ArticleMolecules (Basel, Switzerland)2021
Comparison of Two Immunoassay Screening Methods and a LC-MS/MS in Detecting Traditional and Designer Benzodiazepines in Urine.
Article in Molecules (Basel, Switzerland), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparison of Immunoassay Results near Cutoff Values with LC-MS/MS in Individuals with Substance Use Disorder Under Probation.Metabolites · 2026Article
- Determination of 14 Benzodiazepine Multiresidues in Aquaculture Environment by Ultra-High-Performance Liquid Chromatography-Tandem Mass Spectrometry.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Substance misuse disorder in Saudi Arabia: A comprehensive examination of current demographic patterns, trends, and intervention requirements.Saudi pharmaceutical journal : SPJ : the official publication of the Saudi Pharmaceutical Society · 2024Article
- Despite the improved clinical sensitivity of the Roche benzodiazepines II assay it cannot replace mass spectrometry in all patient populations.Journal of mass spectrometry and advances in the clinical lab · 2024Article
- A critical review of workplace drug testing methods for old and new psychoactive substances: Gaps, advances, and perspectives.Saudi pharmaceutical journal : SPJ : the official publication of the Saudi Pharmaceutical Society · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Sensitive and specific immunoassay screening methods for the detection of benzodiazepines in urine represent an important prerequisite for routine analysis in clinical and forensic toxicology. Moreover, emerging designer benzodiazepines force labs to keep their methodologies updated, in order to evaluate the reliability of the immunochemical techniques. This study aimed at evaluating the sensitivity and specificity of two different immunoassay methods for the detection of benzodiazepines in urine, through a comparison with the results obtained by a newly developed liquid chromatographic tandem mass spectrometric (LC-MS/MS) procedure. A cohort of authentic urine samples (N = 501) were processed, before and after a hydrolysis procedure, through two immunoassays and an LC-MS/MS method. The LC-MS/MS target procedure was optimized for monitoring 25 different molecules, among traditional and designer benzodiazepines, including some metabolites. At least one of the monitored substances was detected in 100 out of the 501 samples. A good specificity was observed for the two immunoassays (>0.99), independently of the cut-offs and the sample hydrolysis. The new kit demonstrated a fairly higher sensitivity, always higher than 0.90; in particular, a high cross-reactivity of the new immunoassay was observed for samples that tested positive for lorazepam and 7-aminoclonazepam. The two immunoassays appeared adequate to monitor not only traditional benzodiazepines but also new designer ones.
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.