Home Medicine Immunoassay screening in urine for synthetic cannabinoids – an evaluation of the diagnostic efficiency
Article
Licensed
Unlicensed Requires Authentication

Immunoassay screening in urine for synthetic cannabinoids – an evaluation of the diagnostic efficiency

  • Florian Franz , Verena Angerer , Hanna Jechle , Melanie Pegoro , Harald Ertl , Georg Weinfurtner , David Janele , Christian Schlögl , Matthias Friedl , Stefan Gerl , Reinhard Mielke , Ralf Zehnle , Matthias Wagner , Bjoern Moosmann and Volker Auwärter EMAIL logo
Published/Copyright: January 28, 2017

Abstract

Background:

The abuse of synthetic cannabinoids (SCs) as presumed legal alternative to cannabis poses a great risk to public health. For economic reasons many laboratories use immunoassays (IAs) to screen for these substances in urine. However, the structural diversity and high potency of these designer drugs places high demands on IAs regarding cross-reactivity of the antibodies used and detection limits.

Methods:

Two retrospective studies were carried out in order to evaluate the capability of two homogenous enzyme IAs for the detection of currently prevalent SCs in authentic urine samples. Urine samples were analyzed utilizing a ‘JWH-018’ kit and a ‘UR-144’ kit. The IA results were confirmed by an up-to-date liquid chromatography-electrospray ionization-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-ESI-MS/MS) screening method covering metabolites of 45 SCs.

Results:

The first study (n=549) showed an 8% prevalence of SCs use (LC-MS/MS analysis) among inpatients of forensic-psychiatric clinics, whereas all samples were tested negative by the IAs. In a second study (n=200) the combined application of both IAs led to a sensitivity of 2% and a diagnostic accuracy of 51% when applying the recommended IA cut-offs. Overall, 10 different currently prevalent SCs were detected in this population. The results can be explained by an insufficient cross-reactivity of the antibodies towards current SCs in combination with relatively high detection limits of the IAs.

Conclusions:

In light of the presented study data it is strongly recommended not to rely on the evaluated IA tests for SCs in clinical or forensic settings. For IA kits of other providers similar results can be expected.


Article note:

Parts of this work have been presented at the 19th GTFCh Symposium (Mosbach, Germany), the 53rd TIAFT Meeting (Florence, Italy), the 7th EAFS Conference (Prague, Czech Republic), the 94th DGRM Meeting (Leipzig, Germany) and the 12th DGKL Meeting (Leipzig, Germany).



Corresponding author: Prof. Dr. Volker Auwärter, Institute of Forensic Medicine, Forensic Toxicology, Medical Center – University of Freiburg, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, Albertstraße 9, 79104 Freiburg, Germany, Phone: +49 761 203 6862, Fax: +49 761 203 6826

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank Raija Treffeisen, Kathrin Riedy and Manuel Sandmeyer for technical assistance.

  1. Author contributions: All the authors have accepted responsibility for the entire content of this submitted manuscript and approved submission.

  2. Research funding: The research activities of the Institute of Forensic Medicine Freiburg were financially supported by the ‘Prevention of and Fight against Crime’ program of the European Commission Directorate-General for Justice (JUST/2013/ISEC/DRUGS/AG/6421) and the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (GZ: INST 380/92-1 FUGG).

  3. Employment or leadership: None declared.

  4. Honorarium: None declared.

  5. Competing interests: The funding organization(s) played no role in the study design; in the collection, analysis, and interpretation of data; in the writing of the report; or in the decision to submit the report for publication.

