48
Forensic Drug Testing Part 1: Screening Roger L. Bertholf, Ph.D. Associate Professor of Pathology Chief of Clinical Chemistry & Toxicology

Forensic Drug Testing Part 1: Screening Roger L. Bertholf, Ph.D. Associate Professor of Pathology Chief of Clinical Chemistry & Toxicology Roger L. Bertholf,

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Page 1: Forensic Drug Testing Part 1: Screening Roger L. Bertholf, Ph.D. Associate Professor of Pathology Chief of Clinical Chemistry & Toxicology Roger L. Bertholf,

Forensic Drug TestingPart 1: Screening

Forensic Drug TestingPart 1: Screening

Roger L. Bertholf, Ph.D.

Associate Professor of Pathology

Chief of Clinical Chemistry & Toxicology

Roger L. Bertholf, Ph.D.

Associate Professor of Pathology

Chief of Clinical Chemistry & Toxicology

Page 2: Forensic Drug Testing Part 1: Screening Roger L. Bertholf, Ph.D. Associate Professor of Pathology Chief of Clinical Chemistry & Toxicology Roger L. Bertholf,

What is forensic drug testing?What is forensic drug testing?

• MDs order drug tests to evaluate the medical condition of a patient– Medical drug testing, or– Clinical Toxicology

• Employers order drug tests to determine whether someone uses illegal drugs– Drug testing for legal purposes, or– Forensic Drug Testing

• MDs order drug tests to evaluate the medical condition of a patient– Medical drug testing, or– Clinical Toxicology

• Employers order drug tests to determine whether someone uses illegal drugs– Drug testing for legal purposes, or– Forensic Drug Testing

Page 3: Forensic Drug Testing Part 1: Screening Roger L. Bertholf, Ph.D. Associate Professor of Pathology Chief of Clinical Chemistry & Toxicology Roger L. Bertholf,

Medical vs. forensic drug testingMedical vs. forensic drug testing• Patient consent not

required• Identity of specimen is

presumed• Screening result is

sufficient for medical decision

• Results are used for medical evaluation

• Patient consent not required

• Identity of specimen is presumed

• Screening result is sufficient for medical decision

• Results are used for medical evaluation

• Subject must consent to be tested

• Identity of specimen must be proved

• Only confirmed results can be considered positive

• Results are used for legal action

• Subject must consent to be tested

• Identity of specimen must be proved

• Only confirmed results can be considered positive

• Results are used for legal action

Page 4: Forensic Drug Testing Part 1: Screening Roger L. Bertholf, Ph.D. Associate Professor of Pathology Chief of Clinical Chemistry & Toxicology Roger L. Bertholf,

Illegal Drug Use in the U.S.(1998 Household Survey)

Illegal Drug Use in the U.S.(1998 Household Survey)

• 13.6 million Americans use illicit drugs– 25 million in 1979

• 8.3% of youths age 12-17 use marijuana– 14.2% in 1979

• 1.8 million Americans use cocaine– 5.7 million in 1985

• 13.6 million Americans use illicit drugs– 25 million in 1979

• 8.3% of youths age 12-17 use marijuana– 14.2% in 1979

• 1.8 million Americans use cocaine– 5.7 million in 1985

Page 5: Forensic Drug Testing Part 1: Screening Roger L. Bertholf, Ph.D. Associate Professor of Pathology Chief of Clinical Chemistry & Toxicology Roger L. Bertholf,

Types of drugs usedTypes of drugs used

Marijuana and some

other drug21%

Drug other than

marijuana19%

Marijuana only60%

Marijuana and some

other drug21%

Drug other than

marijuana19%

Marijuana only60%

Page 6: Forensic Drug Testing Part 1: Screening Roger L. Bertholf, Ph.D. Associate Professor of Pathology Chief of Clinical Chemistry & Toxicology Roger L. Bertholf,

Types of drugs usedTypes of drugs used

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

Per

cent

usi

ng in

pre

viou

s 30

day

s

All drugs THC PsyRx Cocaine LSD, etc. Inhalants0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

Per

cent

usi

ng in

pre

viou

s 30

day

s

All drugs THC PsyRx Cocaine LSD, etc. Inhalants

Page 7: Forensic Drug Testing Part 1: Screening Roger L. Bertholf, Ph.D. Associate Professor of Pathology Chief of Clinical Chemistry & Toxicology Roger L. Bertholf,

History of workplace drug testingHistory of workplace drug testing

• 1960s – 1970s: The Department of Defense begins testing military personnel for illegal drug use.

