Abstract
Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is a common neuro-developmental disorder. The symptoms of ADHD include difficulty in attention, memory and impulse control. Many pharmaceutical formulations (stimulants and non-stimulants) are available on the market to treat ADHD symptoms. The most commonly used drugs for treatment are amphetamine, methylphenidate, atomoxetine, bupropion, guanfacine and clonidine. In the field of pharmaceuticals, bioanalysis is an important tool used for the quantification of drugs and their metabolites present in biological samples using various analytical methods. Although a number of analytical methods were reported for the quantification of these drugs in biological samples of experimental animals, due to species differences, it is important to develop analytical methods to quantify these drugs in human biological samples to aid forensic and pharmacokinetic studies. In this review, we compile the bio-analytical methods such as spectrophotometry, spectrofluorimetry, mass spectrometry, electrophoresis, liquid chromatography and gas chromatography used for the quantification of ADHD drugs in human biological samples such as blood, plasma, serum, oral fluids, sweat, hair and urine based on earlier published articles from various journals.
1 Introduction
Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is a psychiatric condition and neuro-developmental disorder typically seen in children, with symptoms including lack of attention, impulsiveness and hyperactivity [1,2]. Worldwide, 8%-12% of children [3] and 2.5% of adults are affected by ADHD [4] and the cause of this disorder is still not clear [5]. Students with this disorder have poor memory and attention, leading to poor academic achievement [6,7] and also affecting their daily activities [8]. Several genetically related studies were conducted in children and adults to explore the genetic risk factors contributing to ADHD [9,10]. Brain imaging studies can assist with ADHD diagnoses, allowing changes in the structure, function and distribution patterns of the brain to be elucidated [11]. Biomarkers can be used for improving the diagnosis and prevention of central nervous system disorders. Some of the important groups of biomarkers were studied for diagnosis of ADHD and its subtypes [12]. Quantitative electro-encephalography (QEEG) measurement of the theta/beta ratio (TBR) is an important tool for ADHD diagnosis with good sensitivity, selectivity and reliability [13,14]. For treatment, approved drugs include both stimulants and non-stimulants at various doses and in various dosage forms. In the class of stimulants, derivatives of amphetamine (AMP) and methylphenidate (MPH) formulations are the most important first line drugs. These drugs have high efficacy. Initially, AMP and MPH increase the central dopaminergic and norepinephrine activity. Due to the specific cellular mechanism of action of AMP and MPH, they can be used to treat depression and anxiety as well as ADHD. In the class of non-stimulants, atomoxetine (ATX) - the selective noradrenaline reuptake inhibitor, bupropion (BUP) - the norepinephrine and dopamine reuptake inhibitor and guanfacine (GNF) and clonidine (CLN) – both selective α2-adrenergic receptor agonists are used to treat ADHD [15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24]. Non-pharmacological treatment including counselling, proper diet maintenance, behavioural parenting and classroom-based interventions may also be useful for the management of ADHD [25].
Bioanalysis is described as qualitative and quantitative measurement of drugs and their metabolites present in biological samples such as blood, plasma, serum, saliva, cerebrospinal fluid, breath, sweat, hair and urine. Bioanalysis can elucidate the pharmacokinetics and toxico-kinetics of drugs and can lead to further understanding of the applications of the drugs in clinical, forensic and bioequivalence studies [26,27]. The steps involved in bioanalysis are sample collection, sample preparation and sample analysis [28]. From this, sample preparation is considered one of the most important steps as it removes interferences and pre-concentrates the analytes of interest to achieve good accuracy and precision. The most important methods for sample preparation include liquid-liquid extraction (LLE), protein precipitation (PP) and solid phase extraction (SPE) [29]. Commonly, after a sample preparation procedure, high performance liquid chromatography coupled with tandem mass spectroscopy [30] is used for detection and quantification of drugs in biological samples.
In this present study, we mainly focussed on analytical methods for the determination of six pharmaceutically important drugs used to treat ADHD i.e., AMP, MPH, ATX, BUP, GNF, and CLN in human biological samples.
2 Chemistry and physio-chemical properties of ADHD drugs
2.1 AMP
AMP belongs to the ‘β-phenylethylamines’ class of drugs. Its chemical formula is C9H13N and molecular weight is 135.21 g/mol [31]. It is a weak basic, synthetic drug, existing in two forms, free base form and salt form i.e., AMP hydrochloride (HCl). AMP in its salt form is highly water soluble whereas AMP in its base form shows less solubility in water. It is a chiral drug existing in two enantiomeric forms, S (+)-AMP and R (-)-AMP, respectively [32]. Vree et al. determined the pKa and partition co-efficient (P) values of some AMP like drugs (ethylamphetamine, methamphetamine, etc.). The pKa value of phenylethylamine was 9.88 and ‘P’ values were 20.8 (chloroform in water) and 0.277 (heptane in water), respectively [33]. AMP showed UV absorbance at 287 nm using n-hexane as the solvent [34]. The mass spectrum of AMP showed ion peaks at mass to charge (m/z) ratios of 91, 119, and 136 [35].
2.2 MPH
MPH is a solid crystalline drug with a systematic name of methyl-2-phenyl2-(piperidin-2-yl) acetate. Its molecular formula is C14H19NO2, molecular mass is 233.31 g/mol, boiling point is 136°C and melting point is 74°C. The molecule contains 1 hydrogen (H) bond donor, 3 H bond acceptors and 4 rotatable bonds, and fully complies with Lipinski’s rules. The molecule also has two stereo-centres that generate 4 possible configurational isomers. These isomers are divided into two pairs of enantiomers, erythro (2R, 2’R, and 2S, 2’S) and threo (2R, 2’S, and 2S, 2’R) [36]. MPH is soluble in ethyl acetate, ether, etc., and insoluble in water [37]. MPH shows UV-Visible absorbance at 510 nm (sulphanilic acid as the reagent and water as the solvent) and 610 nm (potassium permanganate as the reagent and water as the solvent) [38]. The mass spectrum of MPH showed ion peaks at m/z 56.1 and 84.2 and a precursor ion at 234.1, respectively [39].
2.3 ATX
The chemical name of ATX is (R)-N-methyl-3-phenyl-3-(o-tolyloxy)-propylamine. The salt form of ATX is ATX. HCl, the molecular formula is C17H21NO. HCl and the molecular weight is 291.82 g/mol [40,41]. ATX. HCl is a white solid with a solubility of 27.8 mg/mL in water, a melting point of 167°C and a dissociation constant (pKa) of 10.13. ATX is marketed as the R (−) isomer which is more potent than the S (+) isomer [42]. ATX. HCl shows a UV absorbance at 270 nm using double distilled water as the solvent [43]. The mass spectrum of ATX showed ion peaks at m/z 44 and 256 [44].
2.4 BUP
BUP. HCl is the salt form of BUP. It is a white crystalline, weak basic drug with a chemical name of (±)-2-(tert-butylamino)-3´-chloropropiophenone hydrochloride. Its molecular formula is C13H18ClNO. HCl, molecular weight is 239. 74 g/mol, boiling point is 334.8°C and melting point is 233°C. It belongs to the ‘aminoketones’ class of drugs with a pKa of 7.9. BUP has a single chiral centre, giving rise to two enantiomeric forms i.e., (+)-BUP and (-) BUP. The solubility of BUP. HCl at room temperature is 312 mg/mL in water, 193 mg/mL in alcohol and 333 mg/mL in 0.1 N HCl [45,46]. BUP. HCl showed a UV absorbance at 270 nm using 0.1 N HCl as the solvent [47]. The mass spectrum of BUP showed ion peaks at m/z 166, 184, and 240 [48].
2.5 GNF
GNF is a phenylacetyl guanidine with a chemical name of N-amidino-Z(2,6-dichlorophenyl)- acetamide. GNF. HCl is a white or off-white, odourless, crystalline, achiral drug. It has a molecular formula of C9H9Cl2N3O. HCl, molecular weight of 282.5 g/mol and melting point of 226°C. The solubility of GNF. HCl is 0.163 mg/mL in water, 0.420 mg/mL in 0.1 N HCl, 1.265 mg/mL in acetate buffer (pH 4.5), and 1.302 mg/mL in phosphate buffer (pH 6.8) [49,50]. The mass spectrum of GNF showed ion peaks at m/z 60 and 246 [51].
2.6 CLN
CLN. HCl is an imidazoline derivative with a chemical name of 2- (2,6-dichlorophenylimino) imidazolidine hydrochloride and chemical formula of C9H9CI2N3. HC1. It is a white crystalline powder with a bitter taste and is soluble in 13 parts of water, absolute ethanol, slightly soluble in chloroform and insoluble in ether. The molecular weight is 230.10 g/mol for CLN and 266.6 g/mol for CLN. HCl. The melting point of CLN is 130°C and 305°C for CLN. HCl. The drug is stable in light, air and at room temperature [52]. CLN. HCl shows UV absorbance at 418 nm (thymol blue as the reagent and water as the solvent) and 448 nm (bromophenol blue as the reagent and distilled water as the solvent) [53]. In the mass spectrum, the ions of CLN. HCl showed peaks at m/z 44 and 230 [54].
3 Bioanalytical methods for determination of ADHD drugs in human biological samples
3.1 Spectrophotometry
Spectrophotometry is a routinely used instrumental technique in scientific research. It is used for the quantitative measurement of drugs present in sample solutions by measuring the intensity of light (electro-magnetic radiation) which is absorbed by the chemical substance [55]. Wallace et al. developed a spectrophotometric method for the determination of AMP in oxalated blood, serum, urine and homogenized tissues. The AMP present in biological samples at different concentrations may weakly absorb ultra-violet (UV) radiation during analysis and it was not possible to analyse the drug directly by using a UV spectrophotometer. Thus, selection of suitable solvents was required for analysis. In the study, AMP in biological samples was extracted by LLE using n-hexane as the extracting solvent and the drug was analysed from 250 nm to 360 nm. AMP showed its maximum absorbance (λmax) at 287 nm and the limit of detection (LOD) was found to be 0.5 μg/mL [34].
Legua et al. developed a direct extractive-spectrophotometric method for the determination of AMP in urine samples using sodium 1, 2-naphthoquinone 4-sulphonate (NQS) as the reagent. The sample preparation was an important process to obtain good selectivity and sensitivity. Thus, the drug was extracted from urine samples by LLE using hexane and was analysed from 400 nm to 500 nm. AMP showed its λmax at 450 nm. The presence or absence of systematic error was evaluated by using Youden method and standard additions method. It was found that, the Youden method showed presence of a constant bias error and the standard additions method showed absence of proportional bias error [56].
Basavaiah et al. described the charge-transfer complexation method for the quantification of BUP in spiked human urine samples. The BUP base (n-electron donor) was reacted with p-chloranilic acid (PCA) or 2, 3-dichloro-5, 6-dicyano-1, 4-benzoquinone (DDQ), the π-acceptor and formed coloured products. The coloured products were analysed in the visible region and showed λmax at 520 nm and 585 nm with good sensitivity [57]. There is no reported spectrophotometric method for the determination of MPH, ATX, GNF and CLN in human biological samples.
3.2 Spectrofluorimetry
Spectrofluorimetry is an emission spectroscopy technique. It is used for the quantitative measurement of drugs present in sample solutions by measuring the fluorescence intensity emitted from the excited compound at a certain wavelength [58]. Maurı-Aucejo et al. optimised the conditions for determination of AMP in urine samples by fluorimetry using batch and flow injection methods with on-line extraction. Drugs in the biological sample were extracted by LLE using diethyl ether as the solvent. The excitation and emission wavelengths were found to be 260 nm and 277 nm, respectively. The method showed good recovery and reproducibility [59].
Omar et al. determined some anti-depressant drugs from pharmaceutical dosage form and human serum using spectrofluorimetry. In the study, the drug BUP. HCl was reacted with 5-(dimethylamino) naphthalene-1-sulfonyl chloride (dansyl chloride) in the presence of 0.5 M sodium carbonate and formed a fluorescent compound. The excitation and emission wavelengths of this fluorescent compound were 347 nm and 450 nm, respectively. The proposed method was simple, sensitive and cost effective [60].
Wahbi et al. developed a spectrofluorometric method for the quantification of GNF. HCl in spiked human serum and urine samples. The analyte in the biological samples was extracted using chloroform as an extraction solvent at basic pH and the concentration was measured by a calibration-curve method. In the study, the analyte in an aqueous potassium hydroxide solution was reacted with benzoin in the presence of β-mercaptoethanol and sodium sulphite to form a highly fluorescent compound. The excitation and emission wavelengths of this fluorescent compound were 325 nm and 435 nm, respectively. The reported method was simple, accurate, selective and sensitive [61]. There is no reported spectrofluorometric method for the determination of MPH, ATX and CLN in human biological samples.
3.3 Mass spectrometry (MS)
MS is used to measure the m/z ratio of charged particles. Different types of ion source are used to ionize chemical compounds for the generation of charged molecules or molecule fragments. Based on their m/z ratios, the ions are analysed by mass analysers. MS has become the instrument of choice in analytical chemistry and forensic science [62]. Among the six ADHD drugs, MS methods are reported for only two drugs i.e., AMP and MPH for the quantification from human biological samples. Habib et al. developed a sensitive MS method for the determination of AMP extracted from human urine samples. The analyte was alkali treated and ionised using a headspace dielectric barrier discharge (DBD) ionization method. The ions were detected by ion trap detector and the m/z of AMP was found to be 136. The proposed method was validated and the LOD was found to be 0.05 ng/mL [63].
Yang et al. developed a simple MS method for the quantification of MPH extracted from human urine samples using MPH-D3 as the internal standard (IS). The analyte in urine samples was extracted by LLE and subjected to analysis. Electrospray ionization (ESI) with a polymer microchip was used as the ion source to ionize the analyte and IS. The ions of the analyte and IS were analysed by triple quadrupole and detected using selected reaction monitoring (SRM) mode. Ions were found at m/z 84.1 and 234.2 for the analyte and 84.1 and 237.2 for the IS, respectively. The proposed method was validated and showed good accuracy and precision with no carryover [64].
Wachs et al. developed and validated a novel MS/MS method for the estimation of MPH in human urine samples using MPH-D3 as the IS. Solid phase sorbent extraction cards with an ESI sprayer was used for sample preparation and analysis was by triple quadrupole. The ions were detected using SRM mode with ions found at m/z 84 and 234 for the analyte and 84 and 237 for the IS, respectively [65].
3.4 Hyphenated techniques
Hyphenated techniques are the combination of one or more techniques and can be used to detect drugs present in samples with good sensitivity and selectivity. Here, we summarize some reported hyphenated methods such as electrophoresis, liquid chromatography and gas chromatography for the determination of six ADHD drugs extracted from various human biological samples.
3.4.1 Electrophoresis
Electrophoresis is defined as migration of charged ions in an electric field. It is a separation method and the rate of migration is dependent on factors such as net charge, size, shape of the molecule, buffer pH and applied electric current [66]. Capillary electrophoresis (CE) is one important analytical method used for the determination of ADHD drugs in human biological samples using different detectors [67]. Meng et al. developed a sensitive and reproducible micellar CE method for the determination of trace levels of AMP present in human hair. The experiment was carried out using an uncoated fused-silica capillary (60.2 cm × 75 μm) with 25 mM sodium dodecyl sulfate in 100 mM phosphate buffer (pH 2.9) and 20% (v/v) of methanol (organic additive) as a running buffer for separation. A negative voltage (-18 kV) was applied for good separation. AMP was detected using a UV detector at awavelength of 200 nm. The proposed method was validated and the LOD was 0.05 μg/mL [68].
Hudson et al. analysed a number of basic and neutral drugs in whole blood samples using capillary zone electrophoresis (CZE). The relative migration of the drugs AMP, MPH, BUP and CLN was recorded at both pH 2.5 and 9.5. The experiment was carried out using a fused-silica capillary (60 cm × 50 μm) with 100 mM/L phosphate as the running buffer. The separation voltage was set to 20 or 25 kV and the temperature was set at 20°C or 25°C. The analytes were detected by UV detector at 200 nm [69].
Hyotylainen et al. compared two methods for the determination of AMP in human serum and urine samples. The experiment was carried out using capillaries (67 cm × 50 μm) with 0.1 M tricine (pH 8.5) and 0.05 M glycine and 0.05 M sodium dodecyl sulfate (pH 10.5) as the running buffer. The separation voltage was set to 25 kV for quantification and the temperature was maintained at 20°C. The analyte was detected by UV detector at 220 nm. In the study, miceller electrokinetic capillary chromatography showed good separation and had greater applications than CZE [70].
Boatto et al. developed a CE method for determination of AMP in human whole blood samples using a photo diode array detector (DAD). The drug was extracted from the biological sample using a PP extraction with acetonitrile. The experiment was carried out using an uncoated fused-silica capillary (50 cm × 50 μm) with 100 mM phosphate buffer (pH 2.5) as the running solution. The separation voltage and the temperature were set to 10 kV and 25°C, respectively. The detection wavelength was set at 200 nm and the AMP peak was obtained at 5.3 min. This method was simple and effective [71].
Hercegova et al. developed a capillary isotachophoresis method for the quantification of CLN and another three drugs in control serum and human urine samples. The drugs were extracted from biological samples by both PP using methanol and SPE and were analysed. The separation was carried out in an analytical column (80 × 0.3 mm) using a cationic electrolytic system (10 mM sodium acetate buffer, pH 4.64 and 10 mM β-alanine). The analytes were analysed by an isotachophoretic analyser with a conductivity detector. The method showed good recovery in the range of 87-99% [72].
Boatto et al. developed a simple and validated CE-MS method for the quantification of derivatives of AMP in human urine samples. The derivatives of AMP were extracted from urine samples by SPE. The experiment was carried out using an uncoated fused-silica capillary (120 cm × 75 μm) with 50 mM ammonium acetate with acetic acid (pH 4.5) as a running buffer and the separation voltage was set at 25 kV. ESI was used as an ion source and the MS detection was carried out from m/z 50 to 500 (full scan) in positive ion mode. The method was validated according to the international guidelines [73].
Nieddu et al. proposed the validated CE-MS method for the quantification of derivatives of AMP in human urine samples. The analyte was extracted from urine by SPE. The experiment was carried out using an uncoated fused-silica capillary (120 cm × 50 μm) with 10 mM sodium phosphate monobasic with phosphoric acid (pH 4.5) as a running buffer and the separation voltage was set at 10 kV. ESI was used as an ion source and the mass spectrum was monitored from m/z 100 to 300 (full scan). Derivatives of AMP were found at m/z 210, 224 and 238 in selected ion monitoring (SIM) mode. The method showed good results in terms of accuracy and precision [74].
