Evaluation of enzyme‐linked immunosorbent assay screening kits for the detection of nitazene analogs

Nitazene analogs are a highly potent class of novel psychoactive substances (NPS) that were first identified in forensic casework in the United States in 2019. While enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) remains a prevalent screening tool in forensic toxicology laboratories, no nitazene-specific ELISA kits are commercially available, supporting the use of high-resolution mass spectrometry (HRMS) methods as a more adaptable alternative for screening. However, even with the growth in popularity of HRMS techniques, it is important to understand the cross-reactivity of novel substances, such as nitazenes, with routinely used ELISA kits. Cross-reactivity is particularly important for forensic toxicology casework since it can impact the reliability of screening results, potentially leading to non-detection of novel substances or false-positive identifications in the presence of non-target analytes. This study tested the cross-reactivity of seven nitazene analogs (4'-OH nitazene, 5-methyl etodesnitazene, isotonitazene, metodesnitazene, N-piperidinyl etonitazene, N-pyrrolidino etonitazene, and protonitazene) in whole blood using 13 commercial ELISA kits from three manufacturers. Various drug/class kits were selected based on reported or potential co-positivity with nitazenes (opiates, opioids, fentanyl) or by structural similarities (LSD, zolpidem). Across tested concentrations for the seven selected analytes, none of the tested kits produced a signal sufficient for a positive result, confirming that their presence at these levels does not compromise the screening specificity of the target analytes. However, these findings highlight the need for laboratories to adopt mass spectral-based screening methods like HRMS or advocate for the development of nitazene-specific ELISA kits for effective nitazene analog screening.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Forensic Sciences
Published
2025-04-15
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1111/1556-4029.70052
Citations
5
Primary Topic
Forensic Toxicology and Drug Analysis
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
6.54

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Evaluation of enzyme‐linked immunosorbent assay screening kits for the detection of nitazene analogs

Britni Skillman, Amanda L. Pacana
5 citations
Journal of Forensic Sciences
Forensic Toxicology and Drug Analysis
6.54
article

Evaluation of enzyme‐linked immunosorbent assay screening kits for the detection of nitazene analogs

Britni Skillman, Amanda L. Pacana
article en
5 citations

Abstract

Nitazene analogs are a highly potent class of novel psychoactive substances (NPS) that were first identified in forensic casework in the United States in 2019. While enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) remains a prevalent screening tool in forensic toxicology laboratories, no nitazene-specific ELISA kits are commercially available, supporting the use of high-resolution mass spectrometry (HRMS) methods as a more adaptable alternative for screening. However, even with the growth in popularity of HRMS techniques, it is important to understand the cross-reactivity of novel substances, such as nitazenes, with routinely used ELISA kits. Cross-reactivity is particularly important for forensic toxicology casework since it can impact the reliability of screening results, potentially leading to non-detection of novel substances or false-positive identifications in the presence of non-target analytes. This study tested the cross-reactivity of seven nitazene analogs (4'-OH nitazene, 5-methyl etodesnitazene, isotonitazene, metodesnitazene, N-piperidinyl etonitazene, N-pyrrolidino etonitazene, and protonitazene) in whole blood using 13 commercial ELISA kits from three manufacturers. Various drug/class kits were selected based on reported or potential co-positivity with nitazenes (opiates, opioids, fentanyl) or by structural similarities (LSD, zolpidem). Across tested concentrations for the seven selected analytes, none of the tested kits produced a signal sufficient for a positive result, confirming that their presence at these levels does not compromise the screening specificity of the target analytes. However, these findings highlight the need for laboratories to adopt mass spectral-based screening methods like HRMS or advocate for the development of nitazene-specific ELISA kits for effective nitazene analog screening.

Journal of Forensic SciencesVol. 70(4)
Sam Houston State University (US)
Forensic Sciences Foundation
Good health and well-being
Openalex Percentile: Top 3%
Forensic Toxicology and Drug Analysis
6.54
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Evaluation of enzyme‐linked immunosorbent assay screening kits for the detection of nitazene analogs — Britni Skillman, Amanda L. Pacana · Journal of Forensic Sciences (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS