Presentation on theme: "Jeremiah Morris Johnson County Sheriff’s Office Criminalistics Laboratory."— Presentation transcript:
Jeremiah Morris Johnson County Sheriff’s Office Criminalistics Laboratory
Review of how we got into this mess Legislative topics Various legislative approaches Providing data to support control criteria Analytical topics Analytical standards Types of testing Toxicology
Drug chemistry is not suppose to be this difficult What happened to this quiet little section?
First appearance in 2009 JWH-018 and JWH-073 Legislative responses in 2010 Vendor responses in 2010
JWH-018 JWH-073 JWH-250 JWH-200 JWH-210 JWH-203 JWH-122 JWH-019 JWH-015 JWH-251 JWH-398 JWH-081 WIN-55,212-2 JWH-370 CP 47,497 (C7) AM-630 HU-210 AM-2201 (Cl) CP 47,497 Pravadoline AM-1241 JWH-051 JWH-307 CP 47,497 (C9) AM-1220 RCS-4 (2-MeO) JWH-133 RCS-4 RCS-4 (C4) RCS-8 AM-2201 AM-694 And so on… Over 400 compounds have been identified in the literature with potencies at least twice that of THC. This does not include the countless unpublished designer compounds which have also shown up in case submissions. 7
General chemical class Chemical structureCompounds currently marketed or identified in case submissions Naphthoylindoles JWH-007, JWH-015, JWH-018, JWH-019, JWH-073, JWH-081, JWH-122, JWH- 200, JWH-210, JWH-398, AM-2201, WIN 55-212, AM-2201 (Cl analog) AM-2201 (Br analog), AM-1220, 1-butyl-3-(1-(4-methyl)naphthoyl)indole; 4-methyl-AM- 2201, 4-methyl AM-2201, AM-2232, JWH-412 NaphthoylpyrrolesJWH-307, JWH-370, JWH-030, JWH-147 Phenylacetylindoles SR-18, RCS-8 (same as SR-18?), JWH-250, JWH-203, RCS-8 (C4 homolog), JWH- 251, cannabipiperidiethanone CyclohexylphenolsCP 47,497 (and homologs), cannabicyclohexanol Benzoylindoles AM-694, Pravadoline (WIN 48,098), RCS-4 (also called SR-19, BTM-4, and OBT- 199), RCS-4 (C4 homolog), AM-630, AM-1241, RCS-4 (2-methoxy isomer), AM- 2233, 3-(2-methoxybenzoyl)-1-butylindole, AM-679 Tricyclic benzopyransHU-210, JWH-051, JWH-133 8
The drug laws in the United Kingdom take a chemical class approach utilizing broad definitions Tryptamines Phenethylamines Fentanyls Pethidines Barbiturates Steroids Piperazines Cannabinoids Cathinones 9
Any compound containing a ___________ structure with substitution at the nitrogen atom of the indole ring by a alkyl, haloalkyl, alkenyl, cycloalkylmethyl, cycloalkylethyl, 1-(N-methyl-2-piperidinyl)methyl or 2-(4-morpholinyl)ethyl group, whether or not further substituted in the indole ring to any extent and whether or not substituted in the naphthyl ring to any extent. 10
Initiated in 2011 by several states Modified version used federally in 2012 Currently most common legislative approach for cannabinoids Most common controlled classes Naphthoylindoles Naphthylmethylindoles Naphthoylpyrroles Naphthylideneindenes Phenylacetylindoles Cyclohexylphenols Benzoylindoles
Some class definitions contain only structural requirements while others have pharmacological components:
Oklahoma and Texas “Synthetic chemical compound that is a cannabinoid receptor agonist and mimics the pharmacological effect of naturally occurring substances Minnesota “any quantity of a substance that is a cannabinoid receptor agonist” North Dakota “synthetic chemicals which have similar effects on cannabinoid receptors” 13
What actually defines a “cannabinoid receptor agonist”? Binding studies? Animal studies? Within expertise of a forensic chemist? The answer(s) may impact the ability of the state to enforce the specific statute 14