Bach et al. quantified MPH in human urine samples by both CE-MS and CE-MS/MS methods. The sample was prepared by LLE using cyclohexane as the extracting solvent. The experiment was carried out using a fused-silica capillary (65 cm × 50 μm, 190 μm) with 100% aqueous 40 mM ammonium acetate and 30% (v/v) ammonium hydroxide (pH 9.0) as a running buffer. The voltage was applied to the anode (20 kV) and to the cathode (4 kV) for separation. ESI was used as an ion source and the ions were analysed by ion trap analyser. The ions of the analyte were detected using SRM mode at m/z 84 and 234. The proposed method was accurate and precise [75]. There is no reported electrophoretic method for quantification of ATX and GNF in human biological samples.
Allen et al. depicted some important analytical techniques used for the determination of racemic mixtures of MPH. CE was one of the techniques used for chiral separation and detection of the drug in biological matrices [76]. CE was also used to study chiral drugs and their metabolites present in biological samples with sensitive detection and elucidation of their enantiomers and enantioselective actions [77, 78, 79]. Lee et al. investigated the enantio-selectivity of (±) threo –MPH in human plasma samples by CE. The experiment was carried out using an uncoated fused-silica capillary (40 cm × 50 μm) with 50 mM phosphate buffer (pH 3.0) containing 20 mM HP-β-CD as the chiral selector and 30 mM triethanolamine. The voltage was set at 20 kV for separation and the analytes were determined by UV detector at a wavelength of 200 nm. The method was sensitive and enabled a LOD of 600 pg/mL for both enantiomers [80].
Theurillat et al. proposed a CE method for the determination of enantio-selectivity of ± threo –MPH in human oral fluids. The enantiomers of MPH were extracted by LLE and separated using uncoated fused silica capillaries (40 cm × 50 μm) with phosphate and triethanolamine (pH 3.0) as the running buffer and 2-hydroxypropyl-β-CD as the chiral selector. The separation voltage was set to 20 kV for analysis and the capillary cartridge and sample holder temperatures were maintained at 25°C and 20°C, respectively. The enantiomers of MPH were detected using DAD at a wavelength of 200 nm [81].
Castro‐Puyana et al. developed a CE method with good resolution (≥ 3) for the determination of enantiomers of BUP extracted from human urine samples. In this method, the separation of the analyte was carried out using an uncoated fused silica capillary (50 cm × 75 μm) with 5 mM sulfated-α-CD as the chiral selector and 25 mM phosphate (pH 3.0) as the running buffer. The enantiomers of BUP (excitation at 266 nm and emission at 453 or 513 nm) were detected by phosphorescence with a pulsed Xe-lamp. The method showed good selectivity and sensitivity [82].
3.4.2 Liquid chromatography (LC)
LC is an analytical chromatographic method used to isolate the individual components of a mixture. It separates molecules in a liquid mobile phase using a solid stationary phase. High Pressure Liquid Chromatography (HPLC) is an advanced type of LC. The samples in a solvent are pumped at high pressure and are passed through a column packed with solid particles. The principle of separation is adsorption. The samples are separated based on their affinities towards the stationary phase and detected using various detectors (including UV-Vis, DAD and fluorescence). Currently, LC using reversed-phase silica columns is preferred for pharmaceutical analysis [83].
Talwar et al. developed an HPLC method for the quantification of AMP class drugs in human urine samples. The drugs were separated using a silica HPLC column (25 cm × 4 mm, 5 μm) with a mobile phase of hexane:water saturated with ethyl acetate:chloroform:ethanol in the ratio of 145:35:40:20, v/v/v/v at a flow rate of 1 mL/min and detected at two wavelengths 260 nm (UV) and 450 nm (Visible). The method was validated and the LOD for AMP was found to be 60 μg/L at 260 nm and 105 μg/L at 450 nm [84].
Hassan developed and validated a reverse phase HPLC method for the simultaneous determination of CLN and other drugs present in human plasma samples. The drug was extracted from plasma by LLE and was separated in an octadecyle ODS YMC (150 × 46 mm, 3 μm) column using acetonitrile:10 mM potassium phosphate buffer at a pH 3.3 as the mobile phase in gradient elution mode at a flow rate of 1 mL/min. The UV-Visible detection was recorded at 220 nm and the LOD was found to be 30 ng/mL [85].
Guo et al. developed a reverse phase HPLC method for the determination of ATX in human serum samples. The drug was extracted from serum by LLE using diethyl ether as the extracting solvent. The separation of the analyte was carried out using an Inertsil ODS-3 column (150 × 4.6 mm, 5 μm) with acetonitrile:23 mM phosphate buffer, pH 6.6 (39:61, v/v) as the mobile phase and maprotiline as the IS. The flow rate was set at 1 mL/min and detection was by UV at 210 nm. The method was validated and the LOD was found to be 2.5 ng/mL [86].
Baharfar et al. developed an HPLC method for the determination of trace amounts of CLN in human plasma and urine samples. The extracted analyte was separated using an ODS-3 column 147 (25 × 4.6 mm, 5 μm) with acetonitrile:10 mM/L phosphate buffer (pH 4.5) as the mobile phase in the ratio of 80:20, v/v with a flow rate of 1 mL/min and UV detection at 210 nm. The method was validated and the LOD was found to be less than 7 μg/mL for urine and 11 μg/mL for plasma [87].
Campíns Falco et al. developed a normal phase HPLC method for the quantification of AMP in urine samples using NQS as a derivatizing agent. In the study, sample preparation by an SPE procedure was more effective than LLE. The separation was carried out using a LiChrospher Si-60 column (125 × 4 mm, 5 μm) with ethanol:chloroform:ethyl acetate:n-hexane (1:22:32:45, v/v) as the mobile phase with a flow rate of 2 mL/min and the detection of AMP was recorded at 280 nm and 450 nm using DAD. Validation parameters including accuracy, recovery and precision were also studied [88].
Gaillard et al. developed an HPLC method for the analysis of drugs and toxicants present in human blood and urine samples. They established the retention time and λmax for 684 compounds. Using these as a reference, the test samples were determined, and the method was useful for toxicology studies. The test drugs were extracted from biological samples by LLE and were separated using a Waters Symmetry C8 column (250 × 4.6 mm, 5 μm) with Phosphate buffer: acetonitrile as the mobile phase in gradient elution mode. The flow-rate was set between 1-1.5 mL/min and UV spectra were obtained from 200 to 350 nm using DAD. AMP, GNF and CLN drugs had a λmax at 200.5 nm and the retention times were found to be 3.71, 11.38 and 6.12 min, respectively [89].
Zhu et al. developed a reverse phase HPLC method for the determination of MPH in human plasma samples. MPH was extracted from the plasma using LLE. DIB-Cl with 10 mM sodium carbonate (pH 9.0) was added to the extracted drug for derivatization and was separated using a Phenomenex Luna C18 (2) column (250 × 4.6 mm, 5 μm) with acetonitrile:water (73:27, v/v) as the mobile phase with a flow rate of 1 mL/min. The MPH was detected using a fluorescence detector and the excitation wavelength (λex) was set at 330 nm and emission wavelength (λem) was set at 460 nm. The proposed method was validated and found to be sensitive and reliable [90].
Stegmann et al. proposed an HPLC method for the quantification of dexamphetamine, MPH and ATX in human serum and oral fluids. The drugs were extracted from the biological samples by LLE and the extracted samples were derivatized with 4-(4, 5-diphenyl-1H-imidazol-2-yl) benzoyl chloride. The separation of derivatized drugs was carried out using a Phenomenex Gemini-NX C18 column (150 × 4.6 mm, 3 μm) with water: acetonitrile (gradient elution mode) as the mobile phase at a flow rate of 0.8 mL/min and analysed using fluorescence detection. The λex and λem were set at 330 nm and 440 nm, respectively. The method was validated and the LODs for dexamphetamine, MPH and ATX were found to be 1.3, 0.6, 16 ng/mL, respectively, for serum samples and 2.5, 0.6, 5.9 ng/mL, respectively, for oral fluid samples [91].
Ulu et al. developed a reverse phase HPLC method for the determination of BUP in human plasma and urine samples. The separation of the drug was carried out using an Inertsil C18 column (150 × 4.6 mm, 5 μm) with methanol:water (75:25 v/v) as the mobile phase with a flow rate of 1.2 mL/min and analysis by fluorescence detection at 458 nm (λex) and 533 nm (λem). The proposed method was validated and the LOD was found to be 0.24 ng/mL [92]. Other HPLC methods for the quantification of AMP, MPH, ATX, and BUP in human biological samples [93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100, 101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 108] and their chromatographic conditions are reported in Table 1.
Kataoka et al. developed and validated an LC-MS method for the quantification of AMP and its derivatives extracted from human urine samples. The separation of the analyte was carried out using a supelcosil LC-CN column (3.3 cm × 4.6 mm, 3 μm) with acetonitrile:50 mM ammonium acetate (15:85, v/v) as the mobile phase with a flow rate of 0.4 mL/min. ESI was used as an ion source and the analyte of interest (AMP) was detected using MS in SIM mode at m/z 136 [109].
Apollonio et al. developed an ultra-performance LC-MS method for the quantification of AMP extracted from human whole blood samples. The separation of the analyte was carried out using a Waters UPLC BEH C18 column (50 × 2.1 mm) with a mobile phase of aqueous pyrrolidine:methanol (52:48, v/v) at a flow rate of 0.4 mL/min. The analyte was ionized by using a positive ESI method and the ions were detected using SIM mode. The analyte was retained at 1.35 min and the m/z was 136 [110].
Tatsuno et al. developed a reverse phase LC-MS method for the determination of AMP in human urine samples. The analyte was extracted from urine using an SPE method and separated using an ODS column (150 × 4.6 mm) with acetonitrile:100 mM ammonium acetate (40:60, v/v) as the mobile phase at a flow rate of 1 mL/min. The analyte was analysed by thermospray ionisation with SIM detection and the m/z was 136 [111].
Bogusz et al. developed both LC-MS and LC-DAD/ UV methods for the quantification of AMP in human serum and urine samples using AMP-D5 as the IS. The analyte was extracted from serum and urine by LLE and was derivatized using phenylisothiocyanate. The separation was carried out using a Superspher Select B ECO cart column (125 x 3 mm) with 50 mM ammonium formate buffer (ph 3.0):acetonitrile as the mobile phase. The mobile phase ratio was 55:45, v/v with a flow rate of 0.9 mL/min for MS detection and 60:40, v/v with a flow rate of 0.8 mL/min for DAD/UV detection (250 nm). An atmospheric pressure chemical ionisation (APCI) method was used as an ion source and the ions of the analyte and IS were detected using MS in SIM mode. The m/z was 271 for the analyte and 281 for the IS, respectively. The developed LC-MS method was found to be more specific and selective than the LC- DAD/UV method [112].
Marchei et al. developed a reverse phase LC-ESI-MS method for the quantification of MPH extracted from human plasma, oral fluids, sweat, urine [113] and hair samples [114] using SIM detection. The IS was 3, 4-methylendioxypropylamphetamine (MDPA). The analyte of interest was separated using a Thermo Electron-Hipersil Gold next-generation ultra-pure silica column (150 × 4.6 mm; 5 μm) with acetonitrile:10 mM ammonium acetate (gradient elution mode) as the mobile phase at a flow rate of 1 mL/min. The m/z was 234 for the analyte and 222 for the IS, respectively. The developed method was validated and the LOD was 0.31 ng/mL for plasma samples, 0.15 ng/mL for oral fluid samples, 0.14 ng/mL for sweat samples and 0.30 ng/mL for urine samples.
Shinozuka et al. developed an LC-MS method for the quantification of 20 anti-depressants in human plasma samples. The analyte (MPH) was separated at a retention time of 5.1 min using an Inertsil C-8 column (150 × 2.0 mm, 5 μm) with methanol:10 mM ammonium acetate (ph 5.0):acetonitrile (70:20:10, v/v/v) as the mobile phase and a flow rate of 0.10 mL/min. Sonic spray ionisation (SSI) was used as an ion source and the ions were detected in SIM mode. The m/z of MPH was determined to be 234. The developed method was validated and found to be accurate and precise [115].
Wolf et al. developed a simple, validated LC-ESI-MS method for the quantification of GNF in human urine samples using protriptyline as the IS. The separation of the analyte was carried out using a YMC Basic S column (150 × 2 mm, 5 μm) with methanol:10 mM ammonium formate (60:40, v/v) as the mobile phase and a flow rate of 0.3 mL/min. The analyte and IS were detected using SIM mode and the m/z was 246, 248, and 250 for the analyte and 264 and 265 for the IS, respectively. The proposed method was reliable and accurate [116].
Danafar et al. developed and validated a LC-MS method for the determination of CLN. HCl in human plasma samples. The analyte was extracted from plasma by PP and separated using a C18 column (30 × 2.1 mm, 3.5 μm) with acetonitrile:water with 0.2% (v/v) formic acid (60:40, v/v) as the mobile phase at a flow rate of 0.2 mL/min. The analyte was ionised by ESI and detected using multiple reaction monitoring (MRM) mode. The m/z was 213 and 230. This method was useful for pharmacokinetic studies [117,118].
HPLC methods for the determination of ADHD drugs in human biological samples.
| Biological Samples | Analyte | Stationary phase | Mobile phase | Flow rate | Detection | LOD | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Human urine | AMP | Hibar analytical column (250 x 4 mm, 5 μm) | 0.03 M Phosphate buffer (pH 3.0) with 0.05 M methane sulphonic acid: ACN (48:52, v/v) | 0.65 mL/min | UV-Visible at 480 nm | 40-60 ng/mL | [93] |
| Human urine | AMP | Eurospher-100 C18 column (250 x 4.6 mm, 10 μm) | 20 mM phosphate buffer with HCl (pH 4.0): ACN (85:15, v/v) | 1 mL/min | UV-Visible at 210 nm | 2 μg/mL | [94] |
| Human urine | MPH | C8 HPLC column (250 x 4.6 mm2, 5 μm) | Phosphate buffer (pH 4.6): MeOH: ACN (56:40:6, v/v/v) | 0.8 mL/min | UV-Visible at 210 nm | 15 ng/mL | [95] |
| Human urine | AMP | Waters Spherisorb C18 ODS2 column (250 x 4.6 mm, 5 μm) | MeOH: 0.05 M ammonium acetate buffer with 0.1% (v/v) TEA, pH 3.9 (gradient elution mode) | - | UV at 210 nm | 14 ng/mL | [96] |
| Human plasma | MPH | ODS reversed phase column (15 cm x 4.6 mm, 5 μm) | ACN: 0.07% (v/v) TEA with conc. Phosphoric acid, pH 3.4 (35:65, v/v) | 1.5 mL/min | UV at 192 nm | 2.5 ng/mL | [97] |
| Human plasma | BUP | Reverse phase column (25 cm x 4.6 mm, 5 μm) | 0.05 M monobasic potassium phosphate: ACN with 0.007 M sodium heptane sulfonate and 0.01 M TEA, pH 3 (80:20, v/v). | 2.3 mL/min | UV at 214 & 254 nm | 5 ng/mL | [98] |
| Human plasma | BUP | Cartridge u-Bondapak C18 column (10 cm x 8 mm, 10 μm) | ACN: water with perchloric acid, pH 3.15 (40:60, v/v) | 1.4 mL/min | UV at 250 nm | - | [99] |
| Human urine | AMP | Luna C18(2) column (150 x 4.6 mm, 5 μm) | 0.025% (v/v) phosphoric acid with TEA buffer, pH 3.4: ACN | 1 mL/min | DAD at 210 nm | 120 ng/L | [100] |
| Human urine | AMP | Hypersil ODS RP C18 column (250 x 4 mm, 5 μm) | ACN: water (gradient elution mode) | 1 mL/min | DAD at 280 & 450 nm | 4 ng/mL | [101] |
| Human plasma | ATX | Agilent SB-C18 column (150 x 4.6 mm, 5 μm) | ACN: 5 mM heptane sulphonic acid buffer with 1% (v/v) of TEA and GAA, pH 4.8 (40:60, v/v) | 1 mL/min | DAD at 272 nm | [102] | |
| Human plasma | ATX | Agilent XDB-C8 column (150 x 4.6 mm, 3.5 μm) | MeOH: ACN: 10 mM phosphate buffer, pH 3.0 (35:15:50, v/v/v) | 1 mL/min | DAD at 215 nm | 16.34 ng/mL | [103] |
| Human plasma | BUP | Agilent XDB-C8 column (150 x 4.6 mm, 3.5 μm) | MeOH: ACN: 10 mM phosphate buffer (pH 3.0) with 20 mM 1-heptane sulfonic acid sodium salt (40:10:50, v/v/v) | 1 mL/min | DAD at 214 & 254 nm | 24.8 ng/mL | [104] |
| Human plasma | BUP | Phenomenex Aqua C18 column (250 x 4.6 mm, 5 μm) | MeOH: 0.05 M phosphate buffer with 85% (v/v) phosphoric acid, pH 5.5 (45:55, v/v) | 1 mL/min | DAD at 214 & 254 nm | 2 ng/mL | [105] |
| Human urine | AMP | Vercopak Inertsil 5-ODS-80A column, (250 x 3.2 mm, 5 μm) | ACN: water (70:30, v/v) | 0.5 mL/min | Fluorescence (λex at 343 nm & λem at 500 nm) | - | [106] |
| Human plasma | ATX | Phenomena Luna C18 (2) column (250 x 4.6 mm, 5 μm) | ACN: water (75:25, v/v) | 1 mL/min | Fluorescence (λex at 318 nm & λem at 448 nm) | 0.3 ng/mL | [107] |
| Human plasma & urine | ATX | Inertsil C18 column (150 x 4.6 mm, 5 μm) | MeOH: water (85:15 v/v) | 1.2 mL/min | Fluorescence (λex at 375 nm & λem at 537 nm) | - | [108] |
HCl – Hydrochloric acid, ACN – Acetonitrile, GAA – Glacial acetic acid, TEA – Triethylamine, MeOH – Methanol
Miyaguchi et al. developed and validated an LC-MS/MS method for the determination of AMP extracted from human hair samples. The separation of the analyte was carried out using a Unison UK-C18 column (150 × 3 mm) with ammonium formate in water (pH 3.5):acetonitrile (gradient elution mode) as the mobile phase at a flow rate of 0.3 mL/min. ESI was used to ionise the analyte and analysis was by both orbitrap and ion trap analyser. The m/z was 91.2, 119.2, and 130 by product ion scan analysis [119].