References

1. Castaneto MS, Gorelick DA, Desrosiers NA, Hartman RL, Pirard S, Huestis MA. Synthetic cannabinoids: epidemiology, pharmacodynamics, and clinical implications. Drug Alcohol Depend 2014;144:12–41.10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2014.08.005Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

2. Kemp AM, Clark MS, Dobbs T, Galli R, Sherman J, Cox R. Top 10 facts you need to know about synthetic cannabinoids: not so nice spice. Am J Med 2016;129:240–4.10.1016/j.amjmed.2015.10.008Search in Google Scholar PubMed

3. Bretteville-Jensen AL, Tuv SS, Bilgrei OR, Fjeld B, Bachs L. Synthetic cannabinoids and cathinones: prevalence and markets. Forensic Sci Rev 2013;25:7–26.Search in Google Scholar

4. EMCDDA. European drug report 2016: trends and developments. Lisbon: Publications Office of the European Union, 2016.Search in Google Scholar

5. UNODC. World drug report 2015. United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, 2015.Search in Google Scholar

6. Chung H, Lee J, Kim E. Trends of novel psychoactive substances (NPSs) and their fatal cases. Forensic Toxicol 2016;34:1–11.10.1007/s11419-015-0286-5Search in Google Scholar

7. Hermanns-Clausen M, Kneisel S, Szabo B, Auwärter V. Acute toxicity due to the confirmed consumption of synthetic cannabinoids: clinical and laboratory findings. Addiction 2013;108:534–44.10.1111/j.1360-0443.2012.04078.xSearch in Google Scholar PubMed

8. EMCDDA. Early warning system reports. Accesible via EDND database of the EMCDDA. Accessed: 11 Feb 2014.Search in Google Scholar

9. Moosmann B, Angerer V, Auwärter V. Inhomogeneities in herbal mixtures: a serious risk for consumers. Forensic Toxicol 2015;33:54–60.10.1007/s11419-014-0247-4Search in Google Scholar

10. Castaneto MS, Scheidweiler KB, Gandhi A, Wohlfarth A, Klette KL, Martin TM, et al. Quantitative urine confirmatory testing for synthetic cannabinoids in randomly collected urine specimens. Drug Test Anal 2015;7:483–93.10.1002/dta.1709Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

11. Wohlfarth A, Scheidweiler KB, Castaneto M, Gandhi AS, Desrosiers NA, Klette KL, et al. Urinary prevalence, metabolite detection rates, temporal patterns and evaluation of suitable LC-MS/MS targets to document synthetic cannabinoid intake in US military urine specimens. Clin Chem Lab Med 2015;53:423–34.10.1515/cclm-2014-0612Search in Google Scholar PubMed

12. Heltsley R, Shelby MK, Crouch DJ, Black DL, Robert TA, Marshall L, et al. Prevalence of synthetic cannabinoids in US athletes: initial findings. J Anal Toxicol 2012;36:588–93.10.1093/jat/bks066Search in Google Scholar PubMed

13. Palamar JJ, Acosta P. Synthetic cannabinoid use in a nationally representative sample of US high school seniors. Drug Alcohol Depend 2015;149:194–202.10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2015.01.044Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

14. Spaderna M, Addy PH, D’Souza DC. Spicing things up: synthetic cannabinoids. Psychopharmacology 2013;228:525–40.10.1007/s00213-013-3188-4Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

15. Bonar EE, Ashrafioun L, Ilgen MA. Synthetic cannabinoid use among patients in residential substance use disorder treatment: prevalence, motives, and correlates. Drug Alcohol Depend 2014;143:268–71.10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2014.07.009Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

16. Loeffler G, Delaney E, Hann M. International trends in spice use: prevalence, motivation for use, relationship to other substances, and perception of use and safety for synthetic cannabinoids. Brain Res Bull 2016;126:8–26.10.1016/j.brainresbull.2016.04.013Search in Google Scholar PubMed

17. Loeffler G, Hurst D, Penn A, Yung K. Spice, bath salts, and the US military: the emergence of synthetic cannabinoid receptor agonists and cathinones in the US armed forces. Mil Med 2012;177:1041–8.10.7205/MILMED-D-12-00180Search in Google Scholar

18. Arntson A, Ofsa B, Lancaster D, Simon JR, McMullin M, Logan B. Validation of a novel immunoassay for the detection of synthetic cannabinoids and metabolites in urine specimens. J Anal Toxicol 2013;37:284–90.10.1093/jat/bkt024Search in Google Scholar PubMed

