Evaluation of a Rapid Drug Test Device for Urine Fentanyl Compared to Mass Spectrometry and 2 Urine Fentanyl Assays.

IF 1.8 Q3 MEDICAL LABORATORY TECHNOLOGY Journal of Applied Laboratory Medicine Pub Date : 2024-09-03 DOI:10.1093/jalm/jfae059
Erving T Laryea, James H Nichols
{"title":"Evaluation of a Rapid Drug Test Device for Urine Fentanyl Compared to Mass Spectrometry and 2 Urine Fentanyl Assays.","authors":"Erving T Laryea, James H Nichols","doi":"10.1093/jalm/jfae059","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>A new Rapid Drug Test Device (RDTD) is available for analysis of urine fentanyl. With the rise in fentanyl abuse in the United States, we evaluated the analytical performance of the RDTD test strip compared to mass spectrometry and 2 urine fentanyl immunoassays.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Leftover, deidentified urine samples collected from inpatients and outpatients from our psychiatric hospital and other clinics were frozen at <-70°C, thawed at room temperature, and centrifuged. Aliquots were tested with the RDTD (CLIA Waived, Inc.) test strips and 2 urine fentanyl immunoassays: the ARK Fentanyl II assay (ARK Diagnostics Inc.) and the Immunalysis SEFRIA Fentanyl assay (Immunalysis Corporation). Both assays were conducted on the Abbott Alinity c chemistry analyzer (Abbott Laboratories). Mass spectrometry analysis was performed at ARUP Laboratories. All assays had a 1 ng/mL positive cutoff.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 142 urine samples included 70 positive and 72 negative samples. The RDTD strips had lower sensitivity (84.3%) and efficiency (85.9%) and showed a specificity of 87.5% compared to the other assays. The ARK Fentanyl II assay showed identical sensitivity (95.7%) to the Immunalysis SEFRIA Fentanyl assay but had higher specificity (94.4% vs 81.9%) and overall efficiency (95.1% vs 88.7%).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Differences were noted in the number of false negatives and positives among the assays. The RDTD demonstrated acceptable performance in detecting urine fentanyl in our patient population and would provide faster test results at point-of-care testing sites in our healthcare enterprise.</p>","PeriodicalId":46361,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Applied Laboratory Medicine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Applied Laboratory Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jalm/jfae059","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MEDICAL LABORATORY TECHNOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: A new Rapid Drug Test Device (RDTD) is available for analysis of urine fentanyl. With the rise in fentanyl abuse in the United States, we evaluated the analytical performance of the RDTD test strip compared to mass spectrometry and 2 urine fentanyl immunoassays.

Methods: Leftover, deidentified urine samples collected from inpatients and outpatients from our psychiatric hospital and other clinics were frozen at <-70°C, thawed at room temperature, and centrifuged. Aliquots were tested with the RDTD (CLIA Waived, Inc.) test strips and 2 urine fentanyl immunoassays: the ARK Fentanyl II assay (ARK Diagnostics Inc.) and the Immunalysis SEFRIA Fentanyl assay (Immunalysis Corporation). Both assays were conducted on the Abbott Alinity c chemistry analyzer (Abbott Laboratories). Mass spectrometry analysis was performed at ARUP Laboratories. All assays had a 1 ng/mL positive cutoff.

Results: A total of 142 urine samples included 70 positive and 72 negative samples. The RDTD strips had lower sensitivity (84.3%) and efficiency (85.9%) and showed a specificity of 87.5% compared to the other assays. The ARK Fentanyl II assay showed identical sensitivity (95.7%) to the Immunalysis SEFRIA Fentanyl assay but had higher specificity (94.4% vs 81.9%) and overall efficiency (95.1% vs 88.7%).

Conclusions: Differences were noted in the number of false negatives and positives among the assays. The RDTD demonstrated acceptable performance in detecting urine fentanyl in our patient population and would provide faster test results at point-of-care testing sites in our healthcare enterprise.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
尿芬太尼快速药物检测设备与质谱法和两种尿芬太尼化验方法的比较评估。
背景:一种新型快速药物检测设备(RDTD)可用于分析尿液中的芬太尼。随着芬太尼滥用现象在美国的增多,我们对 RDTD 检测条的分析性能进行了评估,并与质谱法和两种尿芬太尼免疫测定法进行了比较:方法:将从精神病医院和其他诊所的住院病人和门诊病人处采集的剩余尿液样本进行冷冻处理:总共 142 份尿液样本中包括 70 份阳性样本和 72 份阴性样本。与其他检测方法相比,RDTD 检测条的灵敏度(84.3%)和有效率(85.9%)较低,特异性为 87.5%。ARK 芬太尼 II 检测法的灵敏度(95.7%)与 Immunalysis SEFRIA 芬太尼检测法相同,但特异性(94.4% 对 81.9%)和总体效率(95.1% 对 88.7%)更高:结论:不同检测方法的假阴性和假阳性数量存在差异。RDTD在检测患者尿液中的芬太尼方面表现出了可接受的性能,并能在医疗机构的床旁检测点提供更快的检测结果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Applied Laboratory Medicine
Journal of Applied Laboratory Medicine MEDICAL LABORATORY TECHNOLOGY-
CiteScore
3.70
自引率
5.00%
发文量
137
期刊最新文献
SARS-CoV-2 Variants May Affect Saliva RT-PCR Assay Sensitivity. Quality Assurance for Multiplex Quantitative Clinical Chemistry Proteomics in Large Clinical Trials. Reference Values of Ceruloplasmin across the Adult Age Range in a Large Italian Healthy Population. Performance of Fentanyl Immunoassays in an ED Patient Population. A Pregnant Patient with a Positive Hepatitis C Antibody.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1