CBD and Its Metabolites Did Not Behave Identically in Cannabinoid Urine Screens

An experiment with six cannabinoid urine immunoassays found no cross-reactivity from parent CBD at the highest concentration tested, while certain hydroxylated CBD metabolites reacted in some assays at lower screening cutoffs. A statement about CBD alone therefore does not describe every related compound or test configuration.

Fortified urine, rather than a CBD dosing trial

Researchers added individual cannabinoid standards to verified drug-free human urine and tested six commercial homogeneous immunoassays on one analyzer platform. Initial concentrations ranged from 20 to 1,000 ng/mL, followed by additional work around selected decision points.

The assays were evaluated at a 50 ng/mL cutoff and a lower cutoff of 20 or 25 ng/mL, depending on the kit. Those cutoffs describe calibration against the intended THC-COOH target, not necessarily the actual concentration of a different compound producing the signal.

Cutoff and chemical identity changed the result

Parent CBD and 7-carboxy-CBD did not react at concentrations up to 1,000 ng/mL in the evaluated configurations. Some assays reacted to 6-hydroxy-CBD or 7-hydroxy-CBD at lower cutoffs, although these metabolites did not produce positive responses at the 50 ng/mL cutoff under the tested conditions.

Delta-8 THC metabolites and HHC carboxy metabolites also cross-reacted. Responses differed among compounds and kits. A positive cannabinoid screen consequently cannot identify the specific cannabinoid solely from its generic label.

Analytical possibility is not a clinical frequency estimate

The study shows what happened when known compounds were added to urine. It did not determine how often CBD users reach these concentrations, how frequently a particular product causes a positive screen, or the full excretion time course.

Likewise, no reaction at the highest tested concentration means none was observed within that experiment’s range. It is not proof of zero response under every possible condition.

Separate cross-reactivity from actual THC exposure

A product containing THC can lead to genuine THC-related exposure, which is a different explanation from another compound triggering an antibody-based assay. Resolving a particular result requires the exact kit, cutoff and appropriately specific confirmatory analysis.

These urine experiments measured analytical response, not psychoactive effect or driving ability. Neither a cross-reactive signal nor a confirmed urinary metabolite result independently establishes impairment at an earlier event.

Related: Interpreting THC concentration and impairment.

Primary research

The cross-reactivity of cannabinoid analogs (delta-8-THC, delta-10-THC and CBD), their metabolites and chiral carboxy HHC metabolites in urine of six commercially available homogeneous immunoassays. DOI: 10.1093/jat/bkad059.

Spread the love


The National Black Lawyers

top 40 lawyers

civil trial law

Lawyers of Distinction

Loading...

Recent Blog Articles

Synthetic Sweat Recovery Does Not Prove Cannabis Collection Pads Are Interchangeable in People

Similar recovery of an added cannabis metabolite from collection materials does not establish that those materials perform interchangeably when sampling people. A 2023 study compared DrugWipe5A pads, cosmetic pads and cotton swabs using fortified synthetic sweat. Its results concern laboratory extraction and measurement, with an important gap before clinical or…

Spread the love

Read Article: Synthetic Sweat Recovery Does Not Prove Cannabis Collection Pads Are Interchangeable in People

A Cannabis Trial’s Smoking-Procedure Change Was Not a Randomized Safety Comparison

A cannabis driving trial reported fewer adverse events after switching from paced smoking to smoking to a desired effect. That observation does not establish the size of a causal safety benefit. The trial randomized cannabis-potency conditions; the smoking procedure changed during the study because the initial procedure was poorly tolerated….

Spread the love

Read Article: A Cannabis Trial’s Smoking-Procedure Change Was Not a Randomized Safety Comparison

THC Measured Per Forehead Sweat Pad Cannot Be Converted Into a Blood Concentration

A result expressed as nanograms of THC per sweat pad measures the amount recovered from that pad. It does not provide a blood concentration. A study involving drivers investigated in Italy illustrates why collection units, confirmation and participant selection must remain visible when interpreting forehead-sweat evidence. The collection sampled the…

Spread the love

Read Article: THC Measured Per Forehead Sweat Pad Cannot Be Converted Into a Blood Concentration

Speak with an expert today!

Contact the offices of Okorie Okorocha for professional and reliable advice which you can trust.

Call (424) 363-3347 Contact Us