Why a Cannabis Urine Assay Used Lower Sensitivity for Its Highest Concentrations

An assay designed to detect trace urinary cannabinoids deliberately used a less responsive measurement channel for high concentrations. This was a way to avoid detector saturation and extend the usable range, rather than evidence that high-exposure samples needed less careful analysis.

Two analytical ranges addressed different problems

The method measured THC, CBD, CBN, 11-hydroxy-THC and THC-COOH using UHPLC–tandem mass spectrometry. Positive electrospray ionization supplied sensitive measurements at low concentrations. A deliberately detuned negative-ion channel covered a higher range, approximately 12.5 to 800 ng/mL.

The ranges overlapped, allowing the investigators to compare measurements from both channels in fortified samples. Agreement in that overlap supported combining the approaches within one analytical workflow.

Sensitivity and quantitation range are different properties

A low detection limit describes the ability to distinguish a small signal from background. It does not establish that the same settings can accurately quantify an arbitrarily large amount. Saturation can compromise a high-concentration result even when the instrument readily detects it.

The study’s dual-channel design reduced the need to prepare and analyze some samples again. That operational benefit depended on calibration, controls and demonstrated agreement; it was not a license to report concentrations beyond a validated range.

Free and total measurements used different preparation

The researchers also distinguished unconjugated cannabinoids from measurements obtained after enzymatic and alkaline hydrolysis. Hydrolysis was intended to include conjugated material but introduced additional preparation steps and analyte losses.

The unconjugated and total methods consequently had different detection limits and recovery characteristics. A report should identify which preparation was used before two numerical results are compared.

What this validation cannot establish

The validation relied heavily on fortified human urine. Its high analytical sensitivity did not, by itself, classify a person’s exposure as active smoking or secondhand exposure, establish the exact last-use time, or measure impairment.

For an individual report, request the analyte, preparation, ionization channel, calibration range and handling of values outside that range. Those details determine what the number means analytically. They cannot be replaced by a general claim that mass spectrometry is highly sensitive.

Related: Interpreting THC concentration and impairment.

Primary research

Analysis of Cannabinoids and Their Metabolites in Human Urine. DOI: 10.1021/acs.analchem.5b02603.

Spread the love


The National Black Lawyers

top 40 lawyers

civil trial law

Lawyers of Distinction

Loading...

Recent Blog Articles

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

An Unidentified Serum Compound Does Not Justify Subtracting 14.6% From Every THC-COOH Result

A serum study found a compound that could interfere with THC-COOH measurement, but its reported median relative abundance was not a universal measurement error. The finding supports checking a laboratory’s separation and identification procedures. It does not justify subtracting 14.6% from every reported cannabis-metabolite result. The problem appeared in authentic…

Spread the love

Read Article: An Unidentified Serum Compound Does Not Justify Subtracting 14.6% From Every THC-COOH Result

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