Concheiro et al. developed and validated an LC-ESI-MS/MS method for the quantification of AMP in human urine samples using AMP-D6 as the IS. The analyte was extracted from urine samples by LLE using diethyl ether as the extracting solvent. The analyte and IS were separated using an Atlantis dC18, Intelligent Speed TM column (20 × 2.1 mm, 3 μm) with ammonium formate buffer (pH 3.0):acetonitrile (gradient elution mode) as the mobile phase at a flow rate of 0.5 mL/min and was detected using SRM mode with a triple quadrupole mass analyser. The m/z was 90.6, 118.9 and 135.9 for the analyte and 92.7 and 142.2 for the IS, respectively [120].
Vaiano et al. developed and validated an LC-MS/MS method for the determination of AMP extracted from human blood samples. The separation of the analyte was carried out using a Zorbax Eclipse Plus C18 column (50 × 2.1 mm, 1.8 μm) with 5 mM aqueous formic acid and acetonitrile (gradient elution mode) as the mobile phase with a flow rate of 0.4 mL/min. ESI was used as an ion source and the analyte ions were detected using MRM mode. The m/z of the analyte was found to be 91, 119 and 136 [35]. Marjorie Chèze et al. developed and validated an LC-MS/MS method for the determination of AMP extracted from human hair, urine and blood samples using AMP-D5 as the IS [121]. The LC chromatographic conditions and MS detection information are reported in Table 2.
Chou et al. developed and validated an LC-MS/MS method for the quantification of AMP present in human serum samples. The analyte was extracted from serum by a solid phase micro extraction (SPME) method and separated using a Supelco Discovery C18 column (15 cm × 3 mm, 5 μm) with acetonitrile: deionized water (gradient elution mode) as the mobile phase with a flow rate of 0.2 mL/min. ESI showed better results than APCI and the parent ion of the analyte was detected using SIM mode. The product ions were detected by MRM with m/z 119 and 136 [122].
The determination of AMP in human plasma and oral fluids by LC-ESI-MS/MS was proposed by Wood et al. The analyte was extracted by methanol precipitation and separated using a Hypersil BDS C18 column (100 × 2.1 mm, 3.5 μm) with 10 mM ammonium acetate buffer: acetonitrile (75:25, v/v) as the mobile phase and a flow rate of 0.3 mL/min. AMP-D11 was used as the IS. The analyte and IS were detected in MRM mode and the m/z was 91 and 136 for the analyte and 98 and 147 for the IS, respectively [123]. Further LC-MS/MS methods for quantification of AMP from human hair [124, 125, 126], urine [127, 128, 129, 130, 131], and serum [132,133] samples are reported in Table 2.
Ramos et al. developed an LC-MS/MS method for the quantification of MPH in human plasma samples. The analyte was extracted from plasma samples by LLE and was separated using an Eclipse XDBC18 column (150 × 4.6 mm, 3.5 μm) with methanol:water with 0.02% (v/v) ammonium trifluoroacetate (80:20, v/v) as the mobile phase at a flow rate of 1 mL/min. APCI was used as an ion source and the analyte was detected using MRM mode. The method was validated, and the m/z of AMP was 83.9 and 234.5 [134].
de Cássia Mariotti et al. developed and validated an LC-MS/MS method for the determination of MPH in human oral fluids using propranolol as the IS. Separation of the analyte and IS was carried out using a Brownlee C18 column (100 × 4.6 mm, 3 μm) with 10 mM ammonium formate buffer with 0.1% (v/v) formic acid and acetonitrile with ammonium formate (gradient elution mode) as the mobile phases at a flow rate of 0.4 mL/min. ESI was used as an ion source. The analyte and IS were detected using MRM mode with m/z 56.1, 84.2 and 234.1 for the analyte and 183.1 and 260.2 for the IS, respectively [39]. Other LC-MS/MS methods for quantification of MPH in human plasma [135, 136, 137], blood, oral fluids [137], hair [138], and urine samples [139,140] are reported in Table 2.
Choi et al. developed and validated an LC-MS/MS method for the determination of ATX and its metabolites in human plasma samples using metoprolol as the IS. The analyte was extracted from plasma samples by LLE using methyl tert butyl ether as an extracting solvent. The analyte, its metabolites and the IS were separated using a Phenomenex Luna C18 column (100 × 2 mm, 3 μm) with methanol:10 mM ammonium formate buffer, pH 3.5 (90:10, v/v) as the mobile phase at a flow rate of 0.25 mL/min. ESI was used as an ion source. The analytes and IS were detected using MRM mode and the m/z was 44 and 256 for the analyte and 116 and 268 for the IS, respectively [141,142]. Further LC-MS/MS methods for the quantification of ATX extracted from human plasma [44,143, 144, 145], blood, oral fluids, sweat, urine [146], and hair [147] samples are reported in Table 2. Montenarh et al. developed and validated an LC-MS/MS method for the determination of 130 drugs extracted from human whole blood, plasma, serum, hair, liver tissues, gastric contents and urine samples. ATX, BUP and MPH were extracted from human biological samples by LLE [148,149]. The chromatographic conditions are reported in Table 2.
LC-MS/MS methods for the determination of ADHD drugs in human biological samples.
| Analyte | IS | Stationary phase | Mobile phase | Flow rate | Ion Source | Detection mode | m/z | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AMP | AMP- D5 | Uptisphere ODB C18 column (150 x 2.1 mm, 5 μm) | 2 mM formate buffer (pH 3.0): ACN (80:20, v/v) | 250 μL/min | ESI | SRM | 65, 91 & 136 (AMP), 66, 92 & 141 (IS) | [121] |
| AMP | AMP- D5 | Atlantis T3 column (150 x 2.1 mm, 3μm) | 2 mM ammonium formate (pH 3.0): ACN (90:10, v/ v) | 200 μL/min | ESI | MRM | 119 & 136.1 (AMP), 124.1 & 141 (IS) | [124] |
| AMP | AMP- D5 | Zorbax phenyl column (50 x 2.1 mm, 3 μm) | 20 mM formate buffer (pH 3.0): ACN: MeOH (gradient elution mode) | 0.25 mL/ min | ESI | MRM | 119 & 136 (AMP), 123.9 & 141.2 (IS) | [125] |
| AMP | AMP- D5 | Synergi Polar HPLC column (150 x 2 mm, 4 μm) | 0.01% (v/v) acetic acid: MeOH (50:50, v/v) | 0.2 mL/min | ESI | SRM | 91, 119 & 136.3 (AMP), 93, 124.2 & 141.3 (IS) | [126] |
| AMP | AMP- D5 | Luna C18 column (100 x 2 mm, 3 μm) | 25 mM FA with 1% (v/v) ACN: 25 mM FA with 90% (v/v) ACN (gradient elution mode) | 0.3 mL/min | ESI | SRM | 91, 119 & 136.1 (AMP), 93, 124 & 141.2 (IS) | [127] |
| AMP | AMP- D8 | Symmetry shield RP18 column (150 x 2.1 mm, 5 μm) | Water: ACN with TFA (90:10, v/v) | 0.2 mL/min | ESI | MRM | 91, 119 & 136 (AMP), 96, 127 & 144 (IS) | [128] |
| AMP | AMP- D8 | Symmetry shield RP18 column (50 x 2.1 mm, 3.5 μm) | 2% ammonium hydroxide with MeOH (v/v): ACN with 0.05% (v/v) TFA (gradient elution mode) | 0.4 mL/min | ESI | MRM | 91, 119 & 136 (AMP), 96, 127 & 144 (IS) | [129] |
| AMP | 4-phenylbutylamine | Supelco Astec chirobioticTM V2 column (250 x 2.1 mm, 5 μm) | MeOH with 0.1% GAA (v/v) and 0.02% ammonium hydroxide (v/v) | 0.25 mL/min | ESI | MRM | 91, 119 & 136 (AMP), 91, 133 & 150 (IS) | [130] |
| AMP | 4-phenylbutylamine | Thermo Aquasil C18 column (100 x 2.1 mm, 5 μm) | 10 mM ammonium acetate in water: 10 mM ammonium acetate in MeOH & ACN (1:1, v/v) | 270 μL/min | ESI | MRM | 91, 119 & 136.1 (AMP), 124 & 141.2 (IS) | [131] |
| AMP | AMP- D5 | Penta-fluoro phenyl propyl silica column (30 x 2.1 mm, 3 μm) | 0.1% FA with 1 mM ammonium formate (v/v): ACN with 0.1% (v/v) FA and 1 mM ammonium formate (gradient elution mode) | 200 to 700 μL/min | TIS | MRM | 65, 91 & 136 (AMP), 93 & 141 (IS) | [132] |
| AMP | AMP- D5 | Synergi Polar RP column (150 x 2 mm, 4 μm) | 1 mM ammonium formate with 0.1% (v/v) FA: MeOH with 0.1% (v/v) FA (gradient elution mode) | 0.25 mL/min | TIS | MRM | 91, 119 & 164 (AMP), 20, 93.1 & 141 (IS) | [133] |
| MPH | MPH-D9 | C18 column | 65% (v/v) MeOH: 0.2% (v/v) FA | - | ESI | SRM | 84 & 234 (MPH), 93 & 243 (IS) | [135] |
| MPH | MPH-D9 | SeQuant ZIC-HILIC column (50 x 2.1 mm, 5 μm) | 100% ACN: 2% (v/v) FA in water (90:10, v/v) | 1 mL/min | ESI | MRM | 84 & 234.1 (MPH), 93.1 & 243.1 (IS) | [136] |
| MPH | MPH-D9 | Synergi Polar-RP column (50 x 2 mm, 2.5 μm) | 10 mM ammonium formate buffer with 0.05% (v/v) FA: MeOH with 0.05% (v/v) FA (gradient elution mode) | 0.3 mL/min | ESI | MRM | 84, 56, 174 & 234 (MPH), 93 & 243 (IS) | [137] |
| MPH | MPH-D9 | Zorbax Eclipse Plus C18 RRHD column (100 x 2.1 mm, 1.8 μm) | 2 mM ammonium formate with 0.2% (v/v) FA in water and ACN (gradient elution mode) | 0.3 mL/min | ESI | SRM | 56, 84 & 234.1 (MPH), 93 & 243.2 (IS) | [138] |
| MPH | AMP- D6 | Restek Allure PFP Propyl column (50 x 2.1 mm, 5 μm) | 0.02% (w/v) formate in water and ACN (gradient elution mode) | 0.5 mL/min | ESI | SRM | 56.1, 84.1 & 234.1 (MPH), 93.1, 125.1 & 142.2 (IS) | [139] |
| MPH | AMP-D8 | Capcell Pak MG-II C18 column (150 x 2 mm, 5 μm) | 0.2% (v/v) FA in water: ACN (gradient elution mode) | 400 μL/min | ESI | MRM | 56.3, 84.3 & 234.3 (MPH), 127.1 & 144.1 (IS) | [140] |
| ATX | ATX-D3 | C18 column (20 x 4 mm) | MeOH with 0.025% (v/v) TFA: 0.025% ammonium acetate (v/v) | 200 μL/min | ESI | MRM | 44 & 256 (ATX), 47 & 259 (IS) | [44] |
| ATX | R/S-[2H7]-ATX | Brownlee Spheri-5 C18 polyfunctional column (100 x 4.6 mm, 5 μm) | Water: 5 mM ammonium acetate with 47.2 mM FA, 4 mM TFA in ACN and water (85:15, v/v) | 1 mL/min | APCI | SRM | 44 & 256 (ATX), 44 & 263 (IS) | [143] |
| ATX | Trimipramine-D3 & Topiramate-D12 | Kinetex XB-C18 column (50 x 3 mm, 2.6 μm) | 2 mM ammonium formate with 0.2% (v/v) FA in water and ACN (gradient elution mode) | 0.4 mL/min | TIS | MRM | 44.1, 148 & 256.1 (ATX), 103 & 298.3 (IS- 1), 78 & 350 (IS-2) | [144] |
| ATX | Duloxetine | YMC-Pack TMS column (40 x 4.6 mm, 5-3 μm) | water: 5 mM ammonium acetate with 47.2 mM FA & 4 mM TFA in ACN & water (85:15, v/v) | 0.5 mL/min | ESI | MRM | 44, 148 & 256 (ATX), 44, 154 & 298 (IS) | [145- 147] |
| ATX, BUP. MPH | Waters SunFire C18 column (150 x 2.1 mm, 3.5μm) | 10 mM aqueous ammonium formate with 0.1% (v/v) FA (pH 3.4): ACN with 0.1% (v/v) FA (gradient elution mode) | 500 μL/min | ESI | MRM | 90.9, 115.2, 117.2 & 256.1 (ATX), 130.1, 131.1, 184.1, & 240.1 (BUP) & 84.1, 111.2, 217.3 & 234.2 (MPH) | [148, 149] | |
| BUP | BUP-D6 | Chromolith SpeedROD RP-18 monolithic column (50 x 4.6 mm) | 8 mM ammonium acetate: ACN (55:45, v/v) | 5 mL/min | TIS | SRM | 184 & 240 (BUP), 184 & 246 (IS) | [150] |
| BUP | BUP-D9 | Supelco Ascentis RP-Amide column (100 x 4.6 mm, 5 μm) | 5 mM ammonium formate buffer (pH 3.5): ACN (gradient elution mode) | 0.8 mL/min | TIS | MRM | 166.3, 184.3 & 240.2 (BUP) | [151] |
| BUP | BUP-D9 | Acquity BEH phenyl column | MeOH: 0.06% (v/v) ammonia in aqueous solution (42:58, v/v) | 0.5 mL/min | ESI | MRM | 184.1 & 240.3 (BUP), 185.1 & 249.3 (IS) | [152] |
| BUP | BUP. HCl-D9 | Waters Symmetry C18 column (150 x 4.6 mm, 5 μm) | MeOH: 0.04% (v/v) FA aqueous solution (31:69, v/v) | 1 mL/min | ESI | MRM | 184 & 240 (BUP), 185 & 249 (IS) | [153] |
| BUP | Carbidopa | Waters Sun Fire C18 column (150 x 3.5 mm, 3 μm) | 0.5% (v/v) aqueous FA: MeOH (gradient elution mode) | 0.2 mL/min | TIS | MRM | 166.2, 184.2 & 240.3 (BUP), 71.3, 181.2 & 227.2 (IS) | [154] |
| BUP | Venlafaxine | Zorbax Eclipse XDB-C18 column (150 x 4.6 mm, 5 μm) | 20 mM ammonium acetate: MeOH (10:90, v/v) | 1 mL/min | TIS | MRM | 184.1 & 240.3 (BUP), 260.3 & 278.4 (IS) | [155] |
| BUP | Venlafaxine | Poroshell 120 EC-C18 (100 x 2.1 mm, 2.7 pm) | 0.1% (v/v) FA & ACN (gradient elution mode) | 0.5 mL/min | ESI | SRM | 184 & 240 (BUP), 121 & 278 (IS) | [156] |
| BUP | Acetaminophen | Lux 3p Cellulose 3 chiral column (250 x 4.6 mm) | (25:15:60, v/v/v): (60:30:10, v/v/v) of MeOH, ACN & 5 mM ammonium bicarbonate with 0.1% (v/v) ammonium hydroxide | 400 μL/min | ESI | MRM | 184 & 240.1 (BUP), 109.9 & 152 (IS) | [157] |
| BUP | BUP-D9 | Hypersil Gold C18 column (50 x 2.1 mm, 1.9 μm) | (gradient elution mode) 0.1% FA (v/v): ACN with 0.1% FA (v/v) | 10 μL/min | ESI | SRM | 131.1 & 240.1 (BUP), 131.1 & 249.1 (IS) | [158] |
| GNF | GNF-13C, 15N3 | Luna C18(2) column (30 x 2.1 mm, 3 μm) | 0.02% FA in water (v/v): MeOH (gradient elution mode) | 0.5 mL/min | TIS | SRM | 60.1 & 246.1 (GNF), 64.1 & 250.1 (IS) | [160] |
| GNF | GNF-13C, 15N3 | Fortis UniverSil C18 column (50 x 2.1 mm, 5 μm) | 0.1% FA in water (v/v) and ACN (gradient elution mode) | 1 mL/min | TIS | SRM | 60.1 & 246.1 (GNF), 64.1 & 250.1 (IS) | [161] |
| CLN | Donepezil | Hypersil BDS C18 column (50 x 2.1 mm, 3 μm) | MeOH: water with 0.1% (v/v) FA (60:40, v/v) | 200 μL/min | ESI | SRM | 212.9 & 230 (CLN), 90 & 380.2 (IS) | [163] |
| CLN | Nizatidine | Hypersil Hypurity C18 column (50 x 4.6 mm, 5 μm) | 2 mM ammonium acetate: ACN (20:80, v/v) | 0.4 mL/min | TIS | MRM | 44.1 & 231.9 (CLN), 155.1 & 332.1 (IS) | [164] |
| CLN | CLN-D4 | Waters Acquity UPLC BEH C18 column (100 x 2.1 mm, 1.7 μm) | Water with 5 mM hexa fluoro isopropanol & ammonium hydroxide (pH. 9): MeOH (gradient elution mode) | 250 μL/min | ESI | MRM | 44 & 230 (CLN), 48.2 & 234.1 (IS) | [165] |
| CLN | Tizanidine | Inertsil ODS-3 column (50 x 3 mm, 3 μm) | 5 mM ammonium formate buffer with FA (pH 2.8): MeOH (10:90, v/v) | 0.25 mL/ min | TIS | MRM | 44 & 230 (CLN), 44 & 254 (IS) | [166] |
| MPH | rac-MPH-D3 | Astec Chirobiotic V2 column (250 x 2.1 mm, 5 μm) | MeOH with 0.025% (v/v) ammonium acetate and 0.025% TFA (v/v) | 0.2 mL/min | ESI | MRM | 84.1 & 234 (MPH), 84 & 237 (IS) | [172] |
| BUP | BUP-D9 | Chiralpak α1-acid glycoprotein (AGP) column (100 x 2 mm, 5 μm) | 20 mM aqueous ammonium formate (pH 5.0): MeOH (gradient elution mode) | 0.22 mL/ min | ESI | MRM | 184.1 & 240.2 (BUP), 185 & 249.2 (IS) | [173] |
| BUP | BUP-D9 | Chiralpak α1-acid glycoprotein (AGP) column (100 x 2 mm, 5 μm) | 20 mM formate buffer, (pH 5.7): MeOH (gradient elution mode) | 0.22 mL/ min | ESI | MRM | 184 & 240 (BUP), 184 & 249.2 (IS) | [174] |
ACN - Acetonitrile, TFA - Trifluroacetic acid, GAA - Glacial acetic acid, FA - Formic acid, MeOH - Methanol
Denooz et al. developed an ultra-performance LC-MS/MS method for the quantification of BUP and its metabolites in human whole blood samples. The analyte was extracted from blood by SPE and BUP-D9 was used as the IS. The analyte and IS were separated at retention times of 3.76 min and 3.75 min, respectively using a Waters Acquity UPLC BEH phenyl column (100 × 2.1 mm, 1.7 μm) with 2 mM ammonium formate buffer (pH 4):acetonitrile as the mobile phase and a flow rate of 0.4 mL/min. ESI was used as an ion source and the analytes were detected using MRM mode. The method was validated, and the m/z was 166, 184 and 240 for the analyte and 185 and 349.2 for the IS, respectively [48]. Other LC-MS/MS methods for the quantification of BUP in human plasma [150, 151, 152, 153, 154, 155, 156, 157] and serum samples [158] are reported in Table 2.
