Method development and validation for simultaneous quantification of 15 drugs of abuse and prescription drugs and 7 of their metabolites in whole blood relevant in the context of driving under the influence of drugs--Usefulness of multi-analyte calibration

In the context of driving under the influence of drugs (DUID), not only common drugs of abuse may have an influence, but also medications with similar mechanisms of action. Simultaneous quantification of a variety of drugs and medications relevant in this context allows faster and more effective analyses. Therefore, multi-analyte approaches have gained more and more popularity in recent years. Usually, calibration curves for such procedures contain a mixture of all analytes, which might lead to mutual interferences. In this study we investigated whether the use of such mixtures leads to reliable results for authentic samples containing only one or two analytes. Five hundredmicroliters of whole blood were extracted by routine solid-phase extraction (SPE, HCX). Analysis was performed on an ABSciex 3200 QTrap instrument with ESI+ in scheduled MRM mode. The method was fully validated according to international guidelines including selectivity, recovery, matrix effects, accuracy and precision, stabilities, and limit of quantification. The selected SPE provided recoveries >60% for all analytes except 6-monoacetylmorphine (MAM) with coefficients of variation (CV) below 15% or 20% for quality controls (QC) LOW and HIGH, respectively. Ion suppression >30% was found for benzoylecgonine, hydrocodone, hydromorphone, MDA, oxycodone, and oxymorphone at QC LOW, however CVs were always below 10% (n = 6 different whole blood samples). Accuracy and precision criteria were fulfilled for all analytes except for MAM. Systematic investigation of accuracy determined for QC MED in a multi-analyte mixture compared to samples containing only single analytes revealed no relevant differences for any analyte, indicating that a multi-analyte calibration is suitable for the presented method. Comparison of approximately 60 samples to a former GC-MS method showed good correlation. The newly validated method was successfully applied to more than 1600 routine samples and 3 proficiency tests. (C) 2014 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.