Enter your email address
Submit
Write your message
Volume 10, Issue 3 (May-June 2016)
IJT 2016, 10(3): 47-50 |
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Timcheh-Hariri A, Balali-Mood M, Sadeghi M, Lari N, Riahi-Zanjani B. Comparison of ELISA and TLC Methods for the Morphine Detection in Urine of Drug Abusers . IJT 2016; 10 (3) :47-50
URL: http://ijt.arakmu.ac.ir/article-1-494-en.html
URL: http://ijt.arakmu.ac.ir/article-1-494-en.html
Alireza Timcheh-Hariri1 
, Mahdi Balali-Mood1 , Mahmood Sadeghi1 , Niloofar Lari1 , Bamdad Riahi-Zanjani * 2
, Mahdi Balali-Mood1 , Mahmood Sadeghi1 , Niloofar Lari1 , Bamdad Riahi-Zanjani * 2
1- Department of Medical Toxicology Research Center, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran.
2- Department of Medical Toxicology Research Center, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran. ,riahib@mums.ac.ir
2- Department of Medical Toxicology Research Center, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran. ,
Abstract: (6718 Views)
Background: The current study was conducted to compare ELISA with thin layer chromatography (TLC) methods for diagnosis of morphine in the urine.
Methods: Positive urine samples for morphine confirmed by immunochromatographic strips were collected from the Imam Reza Toxicology Laboratory, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran in 2012 for the current study. Then, the collated urine samples (70) were analyzed by both ELISA and TLC methods.
Results: On analyzing samples by TLC, 57 out of 70 (81.4%) revealed morphine spot, whereas by ELISA method all samples were positive. The difference was statisticaly significant (P=0.0001). Both immunoassays had the same 100% positive results. The possible 18.6% false positive results might be due to drug interactions. TLC is more specific but time-consuming and less sensitive than ELISA is. However, TLC is an old method but more reliable than ELISA.
Conclusion: Contrary to the claim that commercially available ELISA kits have a high specificity for detection of morphine derivatives; it seems that false positive results may occur. It is thus recommended that all positive results obtained from ELISA be checked by a cheap widely available confirmation test of TLC or ideally by a quantitative technique such as GC-Mass spectroscopy, particularly for legal purposes.
References
1. Standridge JB, Adams SM, Zotos AP. Urine drug screen: a valuable office procedure. Am Fam Physician 2010;81(5):635-40.
2. Moeller KE, Lee KC, Kissack JC. Urine drug screening: practical guide for clinicians. Mayo Clin Proc 2008;83(1):66-76. [DOI:10.4065/83.1.66]
3. Riahi-Zanjani, B False Positive and False Negative Results in Urine Drug Screening Tests: Tampering Methods and Specimen Integrity Tests, Pharmacologyonline 2014;1(1):102-08.
4. Laurie D, Manson AJ, Mounsey A, Rowe11 FJ, Sevior J. Rapid enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) with a visual end-point for detecting opiate narcotics in urine. Analyst 1987;112(5):687-8. [DOI:10.1039/an9871200687]
5. Hand CW, Moore RA, McQuay HJ, Allen MC, Sear JW. Analysis of morphine and its major metabolites by differential radioimmunoassay. Ann Clin Biochem 1987;24(2):153-60. [DOI:10.1177/000456328702400205]
6. Tasker RAR, Nakatsu K. Simultaneous quantitation of morphine, monobutanoylmorphine and dibutanoyhnorphine using short capillary column gas chromatography-mass spectrometry. Analyst 1986;111:563-5. [DOI:10.1039/an9861100563]
7. Standridge JB, Adams SM, Zotos AP. Urine drug screen: a valuable office procedure. Am Fam Physician 2010;81(5):635-40.
8. United Nations. Recommended Methods for the Detection and Assay of heroin, Cannabinoids, Cocaine, Amphetamine, Methamphetamine, and Ring-Substituted Amphetamine Derivatives in Biological Specimens. New York. 1995.
9. Weatherburn D, Lind B. The impact of law enforcement activity on a heroin market. Addiction1997;92(5);557-69. [DOI:10.1111/j.1360-0443.1997.tb02913.x]
10. Inaba DS, Cohen WE. Uppers, Downers, All Arounders: Physical and Mental Effects of Psychoactive Drugs. 5th ed. Ashland: CNS Publications, Inc; 2004.
11. https://www.google.com/
12. Cone EJ, Dickerson S, Paul BD, Mitchell JM. Forensic drug testing For opiates. V. Urine Testing for Heroine, Morphine, and Codeine With commercial Immunoassays. J Anal Toxicol 1993;17(3):156-64. [DOI:10.1093/jat/17.3.156]
13. National Institute on Drugs of Abuse (NIDA Research Monograph). Urine Testing for Drugs of Abuse 1986, No. 73.
14. Rezai-Basiri M, Ghazi-khansari M, Faghih A, Sadeghi M, Lotfalizadeh N, Eghbal M, Mohajell-Nayebi A, Rezazadeh H, Arshad Zadeh M. Screening of Morphine & Codeine in Urine of Opioid Abusers by Rapid and TLC Analysis. Eur J Gen Med 2010;7(2):192-6. [DOI:10.29333/ejgm/82849]
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |
The Iranian Journal of Toxicology
Arak University of Medical Sciences in collaboration with the Iranian Society of Toxicology
Website: http://ijt.arakmu.ac.ir
Email: tox.journal@gmail.com