Li et al. developed and validated a new method (dried plasma spots) for the quantification of GNF using LC-MS/MS. The analyte was extracted from whole blood by SPE and GNF-13C, 15N3 was used as the IS. The analyte and IS were separated using a Fortis UniverSil C18 column (50 × 2.1 mm, 5 μm) with 0.1% (v/v) formic acid in water:0.1% (v/v) formic acid in acetonitrile (gradient elution mode) as the mobile phase using a flow rate of 1 mL/min. Turbo ion spray (TIS) was used as an ion source. The analyte and IS were detected using SRM mode with a m/z of 60.1 and 246.1 for the analyte and 64.1 and 250.1 for the IS, respectively [159]. The same researcher also developed a dried blood spot technique for the determination of GNF in human blood samples [160,161] using LC-MS/MS and the LC-MS chromatographic conditions are reported in Table 2.
Martin et al. developed an LC-MS/MS method for the determination of GNF in human plasma samples using guanabenz as the IS. The analyte was extracted from plasma by LLE using methyl tert-butyl ether (MTBE) as the extracting solvent. Separation of the analyte and the IS was carried out using a Phenomenex Luna C18 column (30 × 2 mm, 3 μm) with water with 0.02% (v/v) formic acid: methanol as the mobile phase at a flow rate of 0.5 mL/min. ESI was used as an ion source. The analyte and IS were detected using SRM mode with m/z 60 and 246 for the analyte and 172 and 231 for the IS, respectively [51].
Ghosh et al. developed and validated an LC-ESI-MS method for the quantification of CLN in human plasma samples using carbamazapine as the IS. The analyte was extracted from plasma by LLE using ethyl acetate as the extracting solvent. The separation of the analyte and IS was carried out using an Inertsil ODS 3V C18 column (150 × 4.1 mm, 5 μm) with acetonitrile:0.1% (v/v) formic acid in water (90:10, v/v) as the mobile phase at a flow rate of 0.75 mL/min and was detected using MRM mode. The m/z was 230 for the analyte and 194 and 237 for the IS, respectively [162]. Other LC-MS/MS methods for the quantification of CLN in human plasma samples [163, 164, 165, 166] and their LC-MS chromatographic conditions are reported in Table 2.
Pelzer et al. developed and validated an LC-MS/MS method for the quantification of CLN extracted from human serum samples using CLN-D4 as the IS. The analyte and IS were separated using a Betasil silica column (50 × 3 mm, 5 μm) with acetonitrile:water:formic acid (80:20:1, v/v/v) as the mobile phase at a flow rate of 0.7 mL/min. ESI was used as an ion source. The analyte and IS were detected using MRM mode with m/z 213 and 230 for the analyte and 219 and 236 for the IS, respectively [54].
Liquid chromatography methods for the determination of enantiomers of AMP in biological fluids have been reported using different approaches: chiral derivatization, chiral stationary phase and chiral additives in the mobile phase [167,168]. Foster et al. developed an elution reverse mode HPLC method for the determination of AMP enantiomers present in human urine samples. The extraction of enantiomers from biological samples was done by SPE and the extracted enantiomers were derivatized with chiral Marfey‘s reagent to form diastereomers. The obtained diastereomers were separated using a C18 column (150 × 4.6 mm, 5 μm) with water:methanol (40:60, v/v) as the mobile phase at a flow rate of 1 mL/min with UV detection at 340 nm. The LOD of each enantiomer was found to be 0.16 mg/L [169].
Jose et al. developed an HPLC method for the determination of isomers of MPH in human plasma samples. The chromatographic separation was carried out using a Chirobiotic V2 column (150 × 4.6 mm, 5 μm) with methanol: 20 mM ammonium acetate, pH 4.1 (92:08, v/v) as the mobile phase at a flow rate of 1 mL/min. The d and l-isomers of MPH were retained at 7 and 8.1 min, respectively and were detected by DAD/UV detector at 215 nm. The proposed method was validated and found to be linear, accurate and precise [170].
Thomsen et al. developed an LC-MS/MS method for the determination of enantiomers of MPH and its metabolite extracted from human whole blood using rac-threo-MPH-D10 as the IS. The separation of the drug and IS were carried out using a Chiral-AGP column (100 × 4 mm, 5 μm) with 10 mM ammonium formate buffer:0.4% (v/v) isopropanol with formic acid (pH 5.4) as the mobile phase at a flow rate of 0.6 mL/min. The analyte and IS were ionised using ESI as an ion source. The ions of the analyte and IS were detected using MRM mode and the m/z was 56, 84 and 234.2 for the analyte and 93 and 244.2 for the IS, respectively [171]. Other LC-MS/MS methods for the quantification of MPH in human plasma samples [172, 173, 174] are reported in Table 2.
3.4.3 Gas chromatography (GC)
GC is an analytical method used to measure the various components in a sample. The components need to be volatile and thermostable for GC analysis. The principle of separation is adsorption for gas solid chromatography (GSC) and partition for gas liquid chromatography (GLC). When sample is introduced into the instrument, it enters into a gas stream and passes through a column for separation. The separated components are detected using various detectors including flame ionization detector (FID), electron capture detector (ECD) and nitrogen phosphorous detector (NPD) [175]. Analysis by GC requires derivatization with suitable derivatizing agent before analysis to change the properties of the analyte for better separation, detection and to improve method sensitivity [176].
Anggard et al. proposed a GLC method for the quantification of AMP extracted from blood, cerebrospinal fluid (CSF), tissues and urine samples. The extracted analyte from urine samples was derivatized by adding trifluoracetic anhydride and separated using a glass column (3.04 m × 4 mm) with carrier gas at a flow rate of 40 mL/min and detected by FID. The column, injector and detector temperature were set at 175°C, 235°C, and 240°C, respectively. The extracted analyte from blood and CSF samples was derivatized by adding trichloroacetyl chloride and was separated using a glass column (1.82 m × 4 mm) with carrier gas at a flow rate of 90 mL/min and detected by ECD. The column, injector and detector temperature were set at 200°C, 230°C, and 210°C, respectively. The method was found to be sensitive and accurate [177].
Brien et al. developed a GC method for the determination of AMP in human biological fluids such as whole blood and urine samples and detected using FID. The drug extracted from biological fluids was derivatized with trifluoroacetic anhydride and was separated using a glass column (1.82 m × 6.35 mm) with helium and hydrogen as the carrier gas. The column, detector and inlet temperature were set at 140°C, 250°C, and 190°C, respectively and the flow rate was set to 50 mL/min (for helium) and 35 mL/min (for hydrogen). The proposed method was validated, and it was suitable for analysis [178].
Dugal et al. developed a GC method for the determination of un-metabolized MPH in human urine samples. The extracted analyte was derivatized with trifluoroacetic anhydride and the separation was carried out using a glass coiled column (1.22 m × 2 mm) with helium as the carrier gas at a flow rate of 30 mL/min. The column, injector and detector temperature were set at 140°C to 270°C, 250°C, 300°C, respectively and detection was using NPD [179]. Other GC methods for the quantification of AMP and MPH in human biological samples [180, 181, 182, 183, 184, 185, 186, 187, 188] are reported in Table 3.
GC methods for the determination of AMP and MPH in human biological samples.
| Analyte | Biological samples | Stationary phase | Carrier gas | Flow rate | Injector Temparature | Column Temparature | Detector Temparature | Detector | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AMP | Human blood & urine | Glass U-tube column (1.8 m × 4 mm) | Nitrogen | 50 mL/ min | 195°C | 160°C | 185°C | FID | [180] |
| AMP | Human urine | AT-5 column (30 m × 0.25 mm, 0.25 μm) | Helium | 1 mL/ min | 220°C | 40°C to 280°C | 280°C | FID | [181] |
| AMP | Human urine | DB5 capillary column (25 m × 0.32 mm, 0.25 μm) | Helium | 2 mL/ min | 250°C | 100°C to 260°C | 270°C | FID | [182] |
| AMP | Human urine | BPX5 capillary column (30 m × 0.25 mm, 0.25 μm) | Helium | 30 mL/ min | 280°C | 30°C to 260°C | - | FID | [183] |
| MPH | Human blood & urine | Borosilicate glass column (1.52 m × 3 mm) | Nitrogen and hydrogen | 75 mL/ min | 220°C | 140°C | - | FID | [184] |
| MPH | Human urine | Glass column (1.82 m × 2 mm) | Nitrogen | 25-30 mL/min | 300°C | 170°C | - | FID | [185] |
| AMP | Human hair | CBJ-17 capillary column (30 m × 0.53 mm, 1 μm) | Helium | 4 mL/ min | 220°C | 100°C to 220°C | 220°C | NPD | [186] |
| MPH | Human plasma | Glass coiled column (1.83 m × 2 mm) | Helium | 30 mL/ min | 240°C | 170°C | 270°C | NPD | [187] |
| AMP | Human plasma | Narrow bore fused silica capillary column (25 m × 0.32 mm, 1.05 μm) | Helium | 2 mL/ min | 280°C | 105°C | 325°C | ECD | [188] |
Guerret et al. reported a GLC method for the determination of GNF in human plasma and urine samples. The analyte was extracted and an excess amount of hexafluoro acetyl acetone and methanol was added for derivatization. The separation of the analyte was carried out using a glass column (1.6 m × 3 mm) packed with 3% OV-225 on 100-120-mesh Gas Chrom Q using 5% methane in argon as the carrier gas at a flow rate of 60 mL/min and detected by ECD. The injector, column and detector temperatures were set at 250°C, 210°C, and 300°C, respectively. The developed method was specific and sensitive [189].
Chu et al. developed a GC method to determine CLN and its derivatives extracted from human plasma and urine samples. The separation was carried out using a silanized glass column (1.8 m × 2 mm) with nitrogen as the carrier gas at a flow rate of 25 mL/min. The injector, column and detector temperatures were set at 220°C, 175°C, and 250°C, respectively and detection of the analyte was by ECD [190]. Edlund PO developed a GC method for the quantification of CLN extracted from human plasma samples and evaluated various types of columns, different carrier gases and altered the oven, injector and detector temperatures to develop a selective method for the analysis of CLN using ECD [191].
Kankaanpaa et al. developed and validated a GC-MS method for the quantification of AMP in human blood, serum, oral fluids and urine samples. The analyte was extracted and derivatized with heptafluorobutyric anhydride (HFBA). The methylmexiletine was used as the IS. The analyte and IS were separated at retention times of 6.64 and 10.18 min, respectively using a DB-5MS column (30 m × 0.32 mm, 1 μm) with helium as the carrier gas and were detected using SIM mode. The m/z was found to be 118, 169, and 240 for the analyte and 136 and 254 for the IS, respectively. [192]. Miki et al. developed and validated a GC-MS method for the determination of AMP in human blood, hair and urine samples [193] and the chromatographic conditions are reported in Table 4.
GC-MS methods for the determination of AMP, MPH and CLN in human biological samples.
| Analyte | Derivatizing agent | IS | Stationary phase | Carrier gas | Flow rate | Detection | m/z | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AMP | N-methyl bis(trifluoroacetamide) | Diphenyl-methane | DB-5MS or DB-1MS capillary column (30 m x 0.32 mm, 0.25 μm) | Helium | 3 mL/min | SIM | 140 (AMP) & 168 (IS) | [193] |
| AMP | Perfluoro octanoyl chloride | AMP-D3 | Hewlett-Packard column (12 m x 0.2 mm, 0.33 μm) | Helium | 1.4 mL/min | SIM | 118, 440 (AMP) & 121, 443 (IS) | [195] |
| AMP | HFBA | AMP-D5 | HP 5 MS capillary column (30 m x 0.32 mm, 0.25 μm) | Helium | - | SIM | 91, 118 & 240 (AMP), 244 (IS) | [196] |
| AMP | Propyl-chloroformate | Methamphetamine-D5 | Fused silica capillary column (30 m x 0.25 mm, 0.25 μm) | Helium | 0.8 mL/min | SIM | 130 (AMP) & 148 (IS) | [197] |
| AMP | S-(-)-hepta-fluorobutyryl prolyl chloride | AMP-D11 | HP-5MS column (30 m x 0.25 mm) | Helium | 1 mL/min | SIM | 388 (AMP) & 399 (IS) | [198] |
| AMP | HFBA | AMP-D6 | Fused-silica DB-1 capillary column (30 m x 0.25 mm, 0.25 μm) | Helium | - | SIM | 311.1 (AMP) & 317.1 (IS) | [199] |
| AMP | HFBA | Methamphetamine-D5 | Fused-silica capillary (DB-5 MS) column (30 m x 0.25 mm, 0.25 μm) | Helium | 1 mL/min | SIM | 44, 91 & 135 (AMP), 62, 92 & 154 (IS) | [200] |
| AMP | Pentafluoro propionic acid | AMP-D5 | Agilent HP-5MS column (30 m x 250 pm, 0.25 μm) | Helium | 1 mL/min | SIM | 91, 118 & 190 (AMP), 122, 123 & 194 (IS) | [201] |
| AMP | Propyl chloroformate | AMP-D5 | HP-5MS column (30 m x 0.25 mm, 0.25 μm) | Helium | 1 mL/min | SIM | 130 (AMP) & 134 (IS) | [202] |
| AMP | Ethyl chloroformate | Methamphetamine-D5 | Fused silica capillary column (30 m x 0.25 mm, 0.25 μm) | Helium | 0.8 mL/min | SIM | 116 (AMP) & 134 (IS) | [203] |
| AMP | Pentafluoro propionic anhydride-pentafluoro propanol. | AMP-D5 | HP-5MS column (30 m x 0.25 mm, 0.25 μm) | Helium | 1 mL/min | SIM | 118 & 190, (AMP), 123 & 194 (IS) | [204] |
| AMP | Propionic acid anhydride | Methaqualone | HP-5MS capillary column (30 m x 0.25 mm, 0.25 μm) | Helium | 1 mL/min | SIM | 44, 91, 100 & 118 (AMP), 235 & 250 (IS) | [205] |
| AMP | Heptalluoro butyric anhydride | AMP-D5 | HP-5MS column (30 m x 0.25 mm) | Helium | 1 mL/min | SIM | 240 (AMP) & 244 (IS) | [206] |
| AMP | Alkyl chloroformates | Methamphetamine-D5 | Fused-silica capillary column (30 m x 0.25 mm, 0.25 μm) | Helium | 0.8 mL/min | SIM | 91, 116, 207 (AMP) & 134 (IS) | [207] |
| AMP | Bis(trimethylsilil)-trifluoro -acetamide and trimethyl chlorosilane | AMP-D5 | HP-5 fused-silica capillary column (30 m x 0.25 mm, 0.32 μm) | Helium | 1 mL/min | SIM | 91, 116 & 192 (AMP), 92, 120 & 197 (IS) | [208] |
| AMP | Acetic anhydride | - | Restek Rtx-5MS capillary column (30 m x 0.25 mm, 0.25 μm) | Helium | 0.8 mL/min | SIM | 44 (AMP) | [209] |
| AMP | Pentafluoro-propionic anhydride | AMP-D11 | DB-5MS column (30 m x 0.25 mm, 0.25 μm) | Helium | - | SIM | 190 (AMP) & 194 (IS) | [210] |
| MPH | HFBA | MPH- 18O2 | Restek Rtx-5MS fused-silica capillary column (15 m x 0.25 mm, 0.25 μm) | Helium | 1.5 mL/min | SIM | 369 (MPH) & 373 (IS) | [212] |
| MPH | o-(pentafluoro- benzyloxy carbonyl)-benzoyl chloride | MPH- 18O2H3 | BPX5 fused silica capillary column (15 m x 0.25 mm) | Helium | 1.5 mL/min | SIM | 380 (MPH) & 385 (IS) | [213] |
| MPH | N-Heptafluoro butyryl-L-prolyl chloride | threo- ethylphenidate. HCl | Silanized glass column (1 m x 2.6 mm) | Helium | 37 mL/min | SIM | 527 (MPH) & 541 (IS) | [214] |
| MPH | Trifluoro acetic anhydride | Ethylphenidate | Glass, coiled column (2 m x 2 mm) | Helium | 20 mL/min | SIM | 180 (MPH & IS) | [215] |
| CLN | 3, 5-Bis (tri-fluoromethyl) benzoyl chloride | CLN-2H4 | Fused-silica capillary column (25 m x 0.23 mm, 0.13 μm) | Helium | - | SIM | 673 & 709 (CLN), 676 & 713 (IS) | [220] |
| CLN | Pentafluoro benzyl bromide | Moxonidine | DB 5 capillary column (30 m x 0.25 mm, 0.25 μm) | - | - | SIM | 354 (CLN) & 366 (IS) | [221] |
Frison reported a validated GC-MS method for the determination of AMP in human plasma, hair and urine samples. The analyte was extracted and derivatized with 2, 2, 2‐trichloroethyl chloroformate. 3, 4-methylenedioxypropylamphetamine (MDPA) was used as the IS. The analyte and IS were separated using a Hewlett-Packard HP-5MS capillary column (30 m × 0.25 mm, 0.25 μm) with helium as the carrier gas at a flow rate of 1 mL/min and detected using SIM mode. The m/z was 162, 218, 220, 274, and 309 for the analyte and 260, 262, 264, 395, and 397 for the IS, respectively [194]. Other GC-MS methods for the quantification of AMP in human blood [195, 196, 197, 198], plasma [199], serum [200], oral fluids [201,202], hair [203, 204, 205, 206], and urine samples [207, 208, 209, 210] are reported in Table 4.
