BACKGROUND Oral fluid (OF) is an exciting alternative matrix for monitoring drugs of abuse in workplace, clinical toxicology, criminal justice, and driving under the influence of drugs (DUID) programs. During the last 5 years, scientific and technological advances in OF collection, point-of-collection testing devices, and screening and confirmation methods were achieved. Guidelines were proposed for workplace OF testing by the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, DUID testing by the European Union’s Driving under the Influence of Drugs, Alcohol and Medicines (DRUID) program, and standardization of DUID research. Although OF testing is now commonplace in many monitoring programs, the greatest current limitation is the scarcity of controlled drug administration studies available to guide interpretation. CONTENT This review outlines OF testing advantages and limitations, and the progress in OF that has occurred during the last 5 years in collection, screening, confirmation, and interpretation of cannabinoids, opioids, amphetamines, cocaine, and benzodiazepines. We examine controlled drug administration studies, immunoassay and chromatographic methods, collection devices, point-of-collection testing device performance, and recent applications of OF testing. SUMMARY Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration approval of OF testing was delayed because questions about drug OF disposition were not yet resolved, and collection device performance and testing assays required improvement. Here, we document the many advances achieved in the use of OF. Additional research is needed to identify new bio-markers, determine drug detection windows, characterize OF adulteration techniques, and evaluate analyte stability. Nevertheless, there is no doubt that OF offers multiple advantages as an alternative matrix for drug monitoring and has an important role in DUID, treatment, workplace, and criminal justice programs.

MDMA induces positive mood and increases impulse control during intoxication, but only a few studies on the neuropharmacological mechanisms underlying these processes have been conducted. It was hypothesized that pretreatment with 5-HT1 and 5-HT2 receptor blockers would prevent MDMA effects on mood and impulsivity. Subjects (N = 17) participated in a double-blind, placebo controlled, within-subject design involving 6 experimental conditions consisting of pretreatment (T1) and treatment (T2). T1 preceded T2 by 30 minutes. T1–T2 combinations were: placebo-placebo, 20 mg pindolol-placebo, 50 mg ketanserin-placebo, placebo-75 mg MDMA, 20 mg pindolol-75 mg MDMA and 50 mg ketanserin-75 g MDMA. Subjects completed a Profile of Mood States (POMS) questionnaire and several impulsivity tasks (Stop signal task, Matching familiar figures task, Cue dependent reversal learning task) at 1.5 hrs post-treatment. MDMA alone increased both positive (vigor, arousal, friendliness, elation, positive mood) and negative affect (anxiety, confusion) as assessed by the POMS questionnaire. MDMA also increased stop reaction time in the Stop signal task and reaction time in the Matching familiar figures task. Pretreatment with ketanserin blocked MDMA effects on positive affect, but not negative affect. Ketanserin did not influence the effects of MDMA on impulsivity. Pindolol did not interact with MDMA on any of the measures. In conclusion, 5-HT2 receptors mediate positive moods induced by MDMA but not negative moods or impulsivity. 5-HT1 receptors do not appear to be involved in MDMA effects on mood and impulse control.Trial RegistrationNederlands Trial Register NTR2352

Dronabinol (medicinal tetrahydrocannabinol) impairs driving performance in occasional and heavy users in a dose-dependent way, but to a lesser degree in heavy users due possibly to tolerance. The Standard Field Sobriety Test is not sensitive to clinically relevant driving impairment caused by oral tetrahydrocannabinol.

BackgroundThe present study assessed psychomotor function in chronic, daily cannabis smokers during 3 weeks continuously monitored abstinence on a secure research unit. We hypothesized that psychomotor performance would improve during abstinence of chronic, daily cannabis smokers.Methodology/Principal FindingsPerformance on the critical tracking (CTT) and divided attention (DAT) tasks was assessed in 19 male chronic, daily cannabis smokers at baseline and after 8, 14–16 and 21–23 days of continuously monitored abstinence. Psychomotor performance was compared to a control group of non-intoxicated occasional drug users. Critical frequency (λc) of the CTT and tracking error and control losses of the DAT were the primary outcome measures. Results showed that chronic cannabis smokers’ performance on the CTT (p<0.001) and the DAT (p<0.001) was impaired during baseline relative to the comparison group. Psychomotor performance in the chronic cannabis smokers improved over 3 weeks of abstinence, but did not recover to equivalent control group performance.Conclusions/SignificanceSustained cannabis abstinence moderately improved critical tracking and divided attention performance in chronic, daily cannabis smokers, but impairment was still observable compared to controls after 3 weeks of abstinence. Between group differences, however, need to be interpreted with caution as chronic smokers and controls were not matched for education, social economic status, life style and race.