Linker Ring system B Ring system A Indole Indene Indazole Azaindole Pyrrole Pyrazole Indole Indene Indazole Azaindole Pyrrole Pyrazole Carbonyl Methylene Methine Acetyl Amide Carboxyl Carbonyl Methylene Methine Acetyl Amide Carboxyl Naphthyl Phenyl Adamantyl Tetramethylcyclopropyl Piperidinyl Quinolinyl Amino-3-methyl-1- oxobutan-2-yl Naphthyl Phenyl Adamantyl Tetramethylcyclopropyl Piperidinyl Quinolinyl Amino-3-methyl-1- oxobutan-2-yl Grand total of 252 possible cannabinoid classes
First appeared in 2009 Based on the chemical structure of the naturally occurring cathinone All CNS stimulants Act upon three different CNS receptors Potency varies but most equal or greater than methamphetamine No legitimate bath, beauty, or plant food purpose No accepted medical use in the United States Often referred to as “beta-ketones” (i.e., bk-MDMA is methylone)
23 Unsubstituted 3- or 4-methyl 3- or 4-halo (F, Cl, Br, or I) 3- or 4-ethyl 3- or 4-hydroxy 3- or 4-methoxy 3,4-methylenedioxy 3,4-dimethyl 3,4-dihalo (F, Cl, Br, or I) Replace phenyl with naphthyl Unsubstituted 3- or 4-methyl 3- or 4-halo (F, Cl, Br, or I) 3- or 4-ethyl 3- or 4-hydroxy 3- or 4-methoxy 3,4-methylenedioxy 3,4-dimethyl 3,4-dihalo (F, Cl, Br, or I) Replace phenyl with naphthyl Unsubstituted N-methyl N-ethyl N,N-dimethyl Pyrrolidine Phthalamido N-benzyl Unsubstituted N-methyl N-ethyl N,N-dimethyl Pyrrolidine Phthalamido N-benzyl Propyl Butyl Pentyl Hexyl Propyl Butyl Pentyl Hexyl Grand total of 672 possible combinations
Mixed approach, starting in 2011 Listing individual compounds Chemical class approach
Novelty products which originally contained just substituted cathinones now include a number of additional classes: Modified phenethylamines Stimulants Hallucinogenic Arylcyclohexylamines Tryptamines And so on We have no reason to believe this cycle will stop anytime soon
Work by Dr. Nichols et al discovered modifications of hallucinogenic phenethylamines increases potency 26
N-benzyl ortho- methoxy (NBOME) derivatives were the most potent 27
A number of these compounds are available on the web and have appeared in case submissions 28
Comprise the most common class of dissociatives Complex pharmacology CNS appears dose dependent and spans entire range 29 Methoxy Hydroxy Halo Methoxy Hydroxy Halo Carbonyl Grand total of 54 possible combinations
Class of highly potent hallucinogens Present in a diverse group of botanical materials All contain substituted indole compound 30
31 Hydroxyl, methoxy, acetoxy, halo Alkyl or dialkyl substitution (methyl, ethyl, propyl, isopropyl, allyl Methyl or ethyl with mono-N alkyl substitution Grand total of 175 possible combinations
Any new substance can be considered a controlled “analog” if: It has a substantially similar structure to a Schedule I or II hallucinogen, stimulant, or opiate, AND, It has the same CNS effects as the related Schedule I or II hallucinogen, stimulant, or opiate, OR, It was possessed or sold with the knowledge of being an analog Application can be extremely difficult
Respective of these approaches, how effective have they been? Prosecution issues? Legal challenges? Response from chemists? Effectiveness? Listing compounds individually Chemical class (structure only) Chemical class (with pharmacology) Analog law Emergency scheduling
Educating prosecutors has made all of the difference What the law actually says Capabilities of the drug chemistry section How to read reports
Modifications to the analog law Additional chemical classes Broad class approach “Synthetic drug lookalike substance” approach FDA approach We have to ask, “What are we trying to accomplish?”
