DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

시료 희석 주입 LC-MS/MS를 이용한 소변 중 메스암페타민, 4-하이드록시메스암페타민, 암페타민 및 4-하이드록시암페타민 동시 분석

Determination of methamphetamine, 4-hydroxymethamphetamine, amphetamine and 4-hydroxyamphetamine in urine using dilute-and-shoot liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry

  • 허보름 (대검찰청 과학수사부 디엔에이.화학분석과) ;
  • 권남희 (대검찰청 과학수사부 디엔에이.화학분석과) ;
  • 김진영 (대검찰청 과학수사부 디엔에이.화학분석과)
  • Heo, Bo-Reum (Forensic Genetics & Chemistry Division, Supreme Prosecutors' Office) ;
  • Kwon, NamHee (Forensic Genetics & Chemistry Division, Supreme Prosecutors' Office) ;
  • Kim, Jin Young (Forensic Genetics & Chemistry Division, Supreme Prosecutors' Office)
  • 투고 : 2018.07.03
  • 심사 : 2018.07.25
  • 발행 : 2018.08.25

초록

메스암페타민(methamphetamine, MA)과 암페타민(amphetamine, AP)은 전세계적으로 널리 퍼진합성 흥분제로 보건 및 사회 문제, 경제적 비용 발생 등의 다양한 문제를 일으킨다. 또한 이러한 마약은 중독 및 남용 가능성이 매우 높기 때문에 확산 방지를 위한 방안의 하나로 복용자의 생체시료에서 이들 마약을 검출하기 위한 분석법 개발이 필요하다. 따라서 본 연구에서는 액체크로마토그래피-질량분석법(liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry, LC-MS/MS)를 이용하여 소변에서 MA와 4-하이드록시메스암페타민(4-hydroxymethamphetamine, 4HMA), AP, 4-하이드록시암페타민(4-hydroxyamphetamine, 4HA)을 동시에 분석할 수 있는 분석법을 개발하였고 유효성 평가를 수행하였다. 전처리 시간 단축을 위해 50000 g에서 3 min 동안 초고속원심분리 후 시료 희석 주입법을 이용하여 LC-MS/MS에 주입하였다. 분리관은 역상 C18 컬럼을 사용하였고, 정량분석을 위해 MRM (multiple reaction monitoring) 모드를 적용하였다. 가중계수 $1/x^2$에서 정량 범위는 MA는 10-2500 ng/mL, AP는 1.0-800 ng/mL, 4HA와 4HMA는 2.0-200 ng/mL로 설정하였고, 검량선의 직선성은 결정계수($r^2$)를 구하여 평가하였다. 초고속원심분리법의 효율성을 확인하기 위해 전처리 과정으로 시린지 필터(membrane-filtration)를 적용한 결과와 비교하였고, 그 결과 분석물질에 따라 6-15 % 성능이 우수한 것으로 나타났다. 일내(intra-day)와 일간(inter-day) 정밀도는 6.6 % 미만이었고, 정확도는 -14.9-11.3 % 였다. 최저정량한계(LLOQ)는 2.0 ng/mL (4HA 및 4HMA), 1.0 ng/mL (AP), 10 ng/mL (MA)로 확인되었다. 선택성, 검출한계, 희석무결성, 기질효과, 효율성, 안정성을 평가한 결과 만족스러운 측정값을 얻었다. 또한 개발된 분석법을 마약 복용자의 소변에 적용하여 분석법의 유용성을 확인하였다.

