4.2 Article

Sensitive Determination of Cannabinoids in Whole Blood by LC-MS-MS After Rapid Removal of Phospholipids by Filtration

Journal

JOURNAL OF ANALYTICAL TOXICOLOGY
Volume 41, Issue 5, Pages 382-391

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1093/jat/bkx030

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Direct analysis of Delta(9)-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) and other cannabinoids in crude acetonitrile extracts of whole blood by liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry using pneumatically assisted electrospray ionization (LC-ESI-MS-MS) was subjected to pronounced ion suppression from co-eluting phospholipids (PLs). The interferences were mainly caused by the lysophosphatidylcholine and lysophosphatidylethanolamine classes of PLs. The PLs were easily removed from crude extracts by filtration through a sorbent with Lewis acid properties, which typically increased the THC and cannabinol (CBN) signal intensities by a factor of 5. Based on this technique, a simple highthroughput LC-MS-MS method was developed for the determination of cannabinoids in 100 mu L samples of whole blood. The lower limits of quantification were 0.2 mu g/L for THC, CBN, cannabidiol (CBD) and.9-tetrahydrocannabinolic acid A (THCA-A) and 0.5 mu g/L for 11-hydroxy-.9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC-OH) and 11-nor-9-carboxy-.9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC-COOH). The mean ion suppression levels after clean-up were 10% (THC), 9% (CBN), 17% (CBD), 0% (THC-OH), 2% (THC-COOH) and 9% (THCA-A) at blood concentration levels of 1-10 mu g/L. The mean true extraction recoveries were 97% (THC), 101% (CBN), 101% (CBD), 98% (THC-OH), 95% (THC-COOH) and 90% (THCA-A) at the same concentration levels. The relative intra-laboratory reproducibility standard deviations were < 9% at concentrations of 1 mu g/L or higher. The trueness expressed as the relative bias of the test results was within +/- 4% at concentrations of 1 mu g/L or higher.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available