ArticleScientific reports2026
Bioanalysis of amphetamines in alternative matrices using a sensitive and validated liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry method and its application to real samples.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Amphetamines abuse remains a major concern in both clinical and forensic toxicology. While conventional matrices like blood and urine are commonly used, their detection window is limited. This study aimed to validate a UHPLC-ESI-MS/MS method for amphetamines detection across both conventional and alternative biological specimens and apply it to real patient samples. A validated UHPLC-ESI-MS/MS method was used to quantify amphetamines in whole blood, urine, oral fluid, scalp hair, and fingernail specimens collected from fifty amphetamine abusers. Method validation followed international guidelines, assessing parameters including linearity, sensitivity, precision, and carry-over. Decontamination protocols and wash analyses were performed to exclude external contamination for keratinized matrices. The method demonstrated excellent linearity (r² = 0.995–0.998) and sensitivity (LOD = 2 ng/mL or ng/mg) across all matrices. Oral fluid showed strong correlation with recent drug use and was a reliable non-invasive alternative to blood and urine. Hair yielded the highest amphetamine concentrations due to melanin binding, whereas nail showed lower levels but provided a complementary window for retrospective exposure. Simultaneous quantification of amphetamines in five matrices provides a comprehensive assessment of both recent and chronic drug use. Hair remains the superior matrix for long-term detection, but nail offers valuable supplementary information. Oral fluid emerged as a practical and reliable tool for recent exposure monitoring. This is the first study to report amphetamine concentrations in all five matrices from the same individuals, offering critical insights for toxicological interpretations.
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.