19. Barnes AJ, Spinelli E, Young S, Martin TM, Kleete KL, Huestis MA. Validation of an ELISA synthetic cannabinoids urine assay. Ther Drug Monit 2015;37:661–9.10.1097/FTD.0000000000000201Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

20. Barnes AJ, Young S, Spinelli E, Martin TM, Klette KL, Huestis MA. Evaluation of a homogenous enzyme immunoassay for the detection of synthetic cannabinoids in urine. Forensic Sci Int 2014;241:27–34.10.1016/j.forsciint.2014.04.020Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

21. Castaneto MS, Desrosiers NA, Ellefsen K, Anizan S, Martin TM, Klette KL, et al. Method validation of the biochip array technology for synthetic cannabinoids detection in urine. Bioanalysis 2014;6:2919–30.10.4155/bio.14.150Search in Google Scholar PubMed

22. Mohr AL, Ofsa B, Keil AM, Simon JR, McMullin M, Logan BK. Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) for the detection of use of the synthetic cannabinoid agonists UR-144 and XLR-11 in human urine. J Anal Toxicol 2014;38:427–31.10.1093/jat/bku049Search in Google Scholar PubMed

23. Rodrigues WC, Catbagan P, Rana S, Wang GH, Moore C. Detection of synthetic cannabinoids in oral fluid using ELISA and LC-MS-MS. J Anal Toxicol 2013;37:526–33.10.1093/jat/bkt067Search in Google Scholar PubMed

24. Spinelli E, Barnes AJ, Young S, Castaneto MS, Martin TM, Klette KL, et al. Performance characteristics of an ELISA screening assay for urinary synthetic cannabinoids. Drug Test Anal 2015;7:467–74.10.1002/dta.1702Search in Google Scholar PubMed

25. Schwope DM, Milman G, Huestis MA. Validation of an enzyme immunoassay for detection and semiquantification of cannabinoids in oral fluid. Clin Chem 2010;56:1007–14.10.1373/clinchem.2009.141754Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

26. Kronstrand R, Brinkhagen L, Birath-Karlsson C, Roman M, Josefsson M. LC-QTOF-MS as a superior strategy to immunoassay for the comprehensive analysis of synthetic cannabinoids in urine. Anal Bioanal Chem 2014;406:3599–609.10.1007/s00216-013-7574-xSearch in Google Scholar PubMed

27. Immunalysis. K2-II-Synthetic-Cannbinoids-HEIA-Info-Sheet-Ver.-A-Final [PDF]. Available at: http://immunalysis.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/MKT-1051-K2-II-Synthetic-Cannabinoids-HEIA-Info-Sheet-Ver.-A-Final.pdf. Accessed: 17 Jun 2015.Search in Google Scholar

28. Peters FT, Hartung M, Herbold M, Schmitt G, Daldrup T, Mußhoff F. Anhang B Anforderungen an die Validierung von Analysenmethoden. Toxichem Krimtech 2009;76:185–208.Search in Google Scholar

29. Cannaert A, Storme J, Franz F, Auwärter V, Stove CP. Detection and activity profiling of synthetic cannabinoids and metabolites with a newly developed bio-assay. Anal Chem 2016;88:11476–85.10.1021/acs.analchem.6b02600Search in Google Scholar PubMed

30. Hutter M, Moosmann B, Kneisel S, Auwärter V. Characteristics of the designer drug and synthetic cannabinoid receptor agonist AM-2201 regarding its chemistry and metabolism. J Mass Spectrom 2013;48:885–94.10.1002/jms.3229Search in Google Scholar PubMed

31. Gerostamoulos D, Elliott S, Walls HC, Peters FT, Lynch M, Drummer OH. To measure or not to measure? That is the NPS question. J Anal Toxicol 2016;40:318–20.10.1093/jat/bkw013Search in Google Scholar PubMed


Supplemental Material:

The online version of this article offers supplementary material (DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/cclm-2016-0831).