Leis et al. reported a validated GC-MS method for the determination of MPH in human plasma samples using MPH-18O2H3 as the IS. The analyte was extracted by LLE using n-hexane and derivatized with o-(penta fluorobenzyloxycarbonyl)-2, 3, 4, 5-tetrafluorobenzoyl chloride. The derivatized analyte and IS were separated using a BPX5 fused silica capillary column (15 m × 0.25 mm) with helium as the carrier gas at a flow rate of 1.5 mL/min and detected using SIM mode. The m/z was found to be 408 and 452 for the analyte and 413 and 457 for the IS, respectively [211]. Further GC-MS methods for the quantification of MPH extracted from human plasma [212, 213, 214] and serum samples [215] are reported in Table 4.
Boumba et al. developed and validated a GC-MS method for the quantification of BUP in human whole blood, plasma and serum samples. The analyte was extracted by SPE and was separated using an Equity 5 capillary column (30 m × 0.25 mm, 0.25 μm) with helium as the carrier gas at a flow rate of 1.5 mL/min and detected using SIM mode. The m/z of BUP was 44 [216].
Julien Larose et al. proposed a GC-MS method for the determination of GNF in human plasma samples using negative chemical ionisation. GNF-13C15N3 was used as the IS and the analyte was derivatized with hexafluoro acetyl acetone. The analyte and IS were separated using a fused silica capillary column with helium as the carrier gas and were detected using SIM mode. The m/z was 417 for the analyte and 423 for the IS, respectively. The method was validated and was found to be useful for pharmacokinetic studies [217].
Haglock et al. developed and validated a GC-MS method for the determination of GNF in human urine samples. Protriptyline was used as the IS and the analyte was derivatized with HFBA. The analyte and IS were separated using a DB-5 capillary column (30 m × 0.32 mm, 0.25 μm) and were detected using SIM mode. The m/z was 86.1, 272.1, and 274.1 for the analyte and 189.1 and 191.1 for the IS, respectively [218].
Girault et al. developed and validated a GC-MS method for the determination of CLN extracted from human plasma samples. 2- [(2, 4-dichlorophenyl) imino] - imidazolidine was used as an IS and the analyte was derivatized with pentafluorobenzyl bromide. The analyte and IS were separated using an Ultra 1 bonded phase fused-silica capillary column (25 m × 0.2 mm, 0.33 μm) with helium as the carrier gas and detected using SIM mode. The m/z was 354 for the analyte and IS [219]. Other GC-MS methods for the quantification of CLN extracted from human plasma [220] and serum [221] samples are reported in Table 4.
Woźniak et al. developed and validated a GC-MS/MS method for the quantification of AMP in human blood and urine samples using metamphetamine-D5 as the IS. The analyte was extracted from biological samples by LLE using ethyl acetate as the extracting solvent and derivatized with trifluoroacetic anhydride. The analyte and IS were separated using a Phenomenex ZB-5MSi capillary column (30 m × 0.25 mm, 0.25 μm) with helium as the carrier gas at a flow rate of 1 mL/min and detected using MRM mode. The m/z value was 68.9, 91, 118, and 140 for the analyte and 113 and 158 for the IS [222].
Gambelunghe et al. proposed a GC-MS/MS method for the determination of AMP in human hair samples using AMP-D6 as the IS. The analyte was extracted and derivatized with pentafluoro propionic anhydride for analysis. The analyte and IS were separated using a CP–SIL 8CB-MS capillary column (30 m × 0.25 mm, 0.25 μm) with helium as the carrier gas at a flow rate of 1 mL/min and detected using SIM mode. The m/z was 148 for the analyte and 194 for the IS, respectively [223].
Lachenmeier et al. reported a head space GC-MS/MS method for the quantification of AMP in human hair samples using AMP-D5 as the IS and a triple quadrupole as the mass analyser. A solid-phase dynamic extraction technique was employed for sample preparation. The analyte and IS were separated using a fused-silica capillary column (30 m × 0.25 mm, 0.25 μm) with helium as the carrier gas at a flow rate of 1 mL/min. The analyte and IS were detected using both MRM and SIM mode and the m/z were 93 and 140 for the analyte and 96 and 144 for the IS, respectively. The method was validated and was useful for clinical and forensic studies [224]. There is no reported GC method for the quantification of ATX in human biological samples.
4 Discussion
This review covers almost all of the analytical methods for the determination of ADHD drugs in human biological matrices from the year 1970 to 2019. A greater number of analytical methods were reported for stimulant drugs i.e. AMP and MPH compared to non-stimulant drugs i.e. ATX, BUP, GNF, and CLN, which is represented in Figure 2.
Structures of ADHD drugs.
Availability of reported analytical methods for ADHD drugs.
In general, spectrophotometry and spectrofluorimetry are the simplest and most inexpensive techniques used for the quantification of drugs. In bioanalysis, a limited number of these methods were reported for the quantification of ADHD drugs, as it detects analytes at the level of μg/ mL. For spectrophotometric analysis, addition of a chromogenic reagent (NQS) is required for the analysis of AMP with higher molar absorptivity. The analytes like BUP and GNF are basically non-fluorescent compounds, by reaction with reagents such as dansyl chloride, fluorescent compounds are produced which emit fluorescence at certain wavelengths and are measured using fluorimetry. Nowadays, hyphenated techniques are used for an advanced level of analysis and these have greater applications in the field of bioanalysis due to improved selectivity, sensitivity, accuracy and precision. The various bio-analytical methods used for the quantification of ADHD drugs in biological samples are overviewed in Figure 3. It is found that a greater number of LC-MS/MS methods were reported for the quantification of the six ADHD drugs. Compared to other LC detectors (UV-Vis, fluorescence, etc.), MS is more significant in terms of selectivity and sensitivity. LC-MS/MS methods in bioanalysis significantly reduce the LC run time and increase the sample throughput. To give high quality bioanalytical data, LC-MS/MS is the preferred method for the fast and sensitive quantification of ADHD drugs in biological matrices with a lower detection limit (ng to pg/mL).
Various bio-analytical methods used for quantification of ADHD drugs.
5 Conclusion
In this review, the chemistry, physio-chemical properties and bio-analytical methods of six ADHD drugs were discussed. The stimulant drugs (short acting) are the most commonly prescribed drugs compared to non-stimulant drugs in the treatment of ADHD in children and adolescents. Thus, various bio-analytical methods were developed and validated for quantification of these drugs in biological matrices and were applied to pharmacokinetic, toxico-kinetic studies, etc. From the above discussion, we concluded that LC-MS/MS is well-developed and the most suitable method for the quantification of ADHD drugs in human biological samples.
Acknowledgement
The authors wish to thank C.L. Baid Metha college of Pharmacy for support and encouragement.
References
[1] Ougrin D, Chatterton S, Banarsee R. Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD): review for primary care clinicians. London J Prim Care (Abingdon). 2010;3(1):45‐51.10.1080/17571472.2010.11493296Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[2] Wilms Floet, Scheiner, Grossman. Attention-Deficit/ Hyperactivity Disorder. Pediatrics in Review. 2010;31(2):56-69.10.1542/pir.31.2.56Search in Google Scholar
[3] Luo Y, Weibman D, Halperin JM, Li X. A Review of Heterogeneity in Attention Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD). Front. Hum. Neurosci. 2019;13(42):1-12.10.3389/fnhum.2019.00042Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[4] Faraone SV, Asherson P, Banaschewski T, Biederman J, Buitelaar JK, Ramos-Quiroga JA, et al. Attention-deficit/ hyperactivity disorder. Nat Rev Dis Primers. 2015;1:1-23.10.1038/nrdp.2015.20Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[5] Durston. A review of the biological bases of ADHD: what have we learned from imaging studies? Ment Retard Dev Disabil Res Rev. 2003;9(3):184-95.10.1002/mrdd.10079Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[6] Turker S, Seither-Preisler A, Maria Reiterer S, Schneider P. Cognitive and Behavioural Weaknesses in Children with Reading Disorder and AD (H) D. Scientific Reports. 2019;9(1):1-11.10.1038/s41598-019-51372-wSearch in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[7] Tosto MG, Momi SK, Asherson P, Malki K. A systematic review of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and mathematical ability: current findings and future implications. BMC Med. 2015;13(1):204-18.10.1186/s12916-015-0414-4Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[8] Pérez-Crespo L, Canals-Sans J, Suades-Gonzalez E, Guxens M. Temporal trends and geographical variability of the prevalence and incidence of attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder diagnoses among children in Catalonia, Spain. Scientific Reports. 2020;10(1):1-10.10.1038/s41598-020-63342-8Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[9] Rovira P, Demontis D, Sánchez-Mora C, Zayats T, Klein M, Mota NR, et al. Shared genetic background between children and adults with attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder. Neuropsy-chopharmacol. 2020;0:1-10.10.1038/s41386-020-0664-5Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[10] Al-Mubarak BR, Omar A, Baz B, Al-Abdulaziz B, Magrashi AI, Yemni EA, et al. Whole exome sequencing in ADHD trios from single and multi-incident families implicates new candidate genes and highlights polygenic transmission. Eur J Hum Genet. 2020;28:1098-110.10.1038/s41431-020-0619-7Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[11] Guo X, Yao D, Cao Q, Liu L, Zhao Q, Li H, et al. Shared and distinct resting functional connectivity in children and adults with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. Transl Psychiatry. 2020;10(1):1-12.10.1038/s41398-020-0740-ySearch in Google Scholar
[12] Thome J, Ehlis AC, Fallgatter AJ, Krauel K, Lange KW, Riederer P, et al. Biomarkers for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). A consensus report of the WFSBP task force on biological markers and the World Federation of ADHD. World J Biol Psychiatry. 2012;13(5):379-400.10.3109/15622975.2012.690535Search in Google Scholar
[13] Lenartowicz A, Loo SK. Use of EEG to diagnose ADHD. Current Psychiatry Reports. 2014;16(11):498-509.10.1007/s11920-014-0498-0Search in Google Scholar
[14] Nuwer MR, Buchhalter J, Shepard KM. Quantitative EEG in attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder: A companion payment policy review for clinicians and payers. Neurol Clin Pract. 2016;6(6):543‐8.10.1212/CPJ.0000000000000308Search in Google Scholar
[15] Martinez-Raga J, Ferreros A, Knecht C, de Alvaro R, Carabal E. Attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder medication use: factors involved in prescribing, safety aspects and outcomes. Ther Adv Drug Saf. 2017;8(3):87‐99.10.1177/2042098616679636Search in Google Scholar
[16] Peterson K, McDonagh M, Fu R. Comparative benefits and harms of competing medications for adults with attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder: a systematic review and indirect comparison meta-analysis. Psychopharmacology (Berl). 2008;197(1):1-11.10.1007/s00213-007-0996-4Search in Google Scholar
[17] Faraone SV. The pharmacology of amphetamine and methyl-phenidate: Relevance to the neurobiology of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder and other psychiatric comorbidities. Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2018;87:255-70.10.1016/j.neubiorev.2018.02.001Search in Google Scholar
[18] Challman TD, Lipsky JJ. Methylphenidate: Its Pharmacology and Uses. Current applications and future of artificial intelligence in cardiology. 2000;75(7):711-21.Search in Google Scholar
[19] Bymaster FP, Katner JS, Nelson DL, Hemrick-Luecke SK, Threlkeld PG, Heiligenstein JH, et al. Atomoxetine increases extracellular levels of norepinephrine and dopamine in prefrontal cortex of rat: A potential mechanism for efficacy in attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder. Neuropsychophar-macology. 2002;27:699-711.10.1016/S0893-133X(02)00346-9Search in Google Scholar
[20] Barton J. Atomoxetine: a new pharmacotherapeutic approach in the management of ADHD. Archives of Disease in Childhood. 2005;90(1):26-9.10.1136/adc.2004.059386Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[21] Stahl SM, Pradko JF, Haight BR, Modell JG, Rockett CB, Learned-Coughlin S. Review of the Neuropharmacology of Bupropion, a Dual Norepinephrine and Dopamine Reuptake Inhibitor. Prim Care Companion J Clin Psychiatry. 2004;6(4):159‐66.10.4088/PCC.v06n0403Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[22] Mattes JA. Treating ADHD in Prison: Focus on Alpha-2 Agonists (Clonidine and Guanfacine). J Am Acad Psychiatry Law. 2016;44(2):151-7.Search in Google Scholar
[23] Alamo C, Lopez-Munoz F, Sánchez-García J. Mechanism of action of guanfacine: a postsynaptic differential approach to the treatment of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Actas Esp Psiquiatr. 2016;44(3):107-12.Search in Google Scholar
[24] Bernknopf A. Guanfacine (Intuniv) for Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder. American Family Physician. 2011;83(4):468-75.Search in Google Scholar
[25] Tarver J, Daley D, Sayal K. ADHD: an updated review of the essential facts. Child: care, health and development. 2014;40(6):762–74.10.1111/cch.12139Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[26] Van de Merbel NC. Quantitative determination of endogenous compounds in biological samples using chromatographic techniques. TrAC Trends in Analytical Chemistry. 2008;27(10):924-33.10.1016/j.trac.2008.09.002Search in Google Scholar
[27] Arora K, Gangadharappa HV. An Approach to Bioanalytical method development and Validation: A Review. Int J Pharm Sci Res. 2016;7(6):2291-301.Search in Google Scholar
[28] Moein MM, EI Beqqali A, Abdel-Rehim M. Bioanalytical method development and validation: Critical concepts and strategies. Journal of Chromatography B. 2017;1043:3-11.10.1016/j.jchromb.2016.09.028Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[29] Pandey S, Pandey P, Tiwari G, Tiwari R. Bioanalysis in drug discovery and development. Pharm Methods. 2010; 1(1):14-24.10.4103/2229-4708.72223Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[30] Begum SS, Sushmaa BS, Vijayaraja S. Bioanalytical Techniques – An Overview; PharmaTutor. 2015;3(9):14-24.Search in Google Scholar
[31] Heal DJ, Smith SL, Gosden J, Nutt DJ. Amphetamine, past and present--a pharmacological and clinical perspective. J Psycho-pharmacol. 2013;27(6):479-96.10.1177/0269881113482532Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[32] Budavari S. The Merck index: an encyclopedia of chemicals, drugs and biologicals (12th edition). 1996.Search in Google Scholar
[33] Vree TB, Muskens ATJM, Rossum JMV. Some physico‐chemical properties of amphetamine and related drugs. Journal of Pharmacy and Pharmacology. 1969;21: 774-75.10.1111/j.2042-7158.1969.tb08168.xSearch in Google Scholar PubMed
[34] Wallace JE, Biggs JD, Ladd SL. Determination of amphetamine by ultraviolet spectrophotometry. Analytical Chemistry. 1968;40(14):2207-10.10.1021/ac50158a055Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[35] Vaiano F, Busardo FP, Palumbo D, Kyriakou C, Fioravanti A, Catalani V, et al. A novel screening method for 64 new psychoactive substances and 5 amphetamines in blood by LC–MS/MS and application to real cases. Journal of Pharmaceutical and Biomedical Analysis. 2016;129:441-9.10.1016/j.jpba.2016.07.009Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[36] Wenthur CJ. Classics in Chemical Neuroscience: Methyl-phenidate. ACS Chemical Neuroscience. 2016;7(8):1030-40.10.1021/acschemneuro.6b00199Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[37] O Neil M.J. The Merck Index - An Encyclopedia of Chemicals, Dr ugs, and Biologicals. Royal Society of Chemistry. 2013:1132.Search in Google Scholar
[38] Parastekar VP, Barhate V. Spectrophotometric determination of Methylphenidate in a Pharmaceutical preparation by Potassium Permanganate and Sulphanilic acid. World Journal of Pharmaceutical Research. 2015;4(6):2264-74.Search in Google Scholar
[39] de Cássia Mariotti K, Rubensam G, Barreto, F, Bica VC, Meneghini LZ, Ortiz RS, et al. Simultaneous Determination of Fenproporex, Diethylpropione and Methylphenidate in Oral Fluid by LC-MS/MS. Chromatographia. 2014;77:83-90.10.1007/s10337-013-2569-5Search in Google Scholar
[40] Raghubabu K, Shanti Swarup L, Ramu BK, Rao MN. Simple and convenient visible spectrophotometric assay of atomoxetine hydrochloride in bulk drug and pharmaceutical preparations. Int. J. Chem. Sci. 2012;10(2):643-54.Search in Google Scholar
[41] Rahman Z, Aanandhi VM, SM. Analytical method development and validation of atomoxetine hydrochloride using rapid high-performance liquid chromatographic technique. Asian Journal of Pharmaceutical and Clinical Research. 2018;11(11):118-20.10.22159/ajpcr.2018.v11i11.27204Search in Google Scholar
[42] Sauer J, Ring BJ, Witcher JW. Clinical Pharmacokinetics of Atomoxetine. Clin Pharmacokinet. 2005;44:571-90.10.2165/00003088-200544060-00002Search in Google Scholar
[43] Shailesh K. Spectrophotometric Determination of Atomoxetine Hydrochloride from its pharmaceutical dosage forms. Asian Journal of Research Chemistry. 2009;2:258-9.Search in Google Scholar
