Matthias Bantle, Frederike Stöth, Wolfgang Weinmann, Marc Luginbühl
{"title":"Interlaboratory comparison of phosphatidylethanol in dried blood spots using different sampling devices.","authors":"Matthias Bantle, Frederike Stöth, Wolfgang Weinmann, Marc Luginbühl","doi":"10.1002/dta.3784","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Phosphatidylethanol (PEth) has become an important marker to assess drinking behaviour and monitor abstinence. Despite its increasing use, knowledge on robustness and standardization and comparability of methods and results are still limited. In 2022, the first international consensus for the use of PEth and its interpretation was published. To establish an experience-based foundation for further harmonization, three rounds of interlaboratory comparison using microsamples were conducted. Participating laboratories sent their sampling devices to the laboratory of Forensic Toxicology at the University of Bern, where for each round, four different authentic blood samples were applied to the devices and sent back. The PEth 16:0/18:1 target concentrations covered a range between 16 and 474 ng/mL (0.023 and 0.676 μmol/L, respectively) and included sample concentrations close to the decision limits of 20 and 200 ng/mL (0.025 and 0.28 μmol/L, respectively). Evaluation of the results based on guidelines by Horwitz and the Society of Toxicological and Forensic Chemistry (GTFCh) showed that 73% of all participating laboratories quantified and reported all samples (N = 4 for each round) within the acceptable limits. More than 90% quantified and reported at least one sample within the acceptable limits.</p>","PeriodicalId":160,"journal":{"name":"Drug Testing and Analysis","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Drug Testing and Analysis","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/dta.3784","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"BIOCHEMICAL RESEARCH METHODS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Phosphatidylethanol (PEth) has become an important marker to assess drinking behaviour and monitor abstinence. Despite its increasing use, knowledge on robustness and standardization and comparability of methods and results are still limited. In 2022, the first international consensus for the use of PEth and its interpretation was published. To establish an experience-based foundation for further harmonization, three rounds of interlaboratory comparison using microsamples were conducted. Participating laboratories sent their sampling devices to the laboratory of Forensic Toxicology at the University of Bern, where for each round, four different authentic blood samples were applied to the devices and sent back. The PEth 16:0/18:1 target concentrations covered a range between 16 and 474 ng/mL (0.023 and 0.676 μmol/L, respectively) and included sample concentrations close to the decision limits of 20 and 200 ng/mL (0.025 and 0.28 μmol/L, respectively). Evaluation of the results based on guidelines by Horwitz and the Society of Toxicological and Forensic Chemistry (GTFCh) showed that 73% of all participating laboratories quantified and reported all samples (N = 4 for each round) within the acceptable limits. More than 90% quantified and reported at least one sample within the acceptable limits.
期刊介绍:
As the incidence of drugs escalates in 21st century living, their detection and analysis have become increasingly important. Sport, the workplace, crime investigation, homeland security, the pharmaceutical industry and the environment are just some of the high profile arenas in which analytical testing has provided an important investigative tool for uncovering the presence of extraneous substances.
In addition to the usual publishing fare of primary research articles, case reports and letters, Drug Testing and Analysis offers a unique combination of; ‘How to’ material such as ‘Tutorials’ and ‘Reviews’, Speculative pieces (‘Commentaries’ and ‘Perspectives'', providing a broader scientific and social context to the aspects of analytical testing), ‘Annual banned substance reviews’ (delivering a critical evaluation of the methods used in the characterization of established and newly outlawed compounds).
Rather than focus on the application of a single technique, Drug Testing and Analysis employs a unique multidisciplinary approach to the field of controversial compound determination. Papers discussing chromatography, mass spectrometry, immunological approaches, 1D/2D gel electrophoresis, to name just a few select methods, are welcomed where their application is related to any of the six key topics listed below.