Woodworth Alison, Saunders Al N, Koenig John W, Moyer Thomas P, Turk John, Dietzen Dennis J
Department of Pediatrics, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO 63110, USA.
Clin Chem. 2006 Apr;52(4):743-6. doi: 10.1373/clinchem.2005.060616. Epub 2006 Feb 2.
Immunoassay-based screening for amphetamines has a variable positive predictive value (PPV) for detecting amphetamine abuse. The lack of immunoassay specificity necessitates confirmatory testing by gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC/MS), but the technical complexity and expense of GC/MS limit its availability. Physicians may make decisions regarding patient disposition based on unverified results. In this study we assessed the utility of using dose-response properties to distinguish urine samples containing amphetamines from samples containing cross-immunoreactive species.
Urine was supplemented with known concentrations of amphetamine, methamphetamine, methylenedioxymethamphetamine (MDMA), or pseudoephedrine. Using a series of dilutions, we determined the maximum change in rate over the fractional change in concentration for each compound in the Emit II amphetamine/methamphetamine immunoassay. Patient urine samples that screened positive for amphetamines were diluted 1:1, 1:10, and 1:20, and maximum slope estimates within the dynamic assay range were determined. An optimal slope cutoff that differentiated samples containing (meth)amphetamine from those containing cross-reacting species was determined by ROC analysis.
The slope of the dose response was largest for amphetamine and methamphetamine, followed by MDMA and pseudoephedrine. The optimum slope cutoff for identifying patient specimens containing (meth)amphetamine was 320 (sensitivity, 96%; specificity, 90%; PPV, 92%). High concentrations of less reactive compounds may mask low concentrations of amphetamines.
Use of the slope of the dose-response relationship in patient urine specimens can enhance the PPV of presumptive positive immunoassay results but does not exclude the presence of low amphetamine concentrations in samples containing high concentrations of cross-reactive species.
基于免疫分析的苯丙胺筛查在检测苯丙胺滥用方面具有可变的阳性预测值(PPV)。免疫分析缺乏特异性,因此需要通过气相色谱 - 质谱联用(GC/MS)进行确证检测,但GC/MS的技术复杂性和成本限制了其可用性。医生可能会根据未经证实的结果做出关于患者处置的决定。在本研究中,我们评估了利用剂量反应特性来区分含有苯丙胺的尿液样本与含有交叉免疫反应性物质的样本的效用。
向尿液中添加已知浓度的苯丙胺、甲基苯丙胺、亚甲基二氧甲基苯丙胺(摇头丸)或伪麻黄碱。通过一系列稀释,我们在Emit II苯丙胺/甲基苯丙胺免疫分析中确定了每种化合物浓度分数变化时的最大速率变化。对苯丙胺筛查呈阳性的患者尿液样本进行1:1、1:10和1:20稀释,并确定动态分析范围内的最大斜率估计值。通过ROC分析确定区分含有(甲基)苯丙胺的样本与含有交叉反应性物质的样本的最佳斜率截断值。
苯丙胺和甲基苯丙胺的剂量反应斜率最大,其次是摇头丸和伪麻黄碱。识别含有(甲基)苯丙胺的患者标本的最佳斜率截断值为320(敏感性,96%;特异性,90%;PPV,92%)。高浓度的反应性较低的化合物可能会掩盖低浓度的苯丙胺。
利用患者尿液标本中剂量反应关系的斜率可以提高推定阳性免疫分析结果的PPV,但不能排除含有高浓度交叉反应性物质的样本中存在低浓度苯丙胺的情况。