for acidic (pH < 4) urine samples, but as urinary pH is normally in the range 5–7 this is unlikely to have influenced the present results (the pH of samples was not determined). Anyway, these observations indicated a risk for obtaining false low (false negative) test results with the SEFRIA and, mainly, the DRI assay due to matrix effects, for urine samples containing fentanyl in the low ng/mL concentration range.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 69%

Detectability of fentanyl and designer fentanyls in urine by 3 commercial fentanyl immunoassays

Helander

Stojanović

Villén

et al. 2018

Drug Testing and Analysis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In recent times, structural variants of fentanyl (designer fentanyls) have appeared on the recreational drug market for new psychoactive substances (NPS). These potent opioids have caused harmful intoxications and increased opioid-related mortality in many countries. This work evaluated 3 commercial immunoassays for fentanyl screening in urine and investigated whether they are useful also for screening of designer fentanyls. The assays examined were the Thermo DRI® Fentanyl Enzyme Immunoassay, the ARK™ Fentanyl Assay homogeneous enzyme immunoassay, and the Immunalysis® Fentanyl Urine SEFRIA™ Drug Screening Kit. A liquid chromatography-high-resolution mass spectrometry method was used as reference. The DRI fentanyl immunoassay generated somewhat higher assay imprecision values (%CV) compared with the ARK™ and SEFRIA™ assays, but all assays showed %CV values acceptable for routine use. The 3 assays showed overall good detectability (33%-95% cross-reactivity) for blank urine samples spiked with acetylfentanyl, acrylfentanyl, butyrfentanyl, 4-chloroisobutyrfentanyl, 4-fluorobutyrfentanyl, 4-fluorofentanyl, 4-fluoroisobutyrfentnyl, isobutyrfentanyl, methoxyacetylfentanyl, or tetrahydrofuranfentanyl, whereas 4-methoxybutyrfentanyl (all assays) and 2-fluorofentanyl (DRI assay) showed low cross-reactivity. A good detectability of designer fentanyls was confirmed in urine samples from authentic acute intoxications. In conclusion, the present results demonstrate that the urinary fentanyl immunoassays are generally useful also for preliminary screening of fentanyl analogs sold as NPS. When the SEFRIA™ assay was applied for testing of 980 urine samples from patients treated for drug dependence in Sweden, only 1 sample was confirmed positive for fentanyl.

show abstract

A new automated urine fentanyl immunoassay: Technical performance and clinical utility for monitoring fentanyl compliance

Cited by 24 publications

References 13 publications

Surface‐enhanced Raman spectroscopy, Raman, and density functional theoretical analyses of fentanyl and six analogs

Surface‐enhanced Raman spectroscopy, Raman, and density functional theoretical analyses of fentanyl and six analogs

Comparison of two automated solid phase extractions for the detection of ten fentanyl analogs and metabolites in human urine using liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry

Detectability of fentanyl and designer fentanyls in urine by 3 commercial fentanyl immunoassays

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About