The epidemic of disorders associated with synthetic stimulants, such as methamphetamine (MA) and amphetamine (AP), is a health, social, legal, and financial problem. Owing to the high potential of their abuse and addiction, reliable analytical methods are required to detect and identify MA, AP, and their metabolites in biological samples. Thus, a dilute-and-shoot liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrophotometry (LC-MS/MS) was developed for simultaneous determination of MA, 4-hydroxymethamphetamine (4HMA), AP, and 4-hydroxyamphetamine (4HA) in urine. Urine sample ($100{\mu}L$) was mixed with $50{\mu}L$ of mobile phase consisting of 0.4 % formic acid and methanol and $50{\mu}L$ of working internal-standard solution. Aliquots of $8{\mu}L$ diluted urine was injected into the LC-MS/MS system. For all analytes, chromatographic separation was performed using a C18 reversed-phase column with gradient elution and a total run time of 5 min. The identification and quantification were performed by multiple reaction monitoring (MRM). Linear least-squares regression was conducted to generate a calibration curve, with $1/x^2$ as the weighting factor. The linear ranges were 2.0-200, 1.0-800, and 10-2500 ng/mL for 4HA and 4HMA, AP, and MA, respectively. The inter- and intraday precisions were within 6.6 %, whereas the inter- and intraday accuracies ranged from -14.9 to 11.3 %. The low limits of quantification were 2.0 ng/mL (4HA and 4HMA), 1.0 ng/mL (AP), and 10 ng/mL (MA). The proposed method exhibited satisfactory selectivity, dilution integrity, matrix effect, and stability, which are required for validation. Moreover, the purification efficiency of high-speed centrifugation was clearly higher than 6-15 % for QC samples (n=5), which was higher than that of the membrane-filtration method. The applicability of the proposed method was tested by forensic analysis of urine samples from drug abusers.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. R. A. Glennon, Pharmacol. Biochem. Behav., 64, 251-256 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0091-3057(99)00045-3
  2. United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, World Drug Report 2017, Vienna, United Nations, 2017.
  3. Supreme Prosecutors' Office, White Paper on Drug-Related Crimes 2016, Seoul, Korea, 2017.
  4. J. Caldwell, L. G. Dring, and R. T. Williams, Biochem. J., 129, 11-22 (1972). https://doi.org/10.1042/bj1290011
  5. T. R. Gray, T. Kelly, L. L. LaGasse, L. M. Smith, C. Derauf, W. Haning, P. Grant, R. Shah, A. Arria, A. Strauss, B. M. Lester, and M. A. Huestis, Ther. Drug Monit., 31, 70-75 (2008).
  6. L. G. Dring, R. L. Smith, and R. T. Williams, Biochem. J. 116, 425-435 (1970). https://doi.org/10.1042/bj1160425
  7. A. K. Cho and J. Wright, Life Sci., 22, 363-372 (1978). https://doi.org/10.1016/0024-3205(78)90282-5
  8. R. D. Stevenson and M. L. Wolraich, Pediatr. Clin. North Am., 36, 1183-1197 (1989). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0031-3955(16)36764-5
  9. J. D. Parkes and G. W. Fenton, J. Neurol. Neurosurg. Psychiatry, 36, 1076-1081 (1973). https://doi.org/10.1136/jnnp.36.6.1076
  10. K. Orr and D. Taylor, CNS Drugs, 21, 239-257 (2007). https://doi.org/10.2165/00023210-200721030-00004
  11. C. M. Hartung, W. H. Canu, C. S. Cleveland, E. K. Lefler, M. J. Mignogna, D. A. Fedele, C. J. Correia, T. R. Leffingwell, and J. D. Clapp, Psychol. Addict. Behav,. 27, 832-840 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1037/a0033822
  12. J. Mazanov, M. Dunn, J. Connor, and M.-L. Fielding, Performance Enhancement & Health, 2, 110-118 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.peh.2013.08.017
  13. A. D. DeSantis, E. M. Webb, and S. M. Noar, J. Am. Coll. Health, 57, 315-324 (2008). https://doi.org/10.3200/JACH.57.3.315-324
  14. M. R. Meyer and H. H. Maurer, Pharmacogenomics, 12, 215-233 (2011). https://doi.org/10.2217/pgs.10.171
  15. W. Kwon, S. I. Suh, M. K. In, and J. Y. Kim, Mass Spectrom. Lett., 5, 104-109 (2014). https://doi.org/10.5478/MSL.2014.5.4.104
  16. K. Lachenmeier, F. Musshoff, and B. Madea, Forensic Sci. Int., 159, 189-199 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forsciint.2005.08.009
  17. M. A. von Mach, C. Weber, M. R. Meyer, L. S. Weilemann, H. H. Maurer, and F. T. Peters, Ther. Drug Monit., 29, 27-39 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1097/FTD.0b013e31802bb2aa
  18. L. Broussard, Chap. 20 Interpretation of amphetamines screening and confirmation testing, in: A. Dasgupta (Ed), Handbook of Drug Monitoring Methods - Therapeutics and Drugs of Abuse, p379, Humana Press, New Jersey, 2008.
  19. M. Cheze, M. Deveaux, C. Martin, M. Lhermitte, and G. Pepin, Forensic Sci. Int., 170, 100-104 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forsciint.2007.02.033
  20. A. D. De Jager and N. L. Bailey, J. Chromatogr. B, 879, 2642-2652 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jchromb.2011.07.029
  21. I. L. Tsai, T. I. Weng, Y. J. Tseng, H. K. L. Tan, H. J. Sun, and C. H. Kuo, J. Anal. Toxicol. 37, 642-651 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1093/jat/bkt083
  22. X. Li, B. Shen, Z. Jiang, Y. Huang, and X. Zhuo, J. Chromatogr. A, 1302, 95-104 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chroma.2013.06.028
  23. K. Hara, S. Kashimura, Y. Hieda, and M. Kageura, J. Anal. Toxicol., 21, 54-58 (1997). https://doi.org/10.1093/jat/21.1.54
  24. W. A. Wan Raihana, S. H. Gan, and S. C. Tan, J. Chromatogr. B, 879, 8-16 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jchromb.2010.10.037
  25. Y. Iwasaki, T. Sawada, K. Hatayama, A. Ohyagi, Y. Tsukuda, K. Namekawa, R. Ito, K. Saito, and H. Nakazawa, Metabolites, 2, 496-515 (2012). https://doi.org/10.3390/metabo2030496
  26. F. T. Peters, O. H. Drummer, and F. Musshoff, Forensic Sci. Int., 165, 216-224 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forsciint.2006.05.021
  27. U.S. Department of Health Human Services, Food and Drug Administration, Guidance for Industry: Bioanalytical Method Validation in U.S., Beltsville, MD, 2001.
  28. B. K. Matuszewski, M. L. Constanzer, and C. M. Chavez-Eng, Anal. Chem., 75, 3019-3030 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1021/ac020361s