Received: 2016-9-14
Accepted: 2016-12-12
Published Online: 2017-1-28
Published in Print: 2017-8-28

©2017 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston

Articles in the same Issue

  1. Frontmatter
  2. Editorial
  3. Mass spectrometry or immunoassay: est modus in rebus
  4. Reviews
  5. The use of liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry for therapeutic drug monitoring of antibiotics in cancer patients
  6. Tackling serum folate test in European countries within the health technology assessment paradigm: request appropriateness, assays and health outcomes
  7. Genetics and Molecular Diagnostics
  8. Genetic diagnosis of α1-antitrypsin deficiency using DNA from buccal swab and serum samples
  9. General Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine
  10. Serum triglyceride measurements: the commutability of reference materials and the accuracy of results
  11. Variant peptide detection utilizing mass spectrometry: laying the foundations for proteogenomic identification and validation
  12. Evaluation of two fully automated immunoassay based tests for the measurement of 1α,25-dihydroxyvitamin D in human serum and comparison with LC-MS/MS
  13. Parallel diurnal fluctuation of testosterone, androstenedione, dehydroepiandrosterone and 17OHprogesterone as assessed in serum and saliva: validation of a novel liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry method for salivary steroid profiling
  14. Determination of oxycodone and its major metabolites noroxycodone and oxymorphone by ultra-high-performance liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry in plasma and urine: application to real cases
  15. Identification and quantitation of phosphatidylethanols in oral fluid by liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry
  16. Relationship between plasma and salivary melatonin and cortisol investigated by LC-MS/MS
  17. Paramagnetic micro-particles as a tool for rapid quantification of apixaban, dabigatran, edoxaban and rivaroxaban in human plasma by UHPLC-MS/MS
  18. Measurements of serum non-ceruloplasmin copper by a direct fluorescent method specific to Cu(II)
  19. The serum concentrations of leptin and MCP-1 independently predict low back pain duration
  20. Immunoassay screening in urine for synthetic cannabinoids – an evaluation of the diagnostic efficiency
  21. Cancer Diagnostics
  22. Study of kallikrein-related peptidase 6 (KLK6) and its complex with α1-antitrypsin in biological fluids
  23. Cardiovascular Diseases
  24. A candidate liquid chromatography mass spectrometry reference method for the quantification of the cardiac marker 1-32 B-type natriuretic peptide
  25. The natriuretic peptide MR-proANP predicts all-cause mortality and adverse outcome in community patients: a 10-year follow-up study
  26. CASZ1 loss-of-function mutation contributes to familial dilated cardiomyopathy
  27. Diabetes
  28. Evaluating new HbA1c methods for adoption by the IFCC and NGSP reference networks using international quality targets
  29. Infectious Diseases
  30. Analytical and diagnostic performance of two automated fecal calprotectin immunoassays for detection of inflammatory bowel disease
  31. Letters to the Editor
  32. Is fasting necessary for lipid profile determinations? Some considerations from the perspective of the clinical laboratory
  33. Precision of nonfasting lipid profiles should focus on clinical relevance rather than necessarily obtaining the least variation
  34. Triglyceride concentrations should be measured after elimination of free glycerol to exclude interindividual variations due to adiposity and fasting status
  35. Estimation of the reference interval for serum folate measured with assays traceable to the WHO International Standard
  36. Implausible elevation of peripheral thyroid hormones during therapy with a protein supplement
  37. Interference in Na+ measurements on the Siemens RAPIDPoint® 500 after nortriptyline intoxication: a case report
  38. Usefulness of maternal red cell antibodies to predict hemolytic disease of the fetus and newborn and significant neonatal hyperbilirubinemia: a retrospective study
  39. Improvement of the Sandell-Kolthoff reaction method (ammonium persulfate digestion) for the determination of iodine in urine samples
  40. Clinical use of targeted high-throughput whole-genome sequencing for a dengue virus variant
Downloaded on 4.3.2026 from https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/cclm-2016-0831/html
Scroll to top button