Skip to content

Frank T. Peters

Saarland University

4 papers in the library · 321 citations · publishing 2003-2007

Papers

Screening for and validated quantification of amphetamines and of amphetamine‐ and piperazine‐derived designer drugs in human blood plasma by gas chromatography/mass spectrometry

Journal of Mass Spectrometry June 1, 2003 Frank T. Peters, Simone Schaëfer, Roland F. Staack et al. 171 citations

A method was developed to screen for and simultaneously quantify classical stimulants (amphetamine, methamphetamine, ethylamphetamine, MDA, MDMA, MDEA, BDB, MBDB) and newer designer drugs (4-methylthioamphetamine, p-methoxyamphetamine, p-methoxymethamphetamine, and several piperazine derivatives) along with two metabolites in human blood plasma. The technique uses gas chromatography/mass spectrometry with selected-ion monitoring after solid-phase extraction and derivatization. The method was linear from 5 to 1000 µg/L for all analytes, with a limit of quantification of 5 µg/L. Accuracy and precision met required limits except for MDBP. The assay was validated and applicable for confirming immunoassay results positive for amphetamines or ecstasy-type designer drugs.

Concentrations and Ratios of Amphetamine, Methamphetamine, MDA, MDMA, and MDEA Enantiomers Determined in Plasma Samples from Clinical Toxicology and Driving Under the Influence of Drugs Cases by GC-NICI-MS*

Journal of Analytical Toxicology November 1, 2003 Frank T. Peters, Nele Samyn, Martin Wahl et al. 65 citations

The pharmacological effects of amphetamine, methamphetamine, MDA, MDMA, and MDEA depend on their mirror-image molecular forms (enantiomers), which differ in how they act in the body. Analysis of plasma from clinical toxicology cases and from drivers suspected of drug impairment showed that concentrations of most enantiomers were lower in routine screening samples than in intoxication or driving-under-the-influence cases. Drivers under the influence had higher levels of both amphetamine enantiomers than intoxicated patients. Differences in the ratio of R to S enantiomers for several drugs between groups suggest these ratios can help distinguish recent from past use. In one MDMA poisoning, the R form cleared more slowly (half-life 6.0 hours) than the S form (4.1 hours), and the ratio of R to S rose over time.

Drug Testing in Blood: Validated Negative-Ion Chemical Ionization Gas Chromatographic–Mass Spectrometric Assay for Enantioselective Measurement of the Designer Drugs MDEA, MDMA, and MDA and Its Application to Samples from a Controlled Study with MDMA

Clinical Chemistry August 11, 2005 Frank T. Peters, Nele Samyn, C. T. J. Lamers et al. 49 citations

An assay was developed to measure the enantiomers of the designer drugs MDA, MDMA, and MDEA in small plasma volumes (0.2 mL or less). After extraction and derivatization, the enantiomers were separated by gas chromatography and detected by mass spectrometry within 17 minutes. The method was linear for MDA at 1–50 μg/L and for MDMA and MDEA at 5–250 μg/L per enantiomer, with extraction yields of 82.1%–95.3%. Applied to samples from a controlled study after a single 75 mg dose of racemic MDMA, the assay showed that R-(−)-MDMA concentrations significantly exceeded those of S-(+)-MDMA, with ratios always above 1.0 and increasing over time. S-(+)-MDA concentrations exceeded those of R-(−)-MDA, with ratios also increasing but remaining below 1.0.

Negative-Ion Chemical Ionization Gas Chromatography–Mass Spectrometry Assay for Enantioselective Measurement of Amphetamines in Oral Fluid: Application to a Controlled Study with MDMA and Driving Under the Influence Cases

Clinical Chemistry March 2, 2007 Frank T. Peters, Nele Samyn, Thomas Kræmer et al. 36 citations

A gas chromatography–mass spectrometry method using negative-ion chemical ionization was developed to separately measure the left- and right-handed forms (enantiomers) of amphetamine, methamphetamine, MDA, MDMA, and MDEA in oral fluid. After adding a buffer and a derivatizing agent, the enantiomers were extracted and analyzed. The method was linear from 5–250 μg/L per enantiomer for MDA and from 25–1250 μg/L per enantiomer for the other drugs. Recoveries and precision were acceptable except for MDEA. When applied to samples from a controlled MDMA study and real driving-under-the-influence cases, the oral fluid concentrations and enantiomer ratios did not reliably predict plasma levels.