No abstract

Background“Light cannabis” is a product legally sold in Europe with Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) concentration lower than 0.2% and variable cannabidiol (CBD) content. We studied THC and CBD excretion profiles in blood, oral fluid (OF) and urine after smoking one or four light cannabis cigarettes.MethodsBlood, OF and urine samples were obtained from six healthy light cannabis consumers after smoking one 1 g cigarette containing 0.16% THC and 5.8% CBD and from six others after smoking four 1 g cigarettes within 4 h. Sample collection began 0.5 and 4.5 h after smoking one or four cigarettes, respectively. Cannabinoid concentrations were quantified by gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS).ResultsAt the first collection, the highest THC and CBD concentrations occurred in blood (THC 7.0–10.8 ng/mL; CBD 30.2–56.1 ng/mL) and OF (THC 5.1–15.5 ng/mL; CBD 14.2–28.1 ng/mL); similar results occurred 0.5 h after the last of four cigarettes in blood (THC 14.1–18.2 ng/mL, and CBD 25.6–45.4 ng/mL) and OF (THC 11.2–24.3 ng/mL; CBD 14.4–37.0 ng/mL). The mean OF to blood ratio ranged from 0.6 to 1.2 after one and 0.6 to 1.9 after four light cannabis cigarettes. THC/CBD ratios in blood and OF were never greater than 2. Urinary 11-nor-9-carboxy-THC concentrations peaked 8 h after one and four cigarettes.ConclusionsOF was a valuable alternative to blood in monitoring consumption of light cannabis. Blood and OF THC/CBD concentration ratios, never exceeded 2, possibly providing a useful biomarker to identify light cannabis vs illegal higher THC cannabis use, where THC/CBD ratios are generally greater than 10.

No abstract

Background: A new trend among users of new psychoactive substances’ the consumption of “herbal highs”: plant parts containing psychoactive substances. Most of the substances extracted from herbs, in old centuries were at the centre of religious ceremonies of ancient civilizations. Currently, these herbal products are mainly sold by internet web sites and easily obtained since some of them have no legal restriction.Objective: We reviewed psychoactive effects and neuropharmacology of the most used “herbal highs” with characterized active principles, with studies reporting mechanisms of action, pharmacological and subjective effects, eventual secondary effects including intoxications and/or fatalitiesMethod: The PubMed database was searched using the following key.words: herbal highs, Argyreia nervosa, Ipomoea violacea and Rivea corymbosa; Catha edulis; Datura stramonium; Piper methysticum; Mitragyna speciosa.Results: Psychoactive plants here reviewed have been known and used from ancient times, even if for some of them limited information still exist regarding subjective and neuropharmacological effects and consequent eventual toxicity when plants are used alone or in combination with “classical” drugs of abuse.Conclusion: Some “herbal highs” should be classified as harmful drugs since chronic administration has been linked with addiction and cognitive impairment; for some others taking into consideration only the recent trends of abuse, studies investigating these aspects are lacking.

No abstract

The wide availability of illicit psychotropic drugs is the most serious hazard threatening consumers. Indeed emergency departments are often responsible in evaluating damages caused not only by the base substance, but also by other eventual compounds added to mimic or antagonize drug effects or simply dilute the drug amount, with a possible harmful synergic toxic action.

Although antiepileptic drug (AED) monitoring in saliva may have some clinical applicability, it has not yet come into routine use. The correlation between levetiracetam (LEV) saliva and serum concentrations also remains unclear. To confirm LEV saliva assay as a useful, noninvasive alternative to serum measurement, we investigated the possible correlation between saliva and serum LEV concentrations. Samples of saliva and blood were collected from 30 patients with epilepsy receiving chronic therapy with LEV as monotherapy or add-on therapy, and LEV concentrations were assayed in saliva and serum. Linear regression analyses showed a close correlation between saliva and serum LEV concentrations (r2 = 0.90; P < 0.001). LEV blood and saliva concentrations were linearly related to daily drug doses (r2 = 0.78 and 0.70; P < 0.01). When data were analyzed for subgroups (patients receiving LEV in monotherapy, as add-on therapy with enzyme-inducer AEDs, and as add-on therapy with noninducer or moderate-inducer AEDs), no significant difference was found between saliva and serum LEV concentrations among groups. These preliminary results indicate that LEV, like other AEDs, can be measured in saliva as an alternative to blood-based assays. Saliva LEV collection and assay is a valid noninvasive, more convenient alternative to serum measurement.

Background In those countries where cannabis use is still illegal, some manufacturers started producing and selling “light cannabis”: dried flowering tops containing the psychoactive principle Δ-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) at concentrations lower than 0.2% together with variable concentration of cannabidiol (CBD). We here report a pilot study on the determination of cannabinoids in the oral fluid and urine of six individuals after smoking 1 g of “light cannabis”. Methods On site screening for oral fluid samples was performed, as a laboratory immunoassay test for urine samples. A validated gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS) method was then applied to quantify THC and CBD, independently from results of screening tests. Results On site screening for oral fluid samples, with a THC cut-off of 25 ng/mL gave negative results for all the individuals at different times after smoking. Similarly, negative results for urine samples screening from all the individuals were obtained. Confirmation analyses showed that oral fluid THC was in the concentration range from 2.5 to 21.5 ng/mL in the first 30 min after smoking and then values slowly decreased. CBD values were usually one order of magnitude higher than those of THC. THC-COOH, the principal urinary THC metabolite, presented the maximum urinary value of 1.8 ng/mL, while urinary CBD had a value of 15.1 ng/mL. Conclusions Consumers of a single 1 g dose of “light cannabis” did not result as positive in urine screening, assessing recent consumption, so that confirmation would not be required. Conversely, they might result as positive to oral fluid testing with some on-site kits, with THC cut-off lower than 25 ng/mL, at least in the first hour after smoking and hence confirmation analysis can be then required. No conclusions can be drawn of eventual chronic users.