• 1986: President Reagan establishes the “Federal Drug-Free Workplace”.

• 1988: Mandatory Guidelines for Federal Workplace Drug Testing Programs is published in the Federal Register.

• 1960s – 1970s: The Department of Defense begins testing military personnel for illegal drug use.

• 1986: President Reagan establishes the “Federal Drug-Free Workplace”.

• 1988: Mandatory Guidelines for Federal Workplace Drug Testing Programs is published in the Federal Register.

Page 8: Forensic Drug Testing Part 1: Screening Roger L. Bertholf, Ph.D. Associate Professor of Pathology Chief of Clinical Chemistry & Toxicology Roger L. Bertholf,

The “NIDA” programThe “NIDA” program

• NIDA (now SAMHSA) requirements for drug testing were drafted by Research Triangle Institute

• The RTI established the National Laboratory Certification Program (NLCP)

• Drug testing for federal agencies (DOT, NRC, etc.) must be performed in a NLCP-certified laboratory

• NIDA (now SAMHSA) requirements for drug testing were drafted by Research Triangle Institute

• The RTI established the National Laboratory Certification Program (NLCP)

• Drug testing for federal agencies (DOT, NRC, etc.) must be performed in a NLCP-certified laboratory

Page 9: Forensic Drug Testing Part 1: Screening Roger L. Bertholf, Ph.D. Associate Professor of Pathology Chief of Clinical Chemistry & Toxicology Roger L. Bertholf,

Florida Drug-Free WorkplaceFlorida Drug-Free Workplace

• The Florida HRS (now AHCA) established a drug-free workplace program in 1990

• Specifications for the State of Florida program are similar to federal requirements, but there are notable differences

• Employees of Florida Drug-Free Workplace-compliant businesses must be tested in AHCA-licensed laboratories

• The Florida HRS (now AHCA) established a drug-free workplace program in 1990

• Specifications for the State of Florida program are similar to federal requirements, but there are notable differences

• Employees of Florida Drug-Free Workplace-compliant businesses must be tested in AHCA-licensed laboratories

Page 10: Forensic Drug Testing Part 1: Screening Roger L. Bertholf, Ph.D. Associate Professor of Pathology Chief of Clinical Chemistry & Toxicology Roger L. Bertholf,

Comparison of NLCP Certified and AHCA Licensed

Laboratories

Comparison of NLCP Certified and AHCA Licensed

Laboratories

• Florida Drug Free Workplace Program

• 10 drugs + ethanol

• Inspected every 6 months

• Quarterly proficiencies

• Director must be board-certified

• Florida Drug Free Workplace Program

• 10 drugs + ethanol

• Inspected every 6 months

• Quarterly proficiencies

• Director must be board-certified

• Federal employees, federally-regulated jobs

• 5 drugs

• Inspected every 6 months

• Quarterly proficiencies

• Director must be board-certified

• Federal employees, federally-regulated jobs

• 5 drugs

• Inspected every 6 months

• Quarterly proficiencies

• Director must be board-certified

AHCA NLCP

Page 11: Forensic Drug Testing Part 1: Screening Roger L. Bertholf, Ph.D. Associate Professor of Pathology Chief of Clinical Chemistry & Toxicology Roger L. Bertholf,

ScreeningScreening

• Sensitivity vs. specificity of analytical methods

• Sensitivity vs. specificity of analytical methods

Page 12: Forensic Drug Testing Part 1: Screening Roger L. Bertholf, Ph.D. Associate Professor of Pathology Chief of Clinical Chemistry & Toxicology Roger L. Bertholf,

Performance characteristics of screening tests

Performance characteristics of screening tests

1 -

Sen

siti

vity

Specificity

Receiver Operator Characteristic

(1)

(2)

(5)

(10)

(12)(15) (20) (50) (80) (100)

Page 13: Forensic Drug Testing Part 1: Screening Roger L. Bertholf, Ph.D. Associate Professor of Pathology Chief of Clinical Chemistry & Toxicology Roger L. Bertholf,

ScreeningScreening

• Procedure is designed to eliminate all negatives

• Positive screens are presumptive

• Negative screens can be reviewed and released by a Scientific Review Officer

• Positive screens are submitted for confirmatory testing

• Procedure is designed to eliminate all negatives

• Positive screens are presumptive

• Negative screens can be reviewed and released by a Scientific Review Officer

• Positive screens are submitted for confirmatory testing

Page 14: Forensic Drug Testing Part 1: Screening Roger L. Bertholf, Ph.D. Associate Professor of Pathology Chief of Clinical Chemistry & Toxicology Roger L. Bertholf,

Challenge question . . .Challenge question . . .