[44] Appel DI, Brinda B, Markowitz JS, Newcorn JH, Zhu HJ. A liquid chromatography/tandem mass spectrometry assay for the analysis of atomoxetine in human plasma and in vitro cellular samples. Biomed. Chromatogr. 2012;26:1364-70.10.1002/bmc.2706Search in Google Scholar
[45] Yeniceli D, Dogrukol AK D. The determination of Bupropion Hydrochloride In pharmaceutical dosage forms by original UV-and second derivative UV spectrophotometry, potentiometric and conductometric methods. Turk J Pharm Sci 2010;7:99-110.Search in Google Scholar
[46] Khan SR, Berendt RT, Ellison CD, Ciavarella AB, Asafu-Adjaye E, Khan MA, Faustino PJ. Chapter One - Bupropion Hydrochloride. Profiles of Drug Substances, Excipients and Related Methodology. 2016;41:1-30.10.1016/bs.podrm.2015.12.001Search in Google Scholar
[47] Muralidhar P, Bhargav E, Srinath B. Formulation and Optimization of Bupropion HCl Microsponges by 23 Factorial Design. International Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences and Research. 2017;8(3):1134-44.Search in Google Scholar
[48] Denooz R, Mercerolle M, Lachatre G, Charlie C. Ultra-Performance Liquid Chromatography-Tandem Mass Spectrometry Method for the Determination of Bupropion and its Main Metabolites in Human Whole Blood. Journal of Analytical Toxicology 2010; 34(5): 280-6.10.1093/jat/34.5.280Search in Google Scholar
[49] Frisk-Holmberg M, Wibell L. Concentration-dependent blood pressure effects of guanfacine. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 1986;39(2):169-72.10.1038/clpt.1986.29Search in Google Scholar
[50] Desai S, Bhagwat DA, Shinde S, Disouza JI. Design and Evaluation of Guanfacine extended release formulation. Int J App Pharm. 2019;11(3):43-8.10.22159/ijap.2019v11i3.30578Search in Google Scholar
[51] Martin P, Satin L, Vince BD, Padilla AF, White C, Corcoran M, et al. Pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of guanfacine extended release in adolescents aged 13–17 years with attention‐deficit/hyperactivity disorder. Clinical Pharmacology in Drug Development, 2014;3(4):252-61.10.1002/cpdd.124Search in Google Scholar
[52] Abounassif MA, Mian MS, Mian NAA. Clonidine Hydrochloride. Analytical Profiles of Drug Substances and Excipients. 1992;21:109-47.10.1016/S0099-5428(08)60390-1Search in Google Scholar
[53] Corciova A. Validated colorimetric assay of Clonidine Hydrochloride from pharmaceutical preparations. Iran J Pharm Res. 2016;15(1):149-56.Search in Google Scholar
[54] Pelzer M, Addison T, Li W, Jiang X, Weng N. Development and validation of a liquid chromatography–tandem mass spectrometry method, using silica column and aqueous-organic mobile phase, for the analysis of clonidine as low as 10 pg/ml in human serum. Journal of liquid Chromatography & related technologies. 2002;25(7):1019-32.10.1081/JLC-120003421Search in Google Scholar
[55] Germer TA, Zwinkels JC, Tsai BK. Theoretical Concepts in Spectrophotometric Measurements. Experimental Methods in the Physical Sciences, 2014;46:11-66.10.1016/B978-0-12-386022-4.00002-9Search in Google Scholar
[56] Legua CM, Falco PC, Cabeza AS. Extractive-spectrophotometric determination of amphetamine in urine samples with sodium 1, 2-naphthoquinone 4-sulphonate. Analytica Chimica Acta. 1993;283(1):635-44.10.1016/0003-2670(93)85276-PSearch in Google Scholar
[57] Basavaiah K, Abdulrahman SAM. Use of charge transfer complexation reaction for the spectrophotometric determination of bupropion in pharmaceuticals and spiked human urine. Thai J. Pharm. Sci. 2010;34:134-45.Search in Google Scholar
[58] Bec KB, Grabska J, Huck CW. Issues in Hyperspectral Traceability of Foods. Elsevier. 2012.Search in Google Scholar
[59] Maurı́-Aucejo AR, Pascual-Martı́ MC, Llobat M, Herraiz A, Cerdan A. Fluorimetric determination of amphetamine in urine by flow injection with on-line liquid–liquid extraction. Microchemical Journal. 2001;69(3):199-204.10.1016/S0026-265X(01)00080-7Search in Google Scholar
[60] Omar MA, Abdelmageed OH, Derayea SM, Attia TZ. Spectro-fluorimetric protocol for antidepressant drugs in dosage forms and human plasma through derivatization with dansyl chloride. Arabian Journal of Chemistry. 2017;10(2):3197-206.10.1016/j.arabjc.2013.12.015Search in Google Scholar
[61] Wahbi AM, Bedair MM, Galal S, Gazy A, Abdel-hay M. Spectrofluorimetric determination of guanethidine sulphate, guanfacine hydrochloride, guanoclor sulphate and guanoxan sulphate in tablets and biological fluids, using benzoin. Mikrochim Acta. 1993;111(1-3):83-91.10.1007/BF01240170Search in Google Scholar
[62] Waddell Smith R. Mass Spectrometry. Encyclopedia of Forensic Sciences (Second Edition). 2013;603-8.10.1016/B978-0-12-382165-2.00250-6Search in Google Scholar
[63] Habib A, Nargis A, Bi L, Zhao P, Wen L. Analysis of amphetaminic drug compounds in urine by headspace-dielectric barrier discharge ionization-mass spectrometry. Arabian Journal of Chemistry. 2018;13(1):2162-70.10.1016/j.arabjc.2018.04.001Search in Google Scholar
[64] Yang Y, Kameoka J, Wachs T, Henion JD, Craighead HG. Quantitative Mass Spectrometric Determination of Methylphenidate Concentration in Urine Using an Electrospray Ionization Source Integrated with a Polymer Microchip. Anal. Chem. 2004,76(9):2568-74.10.1021/ac0303618Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[65] Wachs T, Henion J. A device for automated direct sampling and quantitation from solid-phase sorbent extraction cards by electrospray tandem mass spectrometry. Anal Chem. 2003;75(7):1769‐75.10.1021/ac020501ySearch in Google Scholar PubMed
[66] Fritsch RJ, Krause I. Electrophoresis. Encyclopedia of Food Sciences and Nutrition (Second Edition). 2003;2055-62.10.1016/B0-12-227055-X/01409-7Search in Google Scholar
[67] Hempel G. Strategies to improve the sensitivity in capillary electrophoresis for the analysis of drugs in biological fluids. Electrophoresis. 2000;21(4):691-8.10.1002/(SICI)1522-2683(20000301)21:4<691::AID-ELPS691>3.0.CO;2-USearch in Google Scholar
[68] Meng P, Fang NJ, Wang M, Liu H. Analysis of amphetamine, methamphetamine and methylenedioxy‐methamphetamine by micellar capillary electrophoresis using cation‐selective exhaustive injection. Electrophoresis. 2006;27(16):3210-7.10.1002/elps.200500886Search in Google Scholar
[69] Hudson JC, Golin M, Malcolm M. Capillary Zone Electrophoresis in a Comprehensive Screen for Basic Drugs in Whole Blood, Canadian Society of Forensic Science Journal.1995;28(2):137-52.10.1080/00085030.1995.10757478Search in Google Scholar
[70] Hyotylainen T, Siren H, Riekkola ML. Determination of morphine analogues, caffeine and amphetamine in biological fluids by capillary electrophoresis with the marker technique. Journal of Chromatography A. 1996;735(1–2):439-47.10.1016/0021-9673(96)00067-2Search in Google Scholar
[71] Boatto G, Faedda MV, Pau A, Asproni B, Menconi S, Cerri R. Determination of amphetamines in human whole blood by capillary electrophoresis with photodiode array detection. J Pharm Biomed Anal. 2002;29(6):1073-80.10.1016/S0731-7085(02)00148-6Search in Google Scholar
[72] Hercegova A, Sadecka J, Polonsky J. Isotachophoretic determination of bisoprolol, clonidine, disopyramide and tolazoline in human fluids. Acta Poloniae Pharmaceutica - Drug Research. 1998;55(3):167-71.Search in Google Scholar
[73] Boatto G, Nieddu M, Carta A, Pau A. Determination of amphetamine-derived designer drugs in human urine by SPE extraction and capillary electrophoresis with mass spectrometry detection. J Chromatogr B Analyt Technol Biomed Life Sci. 2005;814(1):93-8.10.1016/j.jchromb.2004.10.010Search in Google Scholar
[74] Nieddu M, Boatto G, Dessì G. Determination of 4-alkyl 2, 5 dimethoxy-amphetamine derivatives by capillary electrophoresis with mass spectrometry detection from urine samples. Journal of chromatography. B, Analytical Technologies in the Biomedical and Life Sciences. 2007;852(12):578-81.10.1016/j.jchromb.2007.02.029Search in Google Scholar
[75] Bach GA, Jack Henion. Quantitative capillary electrophoresision-trap mass spectrometry determination of methylphenidate in human urine. Journal of Chromatography B: Biomedical Sciences and Applications. 1998;707(1–2):275-85.10.1016/S0378-4347(98)00003-6Search in Google Scholar
[76] Allen SA, Pond BB. Chromatographic and electrophoretic strategies for the chiral separation and quantification of d‐ and l‐threo methylphenidate in biological matrices. Biomed. Chromatogr. 2014 28(11):1554-64.10.1002/bmc.3312Search in Google Scholar
[77] Malagueno de Santana FJ, Jabor VA, Bonato PS. Chiral determination of antidepressant drugs and their metabolites in biological samples. Bioanalysis. 2009;1(1):221-37.10.4155/bio.09.13Search in Google Scholar
[78] Casado N, Valamana Traverso J, Garcia MA, Marina ML. Enantiomeric Determination of Drugs in Pharmaceutical Formulations and Biological Samples by Electrokinetic Chromatography. Critical reviews in analytical chemistry. 2019;0:1-31.10.1080/10408347.2019.1670043Search in Google Scholar
[79] Sanchez‐Hernández L, Castro‐Puyana M, Marina ML, Crego AL. Recent approaches in sensitive enantioseparations by CE. Electrophoresis. 2012;33(1):228-42.10.1002/elps.201100404Search in Google Scholar
[80] Lee SC, Wang CC, Yang PC, Wu SM. Enantioseparation of (±)-threo-methylphenidate in human plasma by cyclodextrin-modified sample stacking capillary electrophoresis. J Chromatogr A. 2012;1232:302-5.10.1016/j.chroma.2011.10.072Search in Google Scholar
[81] Theurillat R, Thormann W. Monitoring of threo‐methyl-phenidate enantiomers in oral fluid by capillary electrophoresis with head‐column field‐amplified sample injection. Electrophoresis. 2014;35(7):986-92.10.1002/elps.201300325Search in Google Scholar
[82] Castro‐Puyana M, Lammers I, Buijs J, Gooijer C, Ariese F. Sensitized phosphorescence as detection method for the enantioseparation of bupropion by capillary electrophoresis. Electrophoresis. 2010;31(23-24):3928-36.10.1002/elps.201000352Search in Google Scholar
[83] Zhu B, Chen YY. Development and Application of Liquid Chromatography in Life Sciences. J Chromatogr Sep Tech. 2017;8(2):1-4.10.4172/2157-7064.1000358Search in Google Scholar
[84] Talwar D, Watson ID, Stewart MJ. Routine analysis of amphetamine class drugs as their naphthaquinone derivatives in human urine by high-performance liquid chromatography. Journal of Chromatography B: Biomedical Sciences and Applications. 1999;735(2):229-41.10.1016/S0378-4347(99)00426-0Search in Google Scholar
[85] Hassan A. Simultaneous determination of selective drugs, fluoxetine, ketoprofen, oxybutynin and clonidine in human plasma. Jordan Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences. 2011;4(2):114-23.Search in Google Scholar
[86] Guo W, Li W, Guo G, Zhang J, Zhou B, Zhai Y, Wang C. Determination of atomoxetine in human plasma by a high performance liquid chromatographic method with ultraviolet detection using liquid-liquid extraction. J Chromatogr B Analyt Technol Biomed Life Sci. 2007;854(1-2):128-34.10.1016/j.jchromb.2007.04.007Search in Google Scholar
[87] Baharfar M, Yamini Y, Seidi S, Karami M. Quantitative analysis of clonidine and ephedrine by a microfluidic system: On-chip electromembrane extraction followed by high performance liquid chromatography. Journal of Chromatography B. 2017;1068–9:313-21.10.1016/j.jchromb.2017.10.062Search in Google Scholar
[88] Campíns Falco P, Molins Legua C, Herraez Hernandez R, Sevillano Cabeza A. Improved amphetamine and metham-phetamine determination in urine by normal-phase high-performance liquid chromatography with sodium 1, 2-naphthoquinone 4-sulphonate as derivatizing agent and solid-phase extraction for sample clean-up. Journal of Chromatography B: Biomedical Sciences and Applications. 1995;663(2):235-45.10.1016/0378-4347(94)00455-ESearch in Google Scholar
[89] Gaillard Y, Pepin G. Use of high-performance liquid chromatography with photodiode-array UV detection for the creation of a 600-compound library application to forensic toxicology. Journal of Chromatography A. 1997;763(1–2):149-63.10.1016/S0021-9673(96)00706-6Search in Google Scholar
[90] Zhu HJ, Wang JS, Patrick KS, Donovan JL, DeVane CL, Markowitz JS. A novel HPLC fluorescence method for the quantification of methylphenidate in human plasma. Journal of Chromatography B. 2007;858(1–2):91-5.10.1016/j.jchromb.2007.08.014Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[91] Stegmann B, Dorfelt A, Haen E. Quantification of Methyl-phenidate, Dexamphetamine, and Atomoxetine in Human Serum and Oral Fluid by HPLC with Fluorescence Detection. Therapeutic Drug Monitoring. 2016;38(1):98-107.10.1097/FTD.0000000000000245Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[92] Ulu ST, Tuncel M. Determination of Bupropion Using Liquid Chromatography with Fluorescence Detection in Pharmaceutical Preparations, Human Plasma and Human Urine. Journal of Chromatographic Science 2012;50(5):433-9.10.1093/chromsci/bms020Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[93] Tedeschi L, Frison G, Castagna F, Giorgetti R, Ferrara SD. Simultaneous identification of amphetamine and its derivatives in urine using HPLC-UV. Int J Leg Med. 1993; 105(5): 265-9.10.1007/BF01370383Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[94] Saber Tehrani M, Givianrad MH, Mahoor N. Surfactant-assisted dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction followed by high-performance liquid chromatography for determination of amphetamine and methamphetamine in urine samples. Anal. Methods. 2012;4(5):1357-64.10.1039/c2ay25125fSearch in Google Scholar
[95] Maddadi S, Qomi M, Rajabi M. Extraction, preconcentration, and determination of methylphenidate in urine sample using solvent bar microextraction in combination with HPLC–UV: Optimization by experimental design. Journal of Liquid Chromatography & Related Technologies. 2017; 40(15):806-12.10.1080/10826076.2017.1369994Search in Google Scholar
[96] Soares ME, Carvalho M, Carmo H, Remiao F, Carvalho F, Bastos ML. Simultaneous determination of amphetamine derivatives in human urine after SPE extraction and HPLC‐UV analysis. Biomed. Chromatogr. 2004;18(2):125-31.10.1002/bmc.315Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[97] Lalande M, Wilson DL, McGilveray IJ. HPLC Determination of Methylphenidate in Human Plasma. Journal of Liquid Chromatography. 1987;10(10):2257-64.10.1080/01483918708068909Search in Google Scholar
[98] Cooperx TB, Suckow RF, Glassman A. Determination of Bupropion and Its Major Basic Metabolites in Plasma by Liquid Chromatography with Dual-Wavelength Ultraviolet Detection. Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences. 1984;73(8):1104-7.10.1002/jps.2600730820Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[99] Al-khamis KI. Rapid Determination of Bupropion in Human Plasma by High Performance Liquid Chromatography, Journal of Liquid Chromatography. 1989;12(4):645-55.10.1080/01483918908051764Search in Google Scholar
[100] Takitane J, Menck R, de Oliveira TF, Prado NV. Determination of Amphetamine, Amfepramone and Fenproporex in Urine Samples by HPLC-DAD: Application to a Population of Brazilian Truck Drivers. J. Braz. Chem. Soc. [online]. 2016;27(3):624-30.10.5935/0103-5053.20150305Search in Google Scholar
[101] Molíns Legua C, Campíns Falco P, Sevillano Cabeza A. Amphetamine and methamphetamine determination in urine by reversed-phase high-performance liquid chromatography with sodium 1, 2-napthoquinone 4-sulfonate as derivatizing agent and solid-phase extraction for sample clean-up. Journal of Chromatography B: Biomedical Sciences and Applications. 1995;672(1):81-8.10.1016/0378-4347(95)00201-SSearch in Google Scholar
[102] Patel C, Patel M, Rani S, Nivsarkar M, Padh H. A new high-performance liquid chromatographic method for quantification of atomoxetine in human plasma and its application for pharmacokinetic study. Journal of Chromatography B. 2007;850(1–2):356-60.10.1016/j.jchromb.2006.12.011Search in Google Scholar
[103] Dogrukol-Ak D, Yeniceli D. A simple and specific hplc method for the determination of atomoxetine in pharmaceuticals and human plasma. Journal of Liquid Chromatography & Related Technologies. 2010;33(19):1745-59.10.1080/10826076.2010.526816Search in Google Scholar
[104] Yeniceli D, Dogrukol-Ak D. An LC Method for the Determination of Bupropion and Its Main Metabolite, Hydroxybupropion in Human Plasma. Chromatographia. 2009;70:1703–08.10.1365/s10337-009-1361-zSearch in Google Scholar
[105] Loboz KK, Gross AS, Ray J, McLachlan AJ. HPLC assay for bupropion and its major metabolites in human plasma. Journal of Chromatography B. 2005;823(2):115-21.10.1016/j.jchromb.2005.06.009Search in Google Scholar
[106] Wang TK, Fuh MS. Determination of amphetamine in human urine by dansyl derivatization and high-performance liquid chromatography with fluorescence detection. Journal of Chromatogr. B: Biomedical Sciences and Applications. 1996;686(2):285-90.10.1016/S0378-4347(96)00228-9Search in Google Scholar
[107] Zhu HJ, Wang JS, Donovan JL, DeVane CL, Gibson BB, Markowitz JS. Sensitive quantification of atomoxetine in human plasma by HPLC with fluorescence detection using 4-(4, 5-diphenyl-1H-imidazole-2-yl) benzoyl chloride derivatization. Journal of Chromatography B. 2007;846(1–2):351-4.10.1016/j.jchromb.2006.08.019Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[108] Ulu ST. Sensitive high-performance liquid chromatographic method for determination of atomoxetine in plasma and urine precolumn derivatization with 1-dimethylaminonaphthalene-5-sulphonyl chloride, Journal of Liquid Chromatography & Related Technologies. 2012;35(6):747-56.10.1080/10826076.2011.608232Search in Google Scholar
