Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35770374›Full record

Trial reportJournal of analytical toxicology2022

Urinary Excretion Profile of Cannabinoid Analytes Following Acute Administration of Oral and Vaporized Cannabis in Infrequent Cannabis Users.

Dennis J Sholler, C Austin Zamarripa, Tory R Spindle, Erin L Martin, David Kuntz, Ryan Vandrey, Megan Grabenauer

Erratum issuedOpen access · hybridAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Journal of analytical toxicology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 20% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Interpol review of forensic drug chemistry, 2022-2025.Forensic science international. Synergy · 2026
    Review
  2. Interpol review of forensic toxicology, 2023-2025.Forensic science international. Synergy · 2026
    Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Advances and Challenges in Modeling Cannabidiol Pharmacokinetics and Hepatotoxicity.Drug metabolism and disposition: the biological fate of chemicals · 2024
    Review
  7. ΔCardiovascular toxicology · 2023
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Dennis J ShollerBehavioral Pharmacology Research Unit, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, 5510 Nathan Shock Dr., Baltimore, MD 21224, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-5043-2918
C Austin ZamarripaBehavioral Pharmacology Research Unit, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, 5510 Nathan Shock Dr., Baltimore, MD 21224, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-6426-8984
Tory R SpindleBehavioral Pharmacology Research Unit, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, 5510 Nathan Shock Dr., Baltimore, MD 21224, USA.
Erin L MartinDepartment of Neuroscience, Medical University of South Carolina, 125 Doughty St., Charleston, SC 29403, USA.
David KuntzClinical Reference Laboratory, 8433 Quivira Rd, Lenexa, KS 66214, USA.
Ryan VandreyBehavioral Pharmacology Research Unit, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, 5510 Nathan Shock Dr., Baltimore, MD 21224, USA.
Megan GrabenauerCenter for Forensic Sciences, RTI International, 3040 East Cornwallis Rd., Research Triangle Park, NC 27709, USA.
Johns Hopkins University · USMedical University of South Carolina · USRTI International · US

Funding

HUMAN BEHAVIORAL PHARMACOLOGY OF SUBSTANCE ABUSET32DA007209 · NIDA · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI Eric C. Strain, Elise M Weerts · 1985 to 2026
$12.9M
DRUG ABUSE TRAINING PROGRAMT32DA007288 · NIDA · MEDICAL UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA · PI Christopher W Cowan, Rachel Penrod-Martin · 1991 to 2026
$11.8M
The DRUID App to Test ImpairmentR44DA046272 · NIDA · DRUIDAPP, LLC · PI MILBURN, MICHAEL A · 2019 to 2019
$224k
National Institute of Justice 2016-DN-BX-0193NIDA NIH HHS DA046272-01A1NIDA NIH HHS R44 DA046272NIDA NIH HHS T32 DA007209NIDA NIH HHS T32DA007209
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Traditionally, smoking has been the predominant method for administering cannabis, but alternative routes of administration have become more prevalent. Additionally, research examining urinary cannabinoid excretion profiles has primarily focused on 11-nor-9-carboxy-∆9-tetrahydrocannabinol (∆9-THC-COOH), a metabolite of ∆9-tetrahydrocannabinol (∆9-THC), as the primary analyte. The aim of the current study was to characterize the urinary excretion profile of ∆9-THC-COOH, ∆9-THC, ∆8-tetrahydrocannabinol (∆8-THC), 11-hydroxy-∆9-tetrahydrocannabinol (11-OH-∆9-THC), ∆9-tetrahydrocannabivarin (THCV), 11-nor-∆9-tetrahydrocannabivarin-9-carboxlic acid (THCV-COOH), cannabidiol (CBD), cannabinol (CBN) and 8,11-dihydroxytetrahydrocannabinol (8,11-diOH-∆9-THC) following controlled administration of both oral and vaporized cannabis. Participants (n = 21, 11 men/10 women) who were infrequent cannabis users ingested cannabis-containing brownies (0, 10 and 25 mg ∆9-THC) and inhaled vaporized cannabis (0, 5 and 20 mg ∆9-THC) across six double-blind outpatient sessions. Urinary concentrations of ∆9-THC analytes were measured at baseline and for 8 h after cannabis administration. Sensitivity, specificity and agreement between the three immunoassays (IAs) for ∆9-THC-COOH (cutoffs of 20, 50 and 100 ng/mL) and liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS-MS) analyses (confirmatory cutoff concentrations of 15 ng/mL) were assessed. Urinary concentrations for ∆9-THC-COOH, ∆9-THC, 11-OH-∆9-THC, THCV, CBN and 8,11-diOH-∆9-THC all peaked at 5-6 h and 4 h following oral and vaporized cannabis administration, respectively. At each active dose, median maximum concentrations (Cmax) for detected analytes were quantitatively higher after oral cannabis administration compared to vaporized. Using current recommended federal workplace drug-testing criteria (screening via IA with a cutoff of ≥50 ng/mL and confirmation via LC-MS-MS at a cutoff of ≥15 ng/mL), urine specimens tested positive for ∆9-THC-COOH in 97.6% of oral sessions and 59.5% of vaporized sessions with active ∆9-THC doses. These data indicate that while ∆9-THC-COOH may serve as the most consistent confirmatory analyte under the current drug-testing guidelines, future work examining 11-OH-∆9-THC under similar parameters could yield an alternative analyte that may be helpful in distinguishing between licit and illicit cannabis products.

Indexed as

CannabidiolCannabinoidsCannabisHallucinogensAdministration, OralAnalgesicsCannabinolDronabinolFemaleHumansMaleSubstance Abuse DetectionAnalgesicsCannabidiolCannabinoidsCannabinolDronabinolHallucinogens

Identifiers

PMID35770374
PMCPMC9995664
OpenAlexW4283720751

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.