Presence of rifampicin in urine causes cross-reactivity with opiates using the KIMS method

Guidelines for the assessment and management of addiction in the hospitalized patient with opioid use disorder: a twenty-first century update

While there have been many articles published on managing the medical sequelae of opioid use disorder in specific patient populations or settings, there is a dearth of literature on assessing and managing opioid use disorder in the acute hospital setting. In 1975, Fultz and Senay published proposed guidelines on the management of what they called the "hospitalized narcotic addict" Fultz and Senay (Ann Intern Med 82(6):815-818, 1975). Since then, many new developments in the treatment of opioid use disorder have occurred. In our experience, services in the acute inpatient hospital turn to psychiatric consultation teams for recommendations on how to manage these complicated and, sometimes, difficult patients. This article serves to provide the internal medicine physician a foundation of understanding how to address the main issues in hospitalized patients with opioid use disorder on a general medical or surgical floor.

Clinical Interpretation of Urine Drug Tests: What Clinicians Need to Know About Urine Drug Screens

Urine drug testing is frequently used in clinical, employment, educational, and legal settings and misinterpretation of test results can result in significant adverse consequences for the individual who is being tested. Advances in drug testing technology combined with a rise in the number of novel misused substances present challenges to clinicians to appropriately interpret urine drug test results. Authors searched PubMed and Google Scholar to identify published literature written in English between 1946 and 2016, using urine drug test, screen, false-positive, false-negative, abuse, and individual drugs of abuse as key words. Cited references were also used to identify the relevant literature. In this report, we review technical information related to detection methods of urine drug tests that are commonly used and provide an overview of false-positive/false-negative data for commonly misused substances in the following categories: cannabinoids, central nervous system (CNS) depressants, CNS stimulants, hallucinogens, designer drugs, and herbal drugs of abuse. We also present brief discussions of alcohol and tricyclic antidepressants as related to urine drug tests, for completeness. The goal of this review was to provide a useful tool for clinicians when interpreting urine drug test results and making appropriate clinical decisions on the basis of the information presented.

Urine drug screening: practical guide for clinicians

Drug testing, commonly used in health care, workplace, and criminal settings, has become widespread during the past decade. Urine drug screens have been the most common method for analysis because of ease of sampling. The simplicity of use and access to rapid results have increased demand for and use of immunoassays; however, these assays are not perfect. False-positive results of immunoassays can lead to serious medical or social consequences if results are not confirmed by secondary analysis, such as gas chromatography-mass spectrometry. The Department of Health and Human Services' guidelines for the workplace require testing for the following 5 substances: amphetamines, cannabinoids, cocaine, opiates, and phencyclidine. This article discusses potential false-positive results and false-negative results that occur with immunoassays of these substances and with alcohol, benzodiazepines, and tricyclic antidepressants. Other pitfalls, such as adulteration, substitution, and dilution of urine samples, are discussed. Pragmatic concepts summarized in this article should minimize the potential risks of misinterpreting urine drug screens.

Hypothesis on interferences in kinetic interaction of microparticles in solution (KIMS) technology

The present paper describes an evaluation of the interferences found with an immunochemical drug test performed during a workplace control. During the period 1993–2003 more than 200,000 urine samples from workers were examined by the Italian Air Force. Samples were screened for drugs of abuse (opiates, cocaine, cannabinoids, amphetamines, methadone) using an immunochemical technique (Roche, kinetic interaction of microparticles in solution, KIMS). A total of 520 positive samples were sent to the Forensic Toxicology Laboratory for confirmation by gas chromatography/mass spectrometry (GC/MS). Approximately 39% of these were found to be true positives. For the remaining samples, pharmacological therapy in subjects was estimated to evaluate possible interferences due to medicine intake. Our study showed a high frequency of false-positive results with this immunochemical technique, mainly for the cannabinoid and amphetamine groups. Recurrent references to some medicines during subject anamnesis were noted.

Clin Chem Lab Med 2006;44;894–7.

Rifampicin causes false-positive immunoassay results for urine opiates

The treatment of tuberculosis usually includes the antibiotic rifampicin, especially in patients with concomitant human immunodeficiency virus infection. Some of these patients are in withdrawal therapy for drug abuse. When opiate screening is carried out in patients receiving rifampicin, false positive results are detected with the kinetic interaction of microparticles in solution method. We evaluated this interference in a Cobas-Integra analyzer and found a 12% cross-reactivity of rifampicin for antibiotic concentrations ranging from 0.19 to 6.08 mumol/l (156 to 5000 micrograms/l). This effect is not explained by the colour of the rifampicin solutions. Calculations assuming first order kinetics of elimination show that more than 18 hours after a single oral dose of 600 mg of rifampicin, a false positive result for opiates could be obtained. This indicates that the risk of a false positive result must always be considered when urine samples from these patients are analyzed.