[109] Kataoka H, Lord HL, Pawliszyn J. Simple and Rapid Determination of amphetamine, methamphetamine, and their methylenedioxy derivatives in urine by automated in-tube solid-phase microextraction coupled with liquid chromatography-electrospray ionization mass spectrometry. Journal of Analytical Toxicology 2000;24(4):257–65.10.1093/jat/24.4.257Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[110] Apollonio LG, Pianca DJ, Whittall IR, Maher WA, Kyd JM. A demonstration of the use of ultra-performance liquid chromatography–mass spectrometry [UPLC/MS] in the determination of amphetamine-type substances and ketamine for forensic and toxicological analysis. Journal of Chromatography B. 2006;836(1–2):111-5.10.1016/j.jchromb.2006.03.045Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[111] Tatsuno M, Nishikawa M, Katagi M, Tsuchihashi H. Simultaneous determination of illicit drugs in human urine by liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry. J Anal Toxicol. 1996;20(5):281‐6.10.1093/jat/20.5.281Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[112] Bogusz MJ, Kala M, Maier RD. Determination of phenylisothiocyanate derivatives of amphetamine and its analogues in biological fluids by HPLC-APCI-MS or DAD. J Anal Toxicol. 1997;21(1):59-69.10.1093/jat/21.1.59Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[113] Marchei E, Farre M, Pellegrini M, Rossi S, García-Algar O, Vall O, Pichini S. Liquid chromatography–electrospray ionization mass spectrometry determination of methylphenidate and ritalinic acid in conventional and non-conventional biological matrices. Journal of Pharmaceutical and Biomedical Analysis. 2009;49(2):434-9.10.1016/j.jpba.2008.11.020Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[114] Marchei E, Muñoz JA, García-Algar O, Pellegrini M, Vall O, Zuccaro P, Pichini S. Development and validation of a liquid chromatography–mass spectrometry assay for hair analysis of methylphenidate. Forensic Science International. 2008;176(1):42-46.10.1016/j.forsciint.2007.06.024Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[115] Shinozuka T, Terada M, Tanaka E. Solid-phase extraction and analysis of 20 antidepressant drugs in human plasma by LC/MS with SSI method. Forensic Sci Int. 2006;162(1-3):108‐12.10.1016/j.forsciint.2006.03.038Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[116] Wolf CE, Kester-Florin SJ, Poklis A. A HPLC-MS method to detect and quantify guanfacine in urine. Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine. 2011; 50(3): 535-7.10.1515/cclm.2011.803Search in Google Scholar
[117] Danafar H. Method validation of clonidine hydrochloride in human plasma by LC-MS technique. Pharm Biomed Res. 2015;1(4):48-58.10.18869/acadpub.pbr.1.4.48Search in Google Scholar
[118] Danafar H, Hamidi M. LC-MS Method for Studying the Pharma-cokinetics and Bioequivalence of Clonidine Hydrochloride in Healthy Male Volunteers. Avicenna Journal Medical Biotechnology. 2016;8(2):91-8.Search in Google Scholar
[119] Miyaguchi H, Inoue H. Determination of amphetamine-type stimulants, cocaine and ketamine in human hair by liquid chromatography/linear ion trap–Orbitrap hybrid mass spectrometry. Analyst. 2011;136:3503-11.10.1039/c0an00850hSearch in Google Scholar PubMed
[120] Concheiro M, Simoes SM, Quintela O, de Castro A, Dias MJ, Cruz A, López-Rivadulla M. Fast LC–MS/MS method for the determination of amphetamine, methamphetamine, MDA, MDMA, MDEA, MBDB and PMA in urine. Forensic Science International. 2007;171(1):44-51.10.1016/j.forsciint.2006.10.004Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[121] Chèze M, Deveaux M, Martin C, Lhermitte M, Pépin G. Simultaneous analysis of six amphetamines and analogues in hair, blood and urine by LC-ESI-MS/MS: Application to the determination of Forensic Science MDMA after low Ecstasy intake. International. 2007; 170(2–3): 100-4.10.1016/j.forsciint.2007.02.033Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[122] Chou CC, Lee MR. Solid phase microextraction with liquid chromatography–electrospray ionization–tandem mass spectrometry for analysis of amphetamine and methamphetamine in serum. Analytica Chimica Acta. 2005;538(1–2):49-56.10.1016/j.aca.2005.02.018Search in Google Scholar
[123] Wood M, Boeck GD, Samyn N, Morris M, Cooper DP, Maes RA, De Bruijn EA. Development of a Rapid and Sensitive Method for the Quantitation of Amphetamines in Human Plasma and Oral Fluid by LC-MS-MS. Journal of Analytical Toxicology 2003;27(2):78-87.10.1093/jat/27.2.78Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[124] Imbert L, Dulaurent S, Mercerolle M, Morichon J, Lachâtre G, Gaulier JM. Development and validation of a single LC–MS/MS assay following SPE for simultaneous hair analysis of amphetamines, opiates, cocaine and metabolites. Forensic Science International. 2014;234:132-8.10.1016/j.forsciint.2013.11.004Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[125] Kronstrand R, Nystrom I, Strandberg J, Druid H. Screening for drugs of abuse in hair with ion spray LC–MS–MS. Forensic Science International. 2004;145(2–3):183-90.10.1016/j.forsciint.2004.04.034Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[126] Tabernero MJ, Felli ML, Bermejo AM, Chiarotti M. Determination of ketamine and amphetamines in hair by LC/ MS/MS. Anal Bioanal Chem. 2009;395:2547-57.10.1007/s00216-009-3163-4Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[127] Andersson M, Gustavsson, Stephanson N, Beck O. Direct injection LC–MS/MS method for identification and quantification of amphetamine, methamphetamine, 3, 4-methylenedioxyamphetamine and 3, 4-methylenedi-oxymethamphetamine in urine drug testing. Journal of Chromatography B. 2008;861(1):22-8.10.1016/j.jchromb.2007.11.025Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[128] Fuh MR, Wu TY, Lin TY. Determination of amphetamine and methamphetamine in urine by solid phase extraction and ion-pair liquid chromatography–electrospray–tandem mass spectrometry. Talanta. 2006;68(3):987-91.10.1016/j.talanta.2005.06.057Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[129] Wu TY, Fuh MR. Determination of amphetamine, metham-phetamine, 3, 4‐methylenedioxyamphetamine, 3, 4‐methylenedioxyethylamphetamine, and 3, 4‐methyle-nedioxymethamphetamine in urine by online solid‐phase extraction and ion‐pairing liquid chromatography with detection by electrospray tandem mass spectrometry. Rapid Commun. Mass Spectrom. 2005;19:775-80.10.1002/rcm.1856Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[130] Wang T, Shen B, Shi Y, Xiang P, Yu Z. Chiral separation and determination of R/S-methamphetamine and its metabolite R/S-amphetamine in urine using LC–MS/MS. Forensic Science International. 2015;246:72-8.10.1016/j.forsciint.2014.11.009Search in Google Scholar
[131] de Jager AD, Bailey NL. Online extraction LC–MS/MS method for the simultaneous quantitative confirmation of urine drugs of abuse and metabolites: Amphetamines, opiates, cocaine, cannabis, benzodiazepines and methadone. Journal of Chromatography B. 2011;879(25):2642-52.10.1016/j.jchromb.2011.07.029Search in Google Scholar
[132] Ferreirós Bouzas N, Dresen S, Munz B, Weinmann W. Determination of basic drugs of abuse in human serum by online extraction and LC–MS/MS. Anal Bioanal Chem. 2009;395:2499-507.10.1007/s00216-009-3036-xSearch in Google Scholar
[133] Wohlfarth A, Weinmann W, Dresen S. LC-MS/MS screening method for designer amphetamines, tryptamines, and piperazines in serum. Anal Bioanal Chem. 2010;396:2403-414.10.1007/s00216-009-3394-4Search in Google Scholar
[134] Ramos L, Bakhtiar R, Tse FLS. Liquid‐liquid extraction using 96‐well plate format in conjunction with liquid chromatography/ tandem mass spectrometry for quantitative determination of methylphenidate (Ritalin®) in human plasma. Rapid Communications in Mass Spectrometry. 2000;14(9):740-5.10.1002/(SICI)1097-0231(20000515)14:9<740::AID-RCM938>3.0.CO;2-CSearch in Google Scholar
[135] Kasabova L, Svinarov D. Determination of Methylphenidate in Human plasma by validated LC-MS/MS method. Clinical Therapeutics. 2015;37(8):62-3.10.1016/j.clinthera.2015.05.188Search in Google Scholar
[136] Seçilir A, Schrier L, Bijleveld YA, Toersche JH, Jorjani S, Burggraaf J, et al. Determination of methylphenidate in plasma and saliva by liquid chromatography/tandem mass spectrometry. Journal of Chromatography B. 2013;923–924:22-8.10.1016/j.jchromb.2013.01.027Search in Google Scholar
[137] Josefsson M, Rydberg I. Determination of methylphenidate and ritalinic acid in blood, plasma and oral fluid from adolescents and adults using protein precipitation and liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry—A method applied on clinical and forensic investigations. Journal of Pharmaceutical and Biomedical Analysis. 2011;55(5):1050-9.10.1016/j.jpba.2011.03.009Search in Google Scholar
[138] Jang M, Kim J, Shin I, Kang S, Choi H, Yang W. Simultaneous determination of methylphenidate and ritalinic acid in hair using LC–MS/MS. Forensic Science International. 2019;294:183-8.10.1016/j.forsciint.2018.11.021Search in Google Scholar
[139] Paterson SM, Moore GA, Florkowski CM, George PM. Determination of methylphenidate and its metabolite ritalinic acid in urine by liquid chromatography/tandem mass spectrometry. J Chromatogr B Analyt Technol Biomed Life Sci. 2012;881-882:20-6.10.1016/j.jchromb.2011.11.007Search in Google Scholar
[140] Kwon W, Suh S, In MK, Kim JY. Simultaneous Determination of methylphenidate, amphetamine and their metabolites in Urine using direct Injection liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry. Mass Spectrom. Lett. 2014;5(4):104-9.10.5478/MSL.2014.5.4.104Search in Google Scholar
[141] Choi CI, Jang CG, Bae JW, Lee SY. Validation of an analytical LC-MS/MS method in human plasma for the pharmacokinetic study of atomoxetine. J Anal Chem. 2013;68:986-91.10.1134/S1061934813110051Search in Google Scholar
[142] Choi CI, Bae JW, Lee HI, Jang CG, Sohn UD, Lee SY. Determination of atomoxetine metabolites in human plasma by liquid chromatography/tandem mass spectrometry and its application to a pharmacokinetic study. J Chromatogr B Analyt Technol Biomed Life Sci. 2012;885-886:103-8.10.1016/j.jchromb.2011.12.023Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[143] Mullen JH, Shugert RL, Ponsler GD, Li Q, Sundaram B, Coales HL, et al. Simultaneous quantification of atomoxetine as well as its primary oxidative and O-glucuronide metabolites in human plasma and urine using liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry (LC/MS/MS). Journal of Pharmaceutical and Biomedical Analysis. 2005;38(4):720-33.10.1016/j.jpba.2005.02.007Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[144] Park D, Choi H, Jang M, Chang H, Woo S, Yang W. Simultaneous determination of 18 psychoactive agents and 6 metabolites in plasma using LC–MS/MS and application to actual plasma samples from conscription candidates. Forensic Science International. 2018;288:283-90.10.1016/j.forsciint.2018.04.024Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[145] Papaseit E, Marchei E, Farre M, Garcia-Algar O, Pacifici R, Pichini S. Concentrations of atomoxetine and its metabolites in plasma and oral fluid from paediatric patients with attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder. Drug testing and Analysis. 2013;5(6):446-52.10.1002/dta.1370Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[146] Marchei E, Papaseit E, Garcia-Algar OQ, Farre M, Pacifici R, Pichini S. Determination of atomoxetine and its metabolites in conventional and non-conventional biological matrices by liquid chromatography–tandem mass spectrometry. Journal of Pharmaceutical and Biomedical Analysis. 2012;60:26-31.10.1016/j.jpba.2011.11.009Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[147] Papaseit E, Marchei E, Mortali C, Aznar G, Garcia-Algar O, Farre M, et al. Development and validation of a liquid chromatography–tandem mass spectrometry assay for hair analysis of atomoxetine and its metabolites: Application in clinical practice. Forensic Science International. 2012;218(1–3):62-7.10.1016/j.forsciint.2011.10.012Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[148] Montenarh D, Hopf M, Warth S, Maurer HH, Schmidt P, Ewald AH. A simple extraction and LC‐MS/MS approach for the screening and identification of over 100 analytes in eight different matrices. Drug testing and Analysis. 2015;7(3):214-40.10.1002/dta.1657Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[149] Montenarh D, Wernet MP, Hopf M, Maurer HH, Schmidt PH, Ewald AH. Quantification of 33 antidepressants by LC-MS/MS—comparative validation in whole blood, plasma, and serum. Anal Bioanal Chem. 2014;406:5939-53.10.1007/s00216-014-8019-xSearch in Google Scholar PubMed
[150] Borges V, Yang E, Dunn J, Henion J. High-throughput liquid chromatography–tandem mass spectrometry determination of bupropion and its metabolites in human, mouse and rat plasma using a monolithic column. Journal of Chromatography B. 2004;804(2):277-87.10.1016/j.jchromb.2004.01.024Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[151] Shah PA, Parekh JM, Shrivastav PS. Assessment of critical extraction and chromatographic parameters for the determination of bupropion and its three primary metabolites in human plasma by LC-MS/MS. Microchemical Journal. 2017;135:81-90.10.1016/j.microc.2017.08.008Search in Google Scholar
[152] Shahi PK, Patel H, Shah V, Bhokari A, Thennati R, Ameta R. Simultaneous Quantitative Determination of Bupropion and its Metabolites by High Performance Liquid Chromatography Tandem Mass Spectrometry Detection: Application to Bioequivalence Study. Indian J of Pharmaceutical Education and Research. 2018;52(4S):37-46.10.5530/ijper.52.4s.74Search in Google Scholar
[153] Wang X, Vernikovskaya DI, Abdelrahman DR, Hankins GD, Ahmed MS, Nanovskaya TN. Simultaneous quantitative determination of bupropion and its three major metabolites in human umbilical cord plasma and placental tissue using high-performance liquid chromatography–tandem mass spectrometry. Journal of Pharmaceutical and Biomedical Analysis. 2012;70:320-9.10.1016/j.jpba.2012.05.008Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[154] Park S, Park CS, Lee SJ, Cha B, Cho YA, Song Y, et al. Development & validation of a high‐performance liquid chromatography–tandem mass spectrometric method for simultaneous determination of bupropion, quetiapine & escitalopram in human plasma. Biomed. Chromatogr. 2015;29:612-8.10.1002/bmc.3322Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[155] Parekh JM, Sutariya DK, Vaghela RN, Sanyal M, Yadav M, Shrivastav PS. Sensitive, selective and rapid determination of bupropion and its major active metabolite, hydroxybupropion, in human plasma by LC‐MS/MS: application to a bioequivalence study in healthy Indian subjects. Biomed. Chromatogr. 2012;26:314-26.10.1002/bmc.1660Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[156] Iwakura K, Ogawa T, Hattori, H, Iwai M, Suzuki O, Nakagawa T. Simultaneous and sensitive analysis of fourth-generation antidepressants in human plasma by ultra-performance liquid chromatography–tandem mass spectrometry. Forensic Toxicol. 2014;32:30-8.10.1007/s11419-013-0197-2Search in Google Scholar
[157] Masters AR, McCoy M, Jones DR, Desta Z. Stereoselective method to quantify bupropion & its three major metabolites, hydroxybupropion, erythro-dihydrobupropion, and threo-dihydrobupropion using HPLC–MS/MS. Journal of Chromatography B. 2016;1015-1016:201-8.10.1016/j.jchromb.2016.02.018Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[158] Petrides AK, Moskowitz J, Johnson-Davis KL, Jannetto PJ, Langman LJ, Clarke W, Marzinke MA. The development and validation of a turbulent flow-liquid chromatography– tandem mass spectrometric method for the simultaneous quantification of citalopram, sertraline, bupropion and hydroxybupropion in serum. Clinical Biochemistry. 2014;47(15):73-9.10.1016/j.clinbiochem.2014.07.018Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[159] Li Y, Henion J, Abbott R, Wang P. The use of a membrane filtration device to form dried plasma spots for the quantitative determination of guanfacine in whole blood. Rapid Commun Mass Spectrom. 2012;26(10):1208-12.10.1002/rcm.6212Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[160] Li Y, Henion J, Abbott R, Wang P. Dried blood spots as a sampling technique for the quantitative determination of guanfacine in clinical studies. Bioanalysis, 2011;3(22):25 01-14.10.4155/bio.11.262Search in Google Scholar
[161] Li Y, Henion J, Abbott R, Wang P. Semi-automated direct elution of dried blood spots for the quantitative determination of guanfacine in human blood. Bioanalysis, 20 12;4(12):1445-56.10.4155/bio.12.111Search in Google Scholar
[162] Ghosh C, Singh RP, Inamdar, S, Mote M, Chakraborty BS. Sensitive, Selective, Precise and Accurate LC–MS Method for Determination of Clonidine in Human Plasma. Chroma. 20 09;69:1227-32.10.1365/s10337-009-1102-3Search in Google Scholar
[163] Zhuang J, Chen J, Wang X, Pang Y, Bi H, Huang L, et al. Validation of a HPLC‐ESI MS/MS method for the determination of clonidine in human plasma and its application in a bioequivalence study in Chinese healthy volunteers. Biomed. Chromatogr. 2015;29:1506-13.10.1002/bmc.3450Search in Google Scholar
[164] Parekh SA, Pudage A, Joshi SS, Vaidya VV, Gomes NA. Rapid and sensitive liquid chromatography–tandem mass spectrometry (LC–MS/MS) method for the determination of clonidine in human plasma. Journal of Chromatography B. 2008;867(2):172-8.10.1016/j.jchromb.2008.03.030Search in Google Scholar
[165] Veigure R, Aro R, Metsvaht T, Standing JF, Lutsar I, Herodes K, Kipper K. A highly sensitive method for the simultaneous UHPLC–MS/MS analysis of clonidine, morphine, midazolam and their metabolites in blood plasma using HFIP as the eluent additive. Journal of Chromatography B. 2017;1052:150-7.10.1016/j.jchromb.2017.03.007Search in Google Scholar
