Canceled THC Confirmations Were an Isomer-Interference Problem, Not Negative Drug Tests

When a laboratory cancels THC confirmation because an interfering isomer prevents reliable interpretation, the outcome is unresolved, not a negative drug test. A casework study of delta-8 THC illustrates why the reason for a canceled result matters.

An analytical problem emerged in casework

Chan-Hosokawa and colleagues described increasing interference involving delta-8 and delta-9 THC and related metabolites in driving-investigation specimens. Testing cancellations reached a reported monthly peak of 3.7% in February 2019.

The issue was overlapping analytical signals. It prevented the laboratory from confidently applying its reporting procedure; it did not establish that the specimen contained no cannabinoid. Nor did cancellation alone establish which isomer was present.

Method development addressed separation

The investigators developed and validated an updated two-dimensional LC–MS-MS approach with a longer run to separate the compounds. They subsequently reported an interference incidence below 0.5%.

The earlier cancellation rate and later interference figure describe the laboratory’s experience under different procedures. They should not be transformed into estimates of delta-8 use in the general population or a claim that the revised method eliminates every possible interference.

Read the disposition and its reason together

A negative result, a canceled analysis and an unquantifiable identification carry different meanings. Before interpreting an old report, determine what was tested, which reporting criteria failed and whether a result was ever issued.

An updated assay does not retroactively generate a concentration for a previously unresolved specimen. Any later testing would need its own documented result. Even successful isomer identification remains exposure evidence; it is not a direct measurement of driving impairment.

Related: How the reference specimen changes a cannabis accuracy claim.

Research cited

Chan-Hosokawa A; Nguyen L; Lattanzio N; Adams WR; Journal of Analytical Toxicology; 2022. Emergence of Delta-8 Tetrahydrocannabinol in DUID Investigation Casework: Method Development, Validation and Application.

Spread the love


The National Black Lawyers

top 40 lawyers

civil trial law

Lawyers of Distinction

Loading...

Recent Blog Articles

A Living-Subject Cannabis Blood-Fraction Ratio Did Not Validate Postmortem Conversion

A plasma-to-whole-blood relationship observed in living cannabis users did not validate the same conversion after death. Giroud and colleagues found substantially greater variability in postmortem samples and cautioned against applying an exposure-time model in that setting. The study compared different blood fractions The investigators examined cannabinoid measurements in eight living…

Spread the love

Read Article: A Living-Subject Cannabis Blood-Fraction Ratio Did Not Validate Postmortem Conversion

A Cannabis Muscle-Tone Opinion Needs a Defined Measurement Method

A statement that someone’s muscle tone indicates cannabis impairment needs a defined observation and measurement method. A published perspective questions whether a subjective limb assessment can carry the same meaning as a standardized clinical evaluation. The critique concerns what was measured The perspective contrasts descriptions such as normal, rigid or…

Spread the love

Read Article: A Cannabis Muscle-Tone Opinion Needs a Defined Measurement Method

A THC-Positive Driver Case Series Did Not Supply a Drug-Free Specificity Group

A study selected from THC-positive driver investigations cannot establish drug-free specificity without a suitable negative comparison group. A two-year case review provides useful observations within its selected cases, but it does not answer every diagnostic-accuracy question. Selection happened before the final analysis Declues and colleagues began with THC-positive cases from…

Spread the love

Read Article: A THC-Positive Driver Case Series Did Not Supply a Drug-Free Specificity Group

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