"Controlled substance analog" means any of the following: A substance that differs in its chemical structure to a controlled substance listed in or added to the scheduled designated in K.S.A. 65-4105 or 64-4107 only by substituting one or more hydrogens with halogens or by substituting one halogen with a different halogen or, A substance that is an alkyl homolog of a controlled substance listed in or added to the scheduled designated in K.S.A. 65-4105 or 64-4107 or (C) A substance intended for human consumption, and: (i) The chemical structure of which is substantially similar to the chemical structure of a controlled substance listed in or added to the schedules designated in K.S.A. 65-4105 or 65-4107, and amendments thereto; (ii) which has a stimulant, depressant or hallucinogenic effect on the central nervous system substantially similar to the stimulant, depressant or hallucinogenic effect on the central nervous system of a controlled substance included in the schedules designated in K.S.A. 65-4105 or 65-4107, and amendments thereto; or (iii) with respect to a particular individual, which the individual represents or intends to have a stimulant, depressant or hallucinogenic effect on the central nervous system substantially similar to the stimulant, depressant or hallucinogenic effect on the central nervous system of a controlled substance included in the schedules designated in K.S.A. 65-4105 or 65-4107, and amendments thereto.
Creates defined chemical modifications which automatically qualify compounds as an analog Structural only, no pharmacology Based on accepted changes in medicinal drug design Retains previous approach for other structural modifications Will this make the analog law more usable?
Draft proposed definitions for the following chemical classes are available if you’re interested: Arylcyclohexylamines (PCP-like) Modified tryptamines Hallucinogenic phenethylamines (two versions) Considerations Same benefits and analytical issues with existing classes Still reactionary and limited in scope
In addition to specific chemical classes, Kentucky has this statement: Any other synthetic cannabinoid or piperazine which is not approved by the United States Food and Drug Administration or, if approved, which is not dispensed or possessed in accordance with state and federal law Considerations Catches all future “illicit” cannabinoids But what is a “synthetic cannabinoid”? Circular definition?
Any compound structurally derived from (1H- indole-3-yl)(cycloalkyl, cycloalkenyl, aryl)methanone, or (1H-indole-3yl)(cycloalkyl, cycloalkenyl, aryl)methane, or (1H-indole-3- yl)(cycloalkyl, cycloalkenyl, aryl)carboxamide by substitution at the nitrogen atoms of the indole ring or carboxamide to any extent, whether or not further substituted in or on the indole ring to any extent, whether or not substituted in the naphthyl ring to any extent in or on the cycloalkyl, cycloalkenyl, aryl ring(s) (substitution in the ring may include, but is not limited to, heteroatoms such as nitrogen, sulfur and oxygen)
or (1H-indole-3yl)(cycloalkyl, cycloalkenyl, aryl)methane, or (1H-indole-3-yl)(cycloalkyl, cycloalkenyl, aryl)carboxamide by substitution at the nitrogen atoms of the indole ring or carboxamide to any extent
Broad-based approach which attempts to pre- empt new drugs of abuse which do not fall into specific control categories Kind of creating a “looks like a duck” law
(a) For the purposes of this section, "synthetic drug look-alike substance" means one or more of the following: (1) a substance that a reasonable person would believe is a synthetic drug; (2) a substance that a reasonable person would believe is being purchased or sold as a synthetic drug; or (3) a substance that a person knows or should have known was intended to be consumed by injection, inhalation, ingestion, or any other immediate means, and consumption was intended to cause or simulate a stimulant, depressant, or hallucinogenic effect on the central nervous system that is substantially similar to or greater than the stimulant, depressant, or hallucinogenic effect on the central nervous system of a controlled substance in Schedule I. ( b) Synthetic drug look-alike substance does not include: (1) food and food ingredients; (2) alcohol; (3) legend drugs; ( 4) tobacco; or (5) dietary supplements.
Sec. 321.5. (a) "Synthetic drug lookalike substance", except as provided in subsection (b), means one (1) or more of the following: (1) A substance, other than a synthetic drug, which any of the factors listed in subsection (c) would lead a reasonable person to believe to be a synthetic drug. (2) A substance, other than a synthetic drug: (A) that a person knows or should have known was intended to be consumed; and (B) the consumption of which the person knows or should have known to be intended to cause intoxication. (b) The term "synthetic drug lookalike substance" does not include the following: (1) Food and food ingredients (as defined in IC 6-2.5-1-20). (2) Alcohol (as defined in IC 7.1-1-3-4). (3) A legend drug (as defined in IC 16-18-2-199). (4) Tobacco. (5) A dietary supplement (as defined in IC 6-2.5-1-16).
(c) In determining whether a substance is a synthetic drug lookalike substance, the following factors