[166] Nirogi R, Kandikere V, Mudigonda K, Komarneni P. Liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry method for the quantification of clonidine with LLOQ of 10 pg/mL in human plasma. Biomedical Chromatography. 2008;22(9):992-1000.10.1002/bmc.1018Search in Google Scholar
[167] Herráez-Hernández R, Campins-Falco P, Verdu-Andres J. Strategies for the enantiomeric determination of amphetamine and related compounds by liquid chromatography. Journal of Biochemical and Biophysical Methods. 2002;5(1–3):147-67.10.1016/S0165-022X(02)00137-9Search in Google Scholar
[168] Herráez-Hernández R, Campíns-Falcó P, Tortajada-Genaro LA. Chiral determination of amphetamine and related compounds using chloroformates for derivatization and high-performance liquid chromatography. Analyst. 1998;123(10):2131-7.10.1039/a802543fSearch in Google Scholar PubMed
[169] Foster BS, Gilbert DD, Hutchaleelaha A, Mayersohn M. Enantiomeric Determination of Amphetamine and Methamphetamine in Urine by Precolumn Derivatization with Marfey’s Reagent and HPLC. Journal of Analytical Toxicology 1998;22(4):265-9.10.1093/jat/22.4.265Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[170] Batista JMM, Guimaraes LAF, Soares JES, Fonteles MMF. Determination of Enantiomeric Methylphenidate in Human Plasma by High Performance Liquid Chromatography. International Journal of PharmTech Research. 2017;10(2):114-9.10.20902/IJPTR.2017.10117Search in Google Scholar
[171] Thomsen R, Rasmussen HB, Linnet K. Enantioselective Determination of Methylphenidate and Ritalinic Acid in Whole Blood from Forensic Cases Using Automated Solid-Phase Extraction and Liquid Chromatography–Tandem Mass Spectrometry, Journal of Analytical Toxicology 2012;36(8): 560-8.10.1093/jat/bks065Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[172] Zhu HJ, Patrick KS, Markowitz JS. Enantiospecific determination of dl-methylphenidate and dl-ethylphenidate in plasma by liquid chromatography–tandem mass spectrometry: Application to human ethanol interactions. Journal of Chromatography B. 2011;879(11–12):783-8.10.1016/j.jchromb.2011.02.033Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[173] Teitelbaum AM, Flaker AM, Kharasch ED. Development and validation of a high-throughput stereoselective LC–MS/MS assay for bupropion, hydroxybupropion, erythrohydrobupropion, and threohydrobupropion in human plasma. Journal of Chromatography B. 2016;1017–1018:101-13.10.1016/j.jchromb.2016.02.032Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[174] Coles R, Kharasch ED. Stereoselective analysis of bupropion and hydroxybupropion in human plasma and urine by LC/MS/MS. Journal of Chromatography B. 2007;857(1):67-75.10.1016/j.jchromb.2007.07.007Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[175] Forgacs E, Cserhati T. Gas chromatography. Food Authenticity and Traceability. 2003;197-217.10.1533/9781855737181.1.197Search in Google Scholar
[176] Moldoveanu S, David V. Derivatization Methods in GC and GC/MS. Peter Kusch Eds. 2019, Gas Chromatography - Derivatization, Sample Preparation, Application.10.5772/intechopen.81954Search in Google Scholar
[177] Anggard E, Gunne LM, Niklasson F. Gas Chromatographic Determination of Amphetamine in Blood, Tissue, and Urine. Scandinavian Journal of Clinical and Laboratory Investigation . 1970;26(2):137-43.10.3109/00365517009049225Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[178] O Brien JE, Zazulak W, Abbey V, Hinsvark O. Determination of Amphetamine and Phentermine in Biological Fluids. Journal of Chromatographic Science 1972;10(5):336-41.10.1093/chromsci/10.5.336Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[179] Dugal R, Rouleau MA, Bertrand MJ. The Nitrogen-Phosphorus Detector in the Gas Chromatographic Assay of Unmeta-bolized Methylphenidate. Journal of Analytical Toxicology 1978;2(3):101-6.10.1093/jat/2.3.101Search in Google Scholar
[180] Lebish P, Finkle BS, Brackett JW. Determination of Amphetamine, Methamphetamine, and Related Amines in Blood and Urine by Gas Chromatography with Hydrogen-Flame Ionization Detector. Clinical Chemistry 1970;16(3):195-200.10.1093/clinchem/16.3.195Search in Google Scholar
[181] Raikos N, Christopoulou K, Theodoridis G, Tsoukali H, Psaroulis D. Determination of amphetamines in human urine by headspace solid-phase microextraction and gas chromatography. J Chromatogr B Analyt Technol Biomed Life Sci. 2003;789(1):59-63.10.1016/S1570-0232(03)00047-3Search in Google Scholar
[182] Rezaee M, Mashayekhi HA, Garmaroudi SS. Simultaneous determination of amphetamine and related compounds in human urine using ultrasound-assisted emulsification microextraction and gas chromatography. Anal. Methods. 2012;4:3212-8.10.1039/c2ay25461aSearch in Google Scholar
[183] Djozan D, Farajzadeh MA, Sorouraddin SM, Baheri T. Determination of methamphetamine, amphetamine and ecstasy by inside-needle adsorption trap based on molecularly imprinted polymer followed by GC-FID determination. Microchimica Acta. 2012;179(3-4):209-17.10.1007/s00604-012-0879-1Search in Google Scholar
[184] Schubert B. Detection and identification of methylphenidate in human urine and blood samples. Acta Chem Scand. 1970;24(2):433-8.10.3891/acta.chem.scand.24-0433Search in Google Scholar
[185] Wells R, Hammond KB, Rodgerson DO. Gas-Liquid Chromatographic Procedure for Measurement of Methylphenidate Hydrochloride and Its Metabolite, Ritalinic Acid, in Urine. Clinical Chemistry 1974;20(4):440-3.10.1093/clinchem/20.4.440Search in Google Scholar
[186] Koide I, Noguchi O, Okada K, Yokoyama A, Oda H, Yamamoto S, Kataoka H. Determination of amphetamine and methamphetamine in human hair by headspace solid-phase microextraction and gas chromatography with nitrogen– phosphorus detection. Journal of Chromatography B: Biomedical Sciences and Applications. 1998;707(1–2):99-104.10.1016/S0378-4347(97)00582-3Search in Google Scholar
[187] Potts BD, Martin CA, Vore M. Gas-chromatographic quantification of methylphenidate in plasma with use of solid-phase extraction and nitrogen-sensitive detection. Clinical Chemistry 1984;30(8):1374-77.10.1093/clinchem/30.8.1374Search in Google Scholar
[188] Asghar SJ, Baker JB, Rauw GA, Silverstone PH. A rapid method of determining amphetamine in plasma samples using pentafluorobenzenesulfonyl chloride and electron-capture gas chromatography. Journal of Pharmacological and Toxicological Methods. 2001;46(2):111-5.10.1016/S1056-8719(02)00167-3Search in Google Scholar
[189] Guerret M, Lavene D, Longchampt J, Kiger JL. Determination of guanfacine in biological fluids by electron‐capture GLC. J. Pharm. Sci. 1979;68(2):219-21.10.1002/jps.2600680225Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[190] Chu LC, Bayne WF, Tao FT, Schmitt LG, Shaw JE. Determination of Submicrogram Quantities of Clonidine in Biological Fluids. Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences. 1979;68(1):72-4.10.1002/jps.2600680122Search in Google Scholar
[191] Edlund PO. Determination of clonidine in human plasma by glass capillary gas chromatography with electron-capture detection. Journal of Chromatography A. 1980;187(1):161-9.10.1016/S0021-9673(00)87882-6Search in Google Scholar
[192] Kankaanpaa A, Gunnar T, Ariniemi K, Lillsunde P, Mykkanen S, Seppala T. Single-step procedure for gas chromatography– mass spectrometry screening and quantitative determination of amphetamine-type stimulants and related drugs in blood, serum, oral fluid and urine samples. Journal of Chromatography B. 2004;810(1):57-68.10.1016/j.jchromb.2004.07.035Search in Google Scholar
[193] Miki A, Katagi M, Zaitsu K, Nishioka H, Tsuchihashi H. Development of a two-step injector for GC–MS with on-column derivatization, and its application to the determination of amphetamine-type stimulants (ATS) in biological specimens. Journal of Chromatography B. 2008;865(1–2):25-32.10.1016/j.jchromb.2008.01.051Search in Google Scholar
[194] Frison G, Tedeschi L, Favretto D, Reheman A, Ferrara SD. Gas chromatography/mass spectrometry determination of amphetamine‐related drugs and ephedrines in plasma, urine and hair samples after derivatization with 2,2,2‐trichloroethyl chloroformate. Rapid Commun. Mass Spectrom. 2005;19(7):919-27.10.1002/rcm.1873Search in Google Scholar
[195] Gjerde H, Hasvold I, Pettersen G, Christophersen AS. Determination of Amphetamine and Methamphetamine in Blood by Derivatization with Perfluorooctanoyl Chloride and Gas Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry. Journal of Analytical Toxicology 1993;17(2):65-8.10.1093/jat/17.2.65Search in Google Scholar
[196] Marquet P, Lacassie E, Battu C, Faubert H, Lachâtre G. Simultaneous determination of amphetamine and its analogs in human whole blood by gas chromatography-mass spectrometry. Journal of Chromatography B: Biomedical Sciences and Applications. 1997;700(1–2):77-82.10.1016/S0378-4347(97)00318-6Search in Google Scholar
[197] Nishida M, Namera A, Yashiki M, Kojima T. On-column derivatization for determination of amphetamine and methamphetamine in human blood by gas chromatography– mass spectrometry. Forensic Science International. 2002; 125(2–3):156-62.10.1016/S0379-0738(01)00631-4Search in Google Scholar
[198] Peters FT, Kraemer T, Maurer HH. Drug Testing in Blood: Validated Negative-Ion Chemical Ionization Gas Chromatographic–Mass Spectrometric Assay for Determination of Amphetamine and Methamphetamine Enantiomers and Its Application to Toxicology Cases, Clinical Chemistry 2002;48(9):1472–85.10.1093/clinchem/48.9.1472Search in Google Scholar
[199] Reimer MLJ, Mamer OA, Zavitsanos AP, Siddiqui AW, Dadgar D. Determination of amphetamine, methamphetamine and desmethyldeprenyl in human plasma by gas chromatography/negative ion chemical ionization mass spectrometry. Biol. Mass Spectrom. 1993;22:235-42.10.1002/bms.1200220404Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[200] Lee MR, Song YS, Hwang BH, Chou CC. Determination of amphetamine and methamphetamine in serum via headspace derivatization solid-phase microextraction–gas chromatography–mass spectrometry. Journal of Chromatography A. 2000;896(1–2):265-73.10.1016/S0021-9673(00)00596-3Search in Google Scholar
[201] Mohamed KM, Bakdash A. Comparison of 3 Derivatization Methods for the Analysis of Amphetamine-Related Drugs in Oral Fluid by Gas Chromatography-Mass Spectrometry. Analytical Chemistry Insights. 2017;12:1-16.10.1177/1177390117727533Search in Google Scholar
[202] Souza DZ, Boehl PO, Comiran E, Mariotti KC, Pechansky F, Duarte PC, et al. Determination of amphetamine-type stimulants in oral fluid by solid-phase microextraction and gas chromatography–mass spectrometry. Analytica Chimica Acta. 2011;696(1–2):67-76.10.1016/j.aca.2011.04.014Search in Google Scholar
[203] Yahata M, Namera A, Nishida M, Yashiki M, Kuramoto T, Kimura K. In-matrix derivatization and automated headspace solid-phase microextraction for GC-MS determination of amphetamine-related drugs in human hair. Forensic Toxicol. 2006;24:51-7.10.1007/s11419-006-0010-6Search in Google Scholar
[204] Kintz P, Cirimele V, Tracqui A, Mangin P. Simultaneous determination of amphetamine, methamphetamine, 3, 4-methylenedioxyamphetamine and 3, 4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine in human hair by gas chromatography-mass spectrometry. Journal of Chromatography B: Biomedical Sciences and Applications. 1995;670(1):162-6.10.1016/0378-4347(95)00160-KSearch in Google Scholar
[205] Rohrich J, Kauert G. Determination of amphetamine and methylenedioxy-amphetamine-derivatives in hair. Forensic Science International. 1997;84(1–3):179-88.10.1016/S0379-0738(96)02061-0Search in Google Scholar
[206] Kintz P, Cirimele V. Interlaboratory. Comparison of quantitative determination of amphetamine and related compounds in hair samples. Forensic Science International. 1997;84(1–3):151-6.10.1016/S0379-0738(96)02058-0Search in Google Scholar
[207] Namera A, Yashiki M, Kojima T, Ueki M. Automated Headspace Solid-Phase Microextraction and In-Matrix Derivatization for the Determination of Amphetamine-Related Drugs in Human Urine by Gas Chromatography-Mass Spectrometry, Journal of Chromatographic Science 2002;40(1):19-25.10.1093/chromsci/40.1.19Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[208] Miranda GE, Sordo M, Salazar AM, Contreras C, Bautista L, Rojas García AE, et al. Determination of Amphetamine, Methamphetamine, and Hydroxyamphetamine Derivatives in Urine by Gas Chromatography-Mass Spectrometry and Its Relation to CYP2D6 Phenotype of Drug Users. Journal of Analytical Toxicology 2007;31(1):31-6.10.1093/jat/31.1.31Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[209] Dobos A, Hidvegi E, Somogyi GP. Comparison of five derivatizing agents for the determination of amphetamine-type stimulants in human urine by extractive acylation and Gas Chromatography–Mass Spectrometry, Jour. of Analytical Toxicology 2012;36(5):340-4.10.1093/jat/bks026Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[210] Alsenedi KA, Morrison C. Determination of amphetamine-type stimulants (ATSs) and synthetic cathinones in urine using solid phase micro-extraction fibre tips and gas chromatography-mass spectrometry. Anal. Methods. 2018;10:1431-40.10.1039/C8AY00041GSearch in Google Scholar
[211] Leis HJ, Windischhofer W. Gas chromatography–negative ion chemical ionisation mass spectrometry using o-(pen tafluorobenzyloxycarbonyl)-2, 3, 4, 5-tetrafluorobenzoyl derivatives for the quantitative determination of methylphenidate in human plasma. Journal of Chromatography B. 2011;879(23):2299-303.10.1016/j.jchromb.2011.06.017Search in Google Scholar
[212] Leis HJ, Fauler G, Raspotnig G, Windischhofer W. Negative ion chemical ionization for the determination of methylphenidate in human plasma by stable isotope dilution gas chromatography/mass spectrometry. J. Mass Spectrom. 2000;35:1100-4.10.1002/1096-9888(200009)35:9<1100::AID-JMS32>3.0.CO;2-9Search in Google Scholar
[213] Leis HJ, Schutz H, Windischhofer W. Quantitative determination of methylphenidate in plasma by gas chromatography negative ion chemical ionisation mass spectrometry using o-(pentafluorobenzyloxycarbonyl)-benzoyl derivatives. Anal Bioanal Chem. 2011;400:2663-70.10.1007/s00216-011-5048-6Search in Google Scholar
[214] Aoyama T, Kotaki H, Honda Y, Nakagawa F. Kinetic analysis of enantiomers of threo ‐methylphenidate and its metabolite in two healthy subjects after oral administration as determined by a gas chromatographic‐mass spectrometric method. Journal of Pharmaceutical sciences. 1990;79(6):465-9.10.1002/jps.2600790602Search in Google Scholar
[215] Chan YM, Soldin SJ, Swanson JM, Deber CM, Thiessen JJ, Macleod S. Gas chromatographic/mass spectrometric analysis of methylphenidate (Ritalin) in serum. Clinical Biochemistry. 1980;13(6):266-72.10.1016/S0009-9120(80)80007-5Search in Google Scholar
[216] Boumba VA, Rallis G, Petrikis P, Vougiouklakis T, Mavreas V. Determination of clozapine, and five antidepressants in human plasma, serum and whole blood by gas chromatography–mass spectrometry: A simple tool for clinical and postmortem toxicological analysis. Journal of Chromatography B. 2016;1038:43-8.10.1016/j.jchromb.2016.10.023Search in Google Scholar
[217] Julien Larose C, Lange C, Lavene D, Kiechel JR, Basselier JJ. Determination of guanfacine in human plasma by GC-MS with electron capture negative chemical ionization. International Journal of Mass Spectrometry and Ion Physics. 1983;48:221-4.10.1016/0020-7381(83)87068-5Search in Google Scholar
[218] Haglock C, Wolf C, Poklis A. A Novel Method for the Determination of Guanfacine in Urine by Gas Chromatography-Mass Spectrometry. Journal of Analytical Toxicology. 2008;32(8):544-6.10.1093/jat/32.8.544Search in Google Scholar
[219] Yamahata T, Dote S, Ozawa Y, Nishikawa H, Maeda S. Determination of clonidine in human plasma by gas chromatography—electron-impact mass spectrometry. Journal of Chromatography B: Biomedical Sciences and Applications. 1994; 653(1): 92-7.10.1016/0378-4347(93)E0417-OSearch in Google Scholar
[220] Girault J, Fourtillan JB. Quantitative measurement of clonidine in human plasma by combined gas chromatography/electron capture negative ion chemical ionization mass spectrometry. Biomedical & Environmental Mass Spectrometry. 1988;17(6):443-8.10.1002/bms.1200170605Search in Google Scholar
[221] Wenzl T, Lankmayr EP, Wintersteiger R, Sadjak A, Likar R, Zakel D. Determination and quantification of clonidine in human blood serum. Journal of Biochemical and Biophysical Methods. 2002;53(1–3):131-9.10.1016/S0165-022X(02)00101-XSearch in Google Scholar
[222] Wozniak MK, Wiergowski M, Aszyk J, Kubica P, Namieśnik J, Biziuk M. Application of gas chromatography–tandem mass spectrometry for the determination of amphetamine-type stimulants in blood and urine. Journal of Pharmaceutical and Biomedical Analysis. 2018;148:58-64.10.1016/j.jpba.2017.09.020Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[223] Gambelunghe C, Rossi R, Ferranti C, Rossi R, Bacci M. Hair analysis by GC/MS/MS to verify abuse of drugs. Journal of Applied Toxicology. 2005;25(3):205-11.10.1002/jat.1054Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[224] Lachenmeier DW, Kroener L, Musshoff F, Madea B. Application of tandem mass spectrometry combined with gas chromatography and headspace solid‐phase dynamic extraction for the determination of drugs of abuse in hair samples. Rapid Communications in Mass Spectrometry. 2003;17(5):472-8.10.1002/rcm.945Search in Google Scholar PubMed
© 2020 J. Sundari et al., published by De Gruyter
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
