ArticleAnalytical and bioanalytical chemistry2025
Challenges of cannabidiol determination in emulsified cosmetics and application of solid-phase extraction followed by HPLC-UV-MS/MS.
Article in Analytical and bioanalytical chemistry, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Interpol review of forensic drug chemistry, 2022-2025.Forensic science international. Synergy · 2026Review
- Cannabidiol's Antioxidant Properties in Skin Care Products and Legislative Regulations.Plants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Optimized Extraction Method for Neutral Cannabinoids Quantification Using UHPLC-HRMS/MS.Biomolecules · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The recent surge in popularity of cannabidiol-infused products extends beyond food and supplements to the cosmetic industry. Accurate labeling remains a significant concern, as many products fail to meet advertised cannabidiol content and/or contain psychoactive tetrahydrocannabinol above the permissible levels. In this work, we present the use of an HPLC-UV-MS/MS method for the quantification of five major cannabinoids (cannabidiol, cannabidiolic acid, tetrahydrocannabinol, tetrahydrocannabinolic acid, and cannabigerol) in oil-in-water cosmetic emulsions. The sample extraction is based on dispersing the sample in isopropanol, followed by solid-phase extraction using Bond Elut Plexa PAX cartridge. The viability of this method is demonstrated by comparing matrix effects in samples subjected to solid-phase extraction (0‒11% suppression of cannabidiol ionization) to samples extracted without additional purification steps (0‒84% ionization suppression of cannabidiol ionization). The limit of quantification is determined at 0.1 mg/g and the calibration is employed in the range of 0.1‒50 mg/g for cannabidiol and 0.1‒10 mg/g for all other analytes. Finally, 36 real cosmetic samples from the Czech market were analyzed. Of these, 14 indicated the amount of CBD on the label but only five (36%) were accurate, i.e., within 90‒110% of the labeled amount, and a considerable amount of THC (0.16 ± 0.01 mg/g) was found in one sample. These findings contribute to the cumulating evidence that cannabidiol-based consumer products are often mislabeled and highlight the importance of better regulatory compliance.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39762637What 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.