• We regularly use immunochemical methods for quantifying therapeutic drugs, but consider them “screening” methods for drugs of abuse.

Why?

• We regularly use immunochemical methods for quantifying therapeutic drugs, but consider them “screening” methods for drugs of abuse.

Why?

Page 15: Forensic Drug Testing Part 1: Screening Roger L. Bertholf, Ph.D. Associate Professor of Pathology Chief of Clinical Chemistry & Toxicology Roger L. Bertholf,

Introduction to Homogeneous Immunoassay

Introduction to Homogeneous Immunoassay

• What is the distinguishing feature of homogeneous immunoassays?– They do not require separation of bound and free

ligands

• Do homogeneous methods have any advantage(s) over heterogeneous methods?– Yes

• What are they?– Speed– Adaptability

• What is the distinguishing feature of homogeneous immunoassays?– They do not require separation of bound and free

ligands

• Do homogeneous methods have any advantage(s) over heterogeneous methods?– Yes

• What are they?– Speed– Adaptability

Page 16: Forensic Drug Testing Part 1: Screening Roger L. Bertholf, Ph.D. Associate Professor of Pathology Chief of Clinical Chemistry & Toxicology Roger L. Bertholf,

Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay

Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay

Microtiter well

E E E E E

Specimen 2nd antibodyE

Substrate

S P

Page 17: Forensic Drug Testing Part 1: Screening Roger L. Bertholf, Ph.D. Associate Professor of Pathology Chief of Clinical Chemistry & Toxicology Roger L. Bertholf,

Homogeneous immunoassaysHomogeneous immunoassays

• Virtually all homogeneous immunoassays are one-site

• Virtually all homogeneous immunoassays are competitive

• Virtually all homogeneous immunoassays are designed for small antigens– Therapeutic/abused drugs– Steroid/peptide hormones

• Virtually all homogeneous immunoassays are one-site

• Virtually all homogeneous immunoassays are competitive

• Virtually all homogeneous immunoassays are designed for small antigens– Therapeutic/abused drugs– Steroid/peptide hormones

Page 18: Forensic Drug Testing Part 1: Screening Roger L. Bertholf, Ph.D. Associate Professor of Pathology Chief of Clinical Chemistry & Toxicology Roger L. Bertholf,

Typical design of a homogeneous immunoassay

Typical design of a homogeneous immunoassay

No signal

Signal

Page 19: Forensic Drug Testing Part 1: Screening Roger L. Bertholf, Ph.D. Associate Professor of Pathology Chief of Clinical Chemistry & Toxicology Roger L. Bertholf,

Enzyme-multiplied immunoassay technique (EMIT™)

Enzyme-multiplied immunoassay technique (EMIT™)

• Developed by Syva Corporation (Palo Alto, CA) in 1970s--now owned by Behring Diagnostics

• Offered an alternative to RIA or HPLC for measuring therapeutic drugs

• Sparked the widespread use of TDM• Adaptable to virtually any chemistry analyzer• Has both quantitative (TDM) and qualitative

(DAU) applications; forensic drug testing is the most common use of the EMIT methods

• Developed by Syva Corporation (Palo Alto, CA) in 1970s--now owned by Behring Diagnostics

• Offered an alternative to RIA or HPLC for measuring therapeutic drugs

• Sparked the widespread use of TDM• Adaptable to virtually any chemistry analyzer• Has both quantitative (TDM) and qualitative

(DAU) applications; forensic drug testing is the most common use of the EMIT methods

Page 20: Forensic Drug Testing Part 1: Screening Roger L. Bertholf, Ph.D. Associate Professor of Pathology Chief of Clinical Chemistry & Toxicology Roger L. Bertholf,

EMIT™ methodEMIT™ method

Enzyme

S

S P

No signal

SignalEnzyme

S

Page 21: Forensic Drug Testing Part 1: Screening Roger L. Bertholf, Ph.D. Associate Professor of Pathology Chief of Clinical Chemistry & Toxicology Roger L. Bertholf,

