Trial reportTherapeutic drug monitoring2014
Quantification of 11-nor-9-carboxy-δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol in human oral fluid by gas chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry.
Trial report in Therapeutic drug monitoring, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
A sensitive and specific method for the quantification of 11-nor-9-carboxy-Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THCCOOH) in oral fluid collected with the Quantisal and Oral-Eze devices was developed and fully validated. Extracted analytes were derivatized with hexafluoroisopropanol and trifluoroacetic anhydride and quantified by gas chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry with negative chemical ionization. Standard curves, using linear least-squares regression with 1/x weighting were linear from 10 to 1000 ng/L with coefficients of determination >0.998 for both collection devices. Bias was 89.2%-112.6%, total imprecision 4.0%-5.1% coefficient of variation, and extraction efficiency >79.8% across the linear range for Quantisal-collected specimens. Bias was 84.6%-109.3%, total imprecision 3.6%-7.3% coefficient of variation, and extraction efficiency >92.6% for specimens collected with the Oral-Eze device at all 3 quality control concentrations (10, 120, and 750 ng/L). This effective high-throughput method reduces analysis time by 9 minutes per sample compared with our current 2-dimensional gas chromatography-mass spectrometry method and extends the capability of quantifying this important oral fluid analyte to gas chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry. This method was applied to the analysis of oral fluid specimens collected from individuals participating in controlled cannabis studies and will be effective for distinguishing passive environmental contamination from active cannabis smoking.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.