RationaleStandardized Field Sobriety Tests (SFST) and oral fluid devices are used to screen for driving impairment and roadside drug detection, respectively. SFST have been validated for alcohol, but their sensitivity to impairment induced by other drugs is relatively unknown. The sensitivity and specificity for Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) of most oral fluid devices have been low.ObjectiveThis study assessed the effects of smoking cannabis with and without alcohol on SFST performance. Presence of THC in oral fluid was examined with two devices (Dräger Drug Test® 5000 and Securetec Drugwipe® 5).MethodsTwenty heavy cannabis users (15 males and 5 females; mean age, 24.3 years) participated in a double-blind, placebo-controlled study assessing percentage of impaired individuals on the SFST and the sensitivity of two oral fluid devices. Participants received alcohol doses or alcohol placebo in combination with 400 μg/kg body weight THC. We aimed to reach peak blood alcohol concentration values of 0.5 and 0.7 mg/mL.ResultsCannabis was significantly related to performance on the one-leg stand (p = 0.037). Alcohol in combination with cannabis was significantly related to impairment on horizontal gaze nystagmus (p = 0.029). The Dräger Drug Test® 5000 demonstrated a high sensitivity for THC, whereas the sensitivity of the Securetec Drugwipe® 5 was low.ConclusionsSFST were mildly sensitive to impairment from cannabis in heavy users. Lack of sensitivity might be attributed to tolerance and time of testing. SFST were sensitive to both doses of alcohol. The Dräger Drug Test® 5000 appears to be a promising tool for detecting THC in oral fluid as far as correct THC detection is concerned.

Δ⁹-Tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) is the illicit drug most frequently observed in accident and driving under the influence of drugs investigations. Whole blood is often the only available specimen collected during such investigations, yet few studies have examined relationships between cannabis effects and whole blood concentrations following cannabis smoking. Nine male and one female heavy, chronic cannabis smokers resided on a closed research unit and smoked ad libitum one 6.8% THC cannabis cigarette. THC, 11-hydroxy-THC and 11-nor-9-carboxy-THC were quantified in whole blood and plasma. Assessments were performed before and up to 6 h after smoking, including subjective [visual analog scales (VAS) and Likert scales], physiological (heart rate, blood pressure and respirations) and psychomotor (critical-tracking and divided-attention tasks) measures. THC significantly increased VAS responses and heart rate, with concentration-effect curves demonstrating counter-clockwise hysteresis. No significant differences were observed for critical-tracking or divided-attention task performance in this cohort of heavy, chronic cannabis smokers. The cannabis influence factor was not suitable for quantifying psychomotor impairment following cannabis consumption and was not precise enough to determine recent cannabis use with accuracy. These data inform our understanding of impairment and subjective effects following acute smoked cannabis and interpretation of whole blood cannabinoid concentrations in forensic investigations.

3,4-Methylenedioxymethamphetamine (MDMA) or 'ecstasy' has been associated with memory deficits during abstinence and intoxication. The human neuropharmacology of MDMA-induced memory impairment is unknown. This study investigated the role of 5-HT 2A and 5-HT 1A receptors in MDMA-induced memory impairment. Ketanserin is a 5-HT 2A receptor blocker and pindolol a 5-HT 1A receptor blocker. It was hypothesized that pretreatment with ketanserin and pindolol would protect against MDMA-induced memory impairment. Subjects (N ¼ 17) participated in a double-blind, placebo-controlled, within-subject design involving six experimental conditions consisting of pretreatment (T1) and treatment (T2). T1 preceded T2 by 30 min. T1-T2 combinations were: placebo-placebo, pindolol 20 mg-placebo, ketanserin 50 mg-placebo, placebo-MDMA 75 mg, pindolol 20 mg-MDMA 75 mg, and ketanserin 50 mg-MDMA 75 mg. Memory function was assessed at Tmax of MDMA by means of a word-learning task (WLT), a spatial memory task and a prospective memory task. MDMA significantly impaired performance in all memory tasks. Pretreatment with a 5-HT 2A receptor blocker selectively interacted with subsequent MDMA treatment and prevented MDMA-induced impairment in the WLT, but not in the spatial and prospective memory task. Pretreatment with a 5-HT 1A blocker did not affect MDMA-induced memory impairment in any of the tasks. Together, the results demonstrate that MDMA-induced impairment of verbal memory as measured in the WLT is mediated by 5-HT 2A receptor stimulation.

RationaleThe driving simulator provides a safe and controlled environment for testing driving behaviour efficiently. The question is whether it is sensitive to detect drug-induced effects.ObjectiveThe primary aim of the current study was to investigate the sensitivity of the driving simulator for detecting drug effects. As a case in point, we investigated the dose-related effects of oral ∆9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), i.e. dronabinol, on simulator and on-the-road driving performance in equally demanding driving tasks.MethodTwenty-four experienced driver participants were treated with dronabinol (Marinol®; 10 and 20 mg) and placebo. Dose-related effects of the drug on the ability to keep a vehicle in lane (weaving) and to follow the speed changes of a lead car (car following) were compared within subjects for on-the-road versus in-simulator driving. Additionally, the outcomes of equivalence testing to alcohol-induced effects were investigated.ResultsTreatment effects found on weaving when driving in the simulator were comparable to treatment effects found when driving on the road. The effect after 10 mg dronabinol was however less strong in the simulator than on the road and inter-individual variance seemed higher in the simulator. There was, however, a differential treatment effect of dronabinol on reactions to speed changes of a lead car (car following) when driving on the road versus when driving in the simulator.ConclusionThe driving simulator was proven to be sensitive for demonstrating dronabinol-induced effects particularly at higher doses. Treatment effects of dronabinol on weaving were comparable with driving on the road but inter-individual variability seemed higher in the simulator than on the road which may have potential effects on the clinical inferences made from simulator driving. Car following on the road and in the simulator were, however, not comparable.