Determination of Lysergic Acid Diethylamide and 2-Oxo-3-Hydroxy-LSD in Blood: Validation and Comparison of Two Liquid Chromatography–Tandem Mass Spectrometry Methods
Alexandra Dimitrova, Maria Grazia di Milia, Regina Rensi, Simone Grassi, Barbara Gualco, Fabio Vaiano
Separations September 27, 2023 DOI: 10.3390/separations10090502 via DOAJ
Summary
AI-generated from the abstractTwo methods for detecting LSD and its main metabolite O-H-LSD in blood were validated using LC-MS/MS. Method #1 upgraded an existing multi-compound screening procedure, while Method #2 was tailored specifically for these substances. Both methods showed good linearity and sensitivity, with limits of quantification as low as 0.025 ng/mL for LSD and 0.0125 ng/mL for O-H-LSD. Bias and precision met acceptance criteria; recoveries exceeded 83% except for O-H-LSD with Method #1. Applied successfully to two real cases, Method #1 is suitable for screening, and Method #2 provides a sensitive, reliable tool for confirmation.
Study at a glance
| Characteristics | Validation study Peer reviewed |
|---|---|
| Topics | LSD |
| Keywords | Lc-ms/ms New psychoactive substances Blood Screening |
| Citations | 6 |
| Key finding | Two validated LC-MS/MS methods for LSD and O-H-LSD in blood achieved low limits of quantification and acceptable accuracy and precision, with Method #2 offering higher sensitivity for confirmatory analysis. |
Abstract
Lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD) is a powerful hallucinogen. Its detection is limited by its low dosage; moreover, LSD is rapidly metabolized into 2-oxo-3-hydroxy-LSD (O-H-LSD). In this study we validated two methods for determination of LSD and O-H-LSD in blood. Method #1 consisted in the upgrade of a previously developed procedure for detection of 163 compounds. Method #2 was specific for LSD and O-H-LSD. Analyses were performed through LC-MS/MS by dynamic (#1) and/or MRM mode (#2), in positive ionization. Transitions were: 324→223,208 m/z for LSD; 356→237,222 m/z for O-H-LSD. Validations were performed following the AAFS’s guidelines. Linearity was good for both methods. Sensitivity was in line with previously validated methods with LOQs at 0.0375 (#1) and 0.025 (#2) ng/mL for LSD and 0.01875 (#1) and 0.0125 (#2) ng/mL for O-H-LSD. Bias and %CV always met the acceptance criteria. RRs were >83%, except for O-H-LSD with method #1. The methods were successfully applied to two real cases. Method #1 proved to be useful for screening purposes, while method #2 can represent a sensitive and reliable tool for confirmation procedures.