ArticleDrug testing and analysis2025
Origin and Interpretation of Low Methamphetamine Levels Found in Amphetamine-Positive Urine Samples: Support for Methylation of Amphetamine as a Minor Metabolic Pathway.
Article in Drug testing and analysis, 2025. 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Methamphetamine is relatively uncommon on the European drug market, but Swedish drug test laboratories repeatedly detect low methamphetamine concentrations in urine samples containing high amphetamine levels, warranting clinical evaluation for suspected polydrug use. Of 12,062 routine samples screened positive for amphetamines, 86% were confirmed positive (≥ 200 μg/L) for amphetamine, 2.1% for methamphetamine, and 4.0% for 3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine (ecstasy) by liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry. Of the 259 methamphetamine-positive samples, 98% contained amphetamine concentrations above the reporting limit, consistent with the metabolic conversion of methamphetamine to amphetamine in the body. However, in most (69%) of these samples, the methamphetamine concentration was only < 2% of the amphetamine level, suggesting methamphetamine was not the primary drug taken. Chiral analysis of selected samples showed that after use of illicit street amphetamine with a racemic content of the l- and d-enantiomers, a similar l/d proportion was observed for methamphetamine. Similarly, in samples from patients receiving d-amphetamine-based ADHD medication, low d-methamphetamine levels were detected, even though the pharmaceutical products contained no methamphetamine. This observation, together with the parallel l/d-enantiomer distributions, supports amphetamine N-methylation as a trace, albeit quantitatively insignificant, metabolic pathway in humans. From both a clinical and forensic perspective, a low urinary methamphetamine concentration of less than a few percent of the amphetamine level therefore does not warrant further clinical evaluation for suspected polydrug use. The present findings further demonstrate that chiral analysis of both amphetamine and methamphetamine is an effective approach for distinguishing between illicit and therapeutic sources in positive screening drug tests for the amphetamines.
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.