BACKGROUND: A sensitive gas chromatography-negative ion chemical ionization mass spectrometry (GC/MS-NICI) method was developed and validated for the measurement of Delta(9)-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) in human sweat patches. METHODS: THC-d(0) and THC-d(3) were added to worn blank sweat patches (PharmChek; PharmChem Incorporated) and extracted with 3 mL of methanol-0.2 mol/L sodium acetate buffer (pH 5.0, 3:1 by volume) on a reciprocating shaker at ambient temperature for 30 min. Extracted solution (2 mL) was diluted with 8 mL of 0.1 mol/L sodium acetate buffer (pH 4.5) and extracted by use of solid-phase extraction columns (CleanScreen; United Chemical Technologies). Dried extracts were derivatized with trifluoroacetic acid and analyzed with an Agilent 6890 gas chromatograph interfaced with an Agilent 5973 mass selective detector operated in NICI-selected ion-monitoring mode. RESULTS: The lower limits of detection and quantification for THC in human sweat were 0.2 and 0.4 ng/patch, respectively. The calibration curve was linear from 0.4 to 10 ng/patch (R(2) >0.995). Overall recovery of THC from blank worn patches to which 0.6, 4.0, and 8.0 ng of THC had been added was 44-46%. Assay imprecision, expressed as CV, was <10% for 0.6, 4.0, and 8.0 ng/patch quality-control samples. Twenty-one potential interfering compounds (50 ng/patch) added to low quality-control samples (0.6 ng/patch) did not influence THC quantification. CONCLUSIONS: This GC/MS-NICI assay for THC in human sweat provides adequate sensitivity and performance characteristics for analyzing THC in sweat patches and meets the requirements of the proposed Substance Abuse and Mental Health Administration's guidelines for sweat testing.
BACKGROUND: A sensitive gas chromatography-negative ion chemical ionization mass spectrometry (GC/MS-NICI) method was developed and validated for the measurement of Delta(9)-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) in human sweat patches. METHODS:THC-d(0) and THC-d(3) were added to worn blank sweat patches (PharmChek; PharmChem Incorporated) and extracted with 3 mL of methanol-0.2 mol/L sodium acetate buffer (pH 5.0, 3:1 by volume) on a reciprocating shaker at ambient temperature for 30 min. Extracted solution (2 mL) was diluted with 8 mL of 0.1 mol/L sodium acetate buffer (pH 4.5) and extracted by use of solid-phase extraction columns (CleanScreen; United Chemical Technologies). Dried extracts were derivatized with trifluoroacetic acid and analyzed with an Agilent 6890 gas chromatograph interfaced with an Agilent 5973 mass selective detector operated in NICI-selected ion-monitoring mode. RESULTS: The lower limits of detection and quantification for THC in human sweat were 0.2 and 0.4 ng/patch, respectively. The calibration curve was linear from 0.4 to 10 ng/patch (R(2) >0.995). Overall recovery of THC from blank worn patches to which 0.6, 4.0, and 8.0 ng of THC had been added was 44-46%. Assay imprecision, expressed as CV, was <10% for 0.6, 4.0, and 8.0 ng/patch quality-control samples. Twenty-one potential interfering compounds (50 ng/patch) added to low quality-control samples (0.6 ng/patch) did not influence THC quantification. CONCLUSIONS: This GC/MS-NICI assay for THC in human sweat provides adequate sensitivity and performance characteristics for analyzing THC in sweat patches and meets the requirements of the proposed Substance Abuse and Mental Health Administration's guidelines for sweat testing.
Authors: Alexander L Wallace; Kristin E Maple; Alicia T Barr; Krista M Lisdahl Journal: Psychopharmacology (Berl) Date: 2020-07-26 Impact factor: 4.530
Authors: Michael L Smith; Shawn P Vorce; Justin M Holler; Eric Shimomura; Joe Magluilo; Aaron J Jacobs; Marilyn A Huestis Journal: J Anal Toxicol Date: 2007-06 Impact factor: 3.367
Authors: Allan J Barnes; Bertrand R Brunet; Robin E Choo; Patrick Mura; Rolley E Johnson; Hendrée E Jones; Marilyn A Huestis Journal: Ther Drug Monit Date: 2010-08 Impact factor: 3.681
Authors: Sarah K Himes; Karl B Scheidweiler; Olof Beck; David A Gorelick; Nathalie A Desrosiers; Marilyn A Huestis Journal: Clin Chem Date: 2013-09-17 Impact factor: 8.327
Authors: Marilyn A Huestis; Karl B Scheidweiler; Takeshi Saito; Neil Fortner; Tsadik Abraham; Richard A Gustafson; Michael L Smith Journal: Forensic Sci Int Date: 2007-05-03 Impact factor: 2.395
Authors: Bertrand R Brunet; Allan J Barnes; Karl B Scheidweiler; Patrick Mura; Marilyn A Huestis Journal: Anal Bioanal Chem Date: 2008-07-08 Impact factor: 4.142
Authors: Bruno S De Martinis; Allan J Barnes; Karl B Scheidweiler; Marilyn A Huestis Journal: J Chromatogr B Analyt Technol Biomed Life Sci Date: 2007-02-15 Impact factor: 3.205
Authors: Ross H Lowe; Erin L Karschner; Eugene W Schwilke; Allan J Barnes; Marilyn A Huestis Journal: J Chromatogr A Date: 2007-07-06 Impact factor: 4.759