Background and aims Phosphatidylethanol 16:0/18:1 (PEth) is a biomarker for alcohol intake. It has a half‐life of 7.9 days. Chronic alcohol consumption causes high PEth values. It can take weeks before PEth values fall below the decision limit for ‘alcohol abstinence’. Our aim was to validate whether alcohol abstinence can be determined based on two consecutive PEth results above the decision limit. Design Observational study. Setting Belgium, February 2019. The study was linked to a social initiative in Belgium, ‘Tournée Minérale’. Participants Adults (aged > 18 years, n = 796) with varying drinking habits who self‐reportedly refrained from alcohol consumption during the study. Measurements A validated liquid chromatography–tandem mass spectrometry method was used to quantify PEth in participants’ dried blood samples, collected at three time‐points via remote fingerprick‐based self‐sampling. Findings A population‐based algorithm to evaluate abstinence based on 95% prediction limits was developed by fitting a linear mixed‐effect model to discern patterns in PEth elimination over time. It took intra‐ and inter‐individual variability into consideration. The algorithm was included in a two‐step decision tree, assessing whether (i) PEth values fell within the prediction interval and (ii) the slope between two PEth values was consistent with no alcohol consumption. Data for 74 participants reporting no alcohol intake during the study were used for validation. With a detection limit of ‘four units spread over 14 days’, the sensitivity and specificity of the decision tree was 89%. Conclusions Claims of alcohol abstinence can be verified using a two‐step decision tree for phosphatidylethanol 16:0/18:1 values, even when those values are above the limit for ‘alcohol abstinence’.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

Dried blood spot(s) (DBS) microsampling has increasingly attracted interest as a patient-centric alternative to conventional blood withdrawal. Despite the many advantages associated with DBS sampling, its widespread use in clinical...

No abstract

After 2 years of COVID-19 restrictions, the 8th Young Scientist Symposium was organized again as a face-to-face meeting covering a broad array of scientific presentations. As in the previous editions, the meeting was organized by young scientists for young scientists under the umbrella of the European Bioanalysis Forum and in collaboration with academia. The traditional Science Café was again included as an interactive round table session. This year, the main focus was on the challenges of communication. New for the 8th edition was a session connecting the young scientists with more seasoned experts in an effort to bridge talent and experience. In this article, we share the feedback of the scientific sessions and the Science Café held at the symposium.

The 7th Young Scientist Symposium, a meeting again organized as a hybrid online event by young scientists for young scientists under the umbrella of the European Bioanalysis Forum and in collaboration with the Universities of Bologna and Ghent, included a variety of interesting presentations on cutting-edge bioanalytical science and processes. On the morning of day 2, the meeting hosted their traditional Science Café around the theme: ‘How has COVID-19 changed our future?’ in which the Young Scientist Symposium organizing committee engaged with the delegates on how the COVID-19 pandemic has impacted the careers of young scientists working in a bioanalytical (industry or academic) laboratory, that is, things they lost, for good or for bad – things they gained, wanted or unwanted, things they learned about themselves and their industry. This manuscript provides feedback from those discussions.