Determination of methadone and eight new psychoactive substances in hair samples by gas chromatography/mass spectrometry

Hair analysis for New Psychoactive Substances (NPS): Still far from becoming the tool to study NPS spread in the community?

“…Generally, the analytical methodology consisted of the following steps: hair decontamination from external contaminants, hair digestion or pulverization and analytes extraction from a hair amount ranging between 10−100 mg. The hair decontamination procedures used were washing with: (i) organic solvents, such as methanol [ 20 , 21 , 23 , 24 , 32 , 34 , 43 , 44 , 47 , 50 , 51 , 53 , 54 , 56 , 58 , 60 ], ethanol [ 35 ], acetone [ 19 , 22 , [25] , [26] , [27] , 37 , 38 , 41 , 46 , 49 , 57 , 61 , 63 ], hexane [ 27 ], petroleum ether [ 41 , 49 ], dichloromethane [ 20 , 21 , 23 , 24 , [28] , [29] , [30] , [31] , 33 , 34 , 36 , 39 , 40 , 42 , 45 , 48 , [52] , [53] , [54] , [55] , [56] , [58] , [59] , [60] , 62 ], isopropanol [ 23 , 28 ], isooctane [ 38 , 52 ]; (ii) sodium dodecyl sulfate solution [ 35 , …”

“…Analytes’ extraction from hair, which followed hair digestion or pulverization, was achieved by either single step methanol extraction [ 20 , 25 , 27 , 43 , 44 , 47 , [49] , [50] , [51] , 53 , 56 , [58] , [59] , [60] , 62 ], or acidified methanol extraction [ 19 , 21 , 32 , 49 ], or ethanol extraction [ 41 ], or liquid-liquid extraction (LLE) with various mixtures of organic solvents [ 22 , 25 , 30 , 36 , 39 , 40 , 42 , 45 , 46 , 48 , 55 , 61 , 63 ], or extraction with aqueous buffers of organic solvents (methanol/ acetonitrile/ ammonium formate) [ 26 ], or (methanol/ acetonitrile/ trifluoroacetic acid (TFA)) [ 37 ] or (methanol/ TFA) [ 38 ] or (methanol/ acetonitrile/ ammonium acetate) [ 57 ], or solid phase extraction (SPE) on various cartridges [ 24 , 29 , 31 , 52 , 54 ] or mixed-mode solid phase extraction (MSPE) [ 33 , 34 ] or pressurized liquid extraction (PLE) [ 23 , 28 , 35 ], assisted in many cases by mild heat of the samples [ [19] , [20] , [21] , [22] , [23] , 25 , 26 , 29 , 34 , 36 , 39 , 40 , ...…”

“…Most of the reports presented the concurrent detection of several NPS from different chemical classes [ [19] , [20] , [21] , [22] , [23] , [25] , [26] , [27] , [28] , [29] , [30] , [31] , 33 , 46 , 62 ] and others focused on the analysis of just one NPS class [ 24 , 32 , 34 , [43] , [44] , [45] , [47] , [48] , [49] , [50] , [51] , [52] , [53] , [54] , [55] , [56] , [57] , [58] , [59] , [60] , [61] , 63 ]. Most of the reviewed methodologies used liquid chromatography coupled to low resolution mass spectrometry [ 21 , 22 , [24] , [25] , [26] , [27] , [28] , [29] , 31 , 33 , 35 , 36 , 39 , 41 , [43] , [44] , [45] , [47] , [48] , [49] , [50] , [51] , [52] , [53] , [54] , [55] , [56] , [57] ,…”

Validation of a Bioanalytical Method for the Determination of Synthetic and Natural Cannabinoids (New Psychoactive Substances) in Oral Fluid Samples by Means of HPLC-MS/MS

“…The purity and composition of products containing NPS are often unknown, and it can be very difficult to develop methods to identify them in biological matrices (Strano-Rossi et al, 2012Brunt et al, 2017;Anzillotti et al, 2018Anzillotti et al, , 2019bBianchi et al, 2019;Graziano et al, 2019;Williams et al, 2019). Although, at present, there is a rapid development of these substances of abuse, there are no current guidelines with threshold reference standard values for NPS in biological samples, to the best of our knowledge.…”

“…The struggle for forensic laboratories is also due to the unknown composition of these new substances: therefore, the treatment of a patient who has taken synthetic drugs, perhaps in combination with other substances or alcohol, is quite difficult (Governo Italiano, 2017; Busardo et al, 2018). To date from a recent search of the literature, only a few studies have dealt with the determination of such compounds in oral fluid; however, thanks to current technological progress in the forensic toxicology field, a few screening tests and more selective techniques for alternative matrices have been developed, though the modern literature on analytical methodologies applied to these matrices is still limited, and a more detailed validation is often required (Gallardo and Queiroz, 2008;Strano-Rossi et al, 2012Huestis et al, 2017;Anzillotti et al, 2018Anzillotti et al, , 2019bBianchi et al, 2019;Graziano et al, 2019). Oral fluid has gained popularity as an alternative to classical hematic and urinary approaches in the field of workplace drug testing and the testing of drivers for being under the influence of drugs owing to its ease of collection and reduced detection time windows (Strano-Rossi et al, 2012;Edvardsen et al, 2015;Anzillotti et al, 2019b;Bianchi et al, 2019;Graziano et al, 2019).…”