EMIT™ signal/concentration curve

EMIT™ signal/concentration curve

Sig

nal (

enzy

me

acti

vity

)

Antigen concentration

Functional concentration range

Page 22: Forensic Drug Testing Part 1: Screening Roger L. Bertholf, Ph.D. Associate Professor of Pathology Chief of Clinical Chemistry & Toxicology Roger L. Bertholf,

Fluorescence polarization immunoassay (FPIA)

Fluorescence polarization immunoassay (FPIA)

• Developed by Abbott Diagnostics, about the same time as the EMIT was developed by Syva– Roche marketed FPIA methods for the Cobas FARA

analyzer, but not have a significant impact on the market

• Like the EMIT, the first applications were for therapeutic drugs

• Currently the most widely used method for TDM• Requires an Abbott instrument

• Developed by Abbott Diagnostics, about the same time as the EMIT was developed by Syva– Roche marketed FPIA methods for the Cobas FARA

analyzer, but not have a significant impact on the market

• Like the EMIT, the first applications were for therapeutic drugs

• Currently the most widely used method for TDM• Requires an Abbott instrument

Page 23: Forensic Drug Testing Part 1: Screening Roger L. Bertholf, Ph.D. Associate Professor of Pathology Chief of Clinical Chemistry & Toxicology Roger L. Bertholf,

Molecular electronic energy transitions

Molecular electronic energy transitions

E0

E4E3

E2

E1

Singlet

Triplet

A

VR

F

IC

P

10-6-10-9 sec

10-4-10 sec

Page 24: Forensic Drug Testing Part 1: Screening Roger L. Bertholf, Ph.D. Associate Professor of Pathology Chief of Clinical Chemistry & Toxicology Roger L. Bertholf,

Polarized radiationPolarized radiationz

y

x

Polarizingfilter

Page 25: Forensic Drug Testing Part 1: Screening Roger L. Bertholf, Ph.D. Associate Professor of Pathology Chief of Clinical Chemistry & Toxicology Roger L. Bertholf,

Fluorescence polarizationFluorescence polarization

OHO OH

C

O

O

Fluoresceinin

Orientation of polarized radiation is maintained!

out (10-6-10-9 sec)

Page 26: Forensic Drug Testing Part 1: Screening Roger L. Bertholf, Ph.D. Associate Professor of Pathology Chief of Clinical Chemistry & Toxicology Roger L. Bertholf,

Fluorescence polarizationFluorescence polarization

OH

OO

H

C

O

O

Rotational frequency 1010 sec-1

in

Orientation of polarized radiation is NOT maintained!

out (10-6-10-9 sec)

But. . .

Page 27: Forensic Drug Testing Part 1: Screening Roger L. Bertholf, Ph.D. Associate Professor of Pathology Chief of Clinical Chemistry & Toxicology Roger L. Bertholf,

Fluorescence polarization immunoassay

Fluorescence polarization immunoassay

OHO OH

C

O

O

Polarization maintainedSlow rotation

OHO OH

C

O

O

Rapid rotation

Polarization lost

Page 28: Forensic Drug Testing Part 1: Screening Roger L. Bertholf, Ph.D. Associate Professor of Pathology Chief of Clinical Chemistry & Toxicology Roger L. Bertholf,

FPIA signal/concentration curveFPIA signal/concentration curveS

igna

l (I

/I)

Antigen concentration

Functional concentration range

Page 29: Forensic Drug Testing Part 1: Screening Roger L. Bertholf, Ph.D. Associate Professor of Pathology Chief of Clinical Chemistry & Toxicology Roger L. Bertholf,

Cloned enzyme donor immunoassay (CEDIA™)

Cloned enzyme donor immunoassay (CEDIA™)

• Developed by Microgenics in 1980s (purchased by BMC, then divested by Roche)

• Both TDM and DAU applications are available

• Adaptable to any chemistry analyzer• Currently trails EMIT and FPIA

applications in market penetration

• Developed by Microgenics in 1980s (purchased by BMC, then divested by Roche)

• Both TDM and DAU applications are available

• Adaptable to any chemistry analyzer• Currently trails EMIT and FPIA

applications in market penetration

Page 30: Forensic Drug Testing Part 1: Screening Roger L. Bertholf, Ph.D. Associate Professor of Pathology Chief of Clinical Chemistry & Toxicology Roger L. Bertholf,

Cloned enzyme donorCloned enzyme donor

Donor

Acceptor

Monomer(inactive)

Active tetramer

Spontaneous

-Galactosidase

Page 31: Forensic Drug Testing Part 1: Screening Roger L. Bertholf, Ph.D. Associate Professor of Pathology Chief of Clinical Chemistry & Toxicology Roger L. Bertholf,

Cloned enzyme donor immunoassay

Cloned enzyme donor immunoassay

Donor

Acceptor

Donor

Acceptor

No activity

Active enzyme

Page 32: Forensic Drug Testing Part 1: Screening Roger L. Bertholf, Ph.D. Associate Professor of Pathology Chief of Clinical Chemistry & Toxicology Roger L. Bertholf,

CEDIA™ signal/concentration curve

CEDIA™ signal/concentration curve

Sig

nal (

enzy

me

acti

vity

)

Antigen concentration

Functional concentration range

Page 33: Forensic Drug Testing Part 1: Screening Roger L. Bertholf, Ph.D. Associate Professor of Pathology Chief of Clinical Chemistry & Toxicology Roger L. Bertholf,

Screening thresholdsScreening thresholds

• Why do we need screening thresholds?– To ensure that results in all participating

laboratories agree

• Who determines the thresholds?– The agency sponsoring the drug testing

program (e.g., SAMHSA, State of Florida, or individual employer)

• Why do we need screening thresholds?– To ensure that results in all participating

laboratories agree

• Who determines the thresholds?– The agency sponsoring the drug testing

program (e.g., SAMHSA, State of Florida, or individual employer)

Page 34: Forensic Drug Testing Part 1: Screening Roger L. Bertholf, Ph.D. Associate Professor of Pathology Chief of Clinical Chemistry & Toxicology Roger L. Bertholf,

Screening thresholds for SAMHSA drugs

Screening thresholds for SAMHSA drugs

Drug ng/mL urine

Amphetamines 1000

Cocaine (as benzoylecgonine) 300

Opiates (morphine, codeine) 2000

Phencyclidine 25

THC 50

Page 35: Forensic Drug Testing Part 1: Screening Roger L. Bertholf, Ph.D. Associate Professor of Pathology Chief of Clinical Chemistry & Toxicology Roger L. Bertholf,

Do screening thresholds have any quantitative relevance?

Do screening thresholds have any quantitative relevance?

• Cross-reactivity of antibodies– Amphetamines– Cannabinoids– Opiates– Benzodiazepines, barbiturates

• Physiological factors– Diuresis

• Cross-reactivity of antibodies– Amphetamines– Cannabinoids– Opiates– Benzodiazepines, barbiturates

• Physiological factors– Diuresis

Page 36: Forensic Drug Testing Part 1: Screening Roger L. Bertholf, Ph.D. Associate Professor of Pathology Chief of Clinical Chemistry & Toxicology Roger L. Bertholf,

HN

CH3

Methamphetamine

CH3

CH3

Amphetamine

NH2

AmphetaminesAmphetamines

• Classified as sympathomimetic amines (or phenylethylamines)

• CNS stimulants, Schedule II drugs (high abuse potential)

• Classified as sympathomimetic amines (or phenylethylamines)

• CNS stimulants, Schedule II drugs (high abuse potential)

Page 37: Forensic Drug Testing Part 1: Screening Roger L. Bertholf, Ph.D. Associate Professor of Pathology Chief of Clinical Chemistry & Toxicology Roger L. Bertholf,

Sympathomimetic aminesSympathomimetic amines

CH3

NH2

HN

CH3

CH3

CH3

NH2

HN

CH3

CH3

OH

OH

CH3

NH2

HN

CH3

CH3

H3C

H3C

+ OH

+ OH+ CH3

+ CH3

Amphetamine PhenylpropanolaminePhentermine

Mephentermine Methamphetamine Ephedrine

Page 38: Forensic Drug Testing Part 1: Screening Roger L. Bertholf, Ph.D. Associate Professor of Pathology Chief of Clinical Chemistry & Toxicology Roger L. Bertholf,

Amphetamine stereochemistryAmphetamine stereochemistry

• Pharmacological preparations of amphetamine can be racemic d,l mixtures (Benzedrine) or pure d-amphetamine (Dexedrine)

• Most immunoassays are calibrated with d,l-amphetamine

• Pharmacological preparations of amphetamine can be racemic d,l mixtures (Benzedrine) or pure d-amphetamine (Dexedrine)

• Most immunoassays are calibrated with d,l-amphetamine

NH2

H3CH

NH2

H CH3

d-Amphetamine l-Amphetamine

Page 39: Forensic Drug Testing Part 1: Screening Roger L. Bertholf, Ph.D. Associate Professor of Pathology Chief of Clinical Chemistry & Toxicology Roger L. Bertholf,

Methamphetamine stereochemistryMethamphetamine stereochemistry

• d-Methamphetamine is 10 times more potent than the l isomer

• l-Desoxyephedrine is used in some non-prescription nasal decongestants

• d-Methamphetamine is 10 times more potent than the l isomer

• l-Desoxyephedrine is used in some non-prescription nasal decongestants

HN

H3CH

HN

H CH3

d-Methamphetamine l-Desoxyephedrine

Page 40: Forensic Drug Testing Part 1: Screening Roger L. Bertholf, Ph.D. Associate Professor of Pathology Chief of Clinical Chemistry & Toxicology Roger L. Bertholf,

Amphetamine derivatives: “Designer Drugs”

Amphetamine derivatives: “Designer Drugs”

NH2

CH3

O

O

HN

CH3

O

O

Methylenedioxyamphetamine Methylenedioxymethamphetamine

Page 41: Forensic Drug Testing Part 1: Screening Roger L. Bertholf, Ph.D. Associate Professor of Pathology Chief of Clinical Chemistry & Toxicology Roger L. Bertholf,

CocaineCocaine

N

H3C

O

O

CH3

O

O

Page 42: Forensic Drug Testing Part 1: Screening Roger L. Bertholf, Ph.D. Associate Professor of Pathology Chief of Clinical Chemistry & Toxicology Roger L. Bertholf,

Cocaine metabolismCocaine metabolism

N

H3C

O

O

CH3

O

O

N

H3C

O

O

CH3

OH

N

H3C

OH

O

O

O

HN

O

O

CH3

O

O

Ecgonine methyl ester Benzoylecgonine Norcocaine

- C6H5COO

- CH3

- CH3

Page 43: Forensic Drug Testing Part 1: Screening Roger L. Bertholf, Ph.D. Associate Professor of Pathology Chief of Clinical Chemistry & Toxicology Roger L. Bertholf,

PhencyclidinePhencyclidine

N

Phencyclidine

Page 44: Forensic Drug Testing Part 1: Screening Roger L. Bertholf, Ph.D. Associate Professor of Pathology Chief of Clinical Chemistry & Toxicology Roger L. Bertholf,

9-Tetrahydrocannabinol (THC)9-Tetrahydrocannabinol (THC)

O

CH3

OH

H3C

H3CO

COOH

OH

H3C

H3C

Oxidation

9-THC 9-THC-COOH

Page 45: Forensic Drug Testing Part 1: Screening Roger L. Bertholf, Ph.D. Associate Professor of Pathology Chief of Clinical Chemistry & Toxicology Roger L. Bertholf,

OpiatesOpiates

OHO OH

N

H3C

H

OO OH

N

H3C

H

H3C

Morphine Codeine

CH3

Page 46: Forensic Drug Testing Part 1: Screening Roger L. Bertholf, Ph.D. Associate Professor of Pathology Chief of Clinical Chemistry & Toxicology Roger L. Bertholf,

Heroin metabolismHeroin metabolism

OO O

N

H3C

H

Heroin

OHO OH

N

H3C

H

Morphine

H3C

O

CH3

O

OHO O

N

H3C

H

6-Monoacetylmorphine CH3

O

- CH3CO

- CH3CO

Page 47: Forensic Drug Testing Part 1: Screening Roger L. Bertholf, Ph.D. Associate Professor of Pathology Chief of Clinical Chemistry & Toxicology Roger L. Bertholf,

SummarySummary

• Screening is the first step of a two-step process in forensic drug testing

• Screening methods are designed to eliminate negative specimens

• Positive screens are presumptive

• Several homogeneous immunoassays have been developed for drug screening

• Screening is the first step of a two-step process in forensic drug testing

• Screening methods are designed to eliminate negative specimens

• Positive screens are presumptive

• Several homogeneous immunoassays have been developed for drug screening

Page 48: Forensic Drug Testing Part 1: Screening Roger L. Bertholf, Ph.D. Associate Professor of Pathology Chief of Clinical Chemistry & Toxicology Roger L. Bertholf,

Thank You!