Quantitative, False Positive, and False Negative Issues for Lateral Flow Immunoassays as Exemplified by Onsite Drug Screens
- 2.1k Downloads
Lateral flow immunoassay devices offer many advantages including convenience, economical, simplicity, and rapid result. Many lateral flow immunoassays are non-instrumental and rely on visual detection of colored lines for results, enabling easy portability and allowing testing at any time and at any place by non-technical personnel. Hence, many lateral flow immunoassay tests have been developed for use “onsite”, “point-of-care”, or “point-of-test”. However, utilization of this type of device requires the acceptance of some trade-offs. The most important is that the test results are generally qualitative. Moreover, since it is antibody-based, possibility exists that chemicals with similar structures will cause positive result leading to specificity and sensitivity issues. Recognizing such limitations, this technology has been widely utilized for screening tests in which a yes and no answer is sufficient. The initial screen test result can then be confirmed by a quantitative...
KeywordsTest Line Drug Screen False Result Poppy Seed Liquid Front
- 1.Mandatory guidelines and proposed revisions to mandatory guidelines for federal workplace drug testing programs. April 13, 2004 (69 FR 19644).Google Scholar
- 4.Melanson, S.E.F., Lewandrowski, E.L., Griggs, D.A. and Flood, J.G. (2007) Interpreting tricyclic antidepressant measurements in urine in an emergency department setting: comparison of two qualitative point-of-care urine tricyclic antidepressant drug immunoassays with quantitative serum chromatographic analysis. J. Anal. Toxicol. 31:270–275.PubMedGoogle Scholar
- 7.Thevis, M., Opfermann, G. and Schanzer, W. (2003) Case report: urinary concentrations of morphine and codeine after consumption of poppy seeds. J. Anal. Toxicol. 27:53–56.Google Scholar
- 14.Wong, R.C. and Tse, H.Y. (2005) Adulteration detection by Intect® 7. In: “Drugs of abuse: Body fluid testing”. Wong, R.C. and Tse, H.Y., eds. Humana Press, Totowa, NJ, pp. 233–245.Google Scholar
- 17.Medical Review Officer Manual for Federal Agency Workplace Drug Testing Programs. US Department of Health and Human Services, Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, Division of Workplace Programs. Available at: http://dwp.samhsa.gov/DrugTesting/Level_1_Pages/HHS%20MRO%20Manual%20(Effective%201,%202004. Accessed 5/12/2008.
- 24.Rossi, S., Yaksh, T., Bentley, H., van den Brande, G., Grant, I. and Ellis, R. (2006) Characterization of interference with 6 commercial Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol immunoassays by Efavirenz (Glucuronide) in urine. Clin. Chem. 52:896–897.Google Scholar
- 26.http://www.fda.gov/cder/foi/label/2004/20987slr020_protonix_lbl.pdf. Accessed 5/18/2008.
- 28.Hendrickson, R.G. and Morocco, A.P. (2003) Quetiapine cross-reactivity among three tricyclic antidepressant immunoassays. J. Anal. Toxicol. 41:105–108.Google Scholar