ArticleThe journal of applied laboratory medicine2024
Performance Evaluation of 2 FDA-Approved Fentanyl Immunoassays against LC-MS/MS Reference.
Article in The journal of applied laboratory medicine, 2024. 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.
- Interpol review of forensic drug chemistry, 2022-2025.Forensic science international. Synergy · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundFentanyl, a synthetic opioid, has caused many recent overdose deaths. Diagnosis of fentanyl abuse is not served by traditional opiate assays due to differences in chemical structure between synthetics and natural opioids. To our knowledge, this is the first study that uses liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) as the reference method to evaluate and compare the ARK Fentanyl II Assay (ARK II) and the Fentanyl II Enzyme Immunoassay by Roche (FEN2). The ARK II is designed to detect fentanyl in urine samples, whereas the FEN2 is designed to detect norfentanyl, which is the major metabolite.
methodsTwo hundred patient urine samples including 100 positive and 100 negative samples according to an in-house LC-MS/MS assay were selected for the study. These samples were tested using the ARK II and the FEN2 to determine their performances relative to LC-MS/MS results.
resultsThe FEN2 showed a positive and negative predictive value of 100% and 97% and a concordance with LC-MS/MS of 98.5% (kappa 0.97). The ARK II showed a positive and negative predictive value of 100% and 95% and a concordance with LC-MS/MS of 97.5% (kappa 0.95). Additionally, the FEN2 accurately identified 9 positive samples with a range of fentanyl concentrations from 0 to 18 ng/mL for which norfentanyl levels were less than the cutoff of 5 ng/mL, indicating potentially greater sensitivity than otherwise stated.
conclusionsThe FEN2 and the ARK II were evaluated to be similar in terms of positive and negative predictive value during the analysis of 200 patient samples, as well as equally concordant with the LC-MS/MS reference, despite differences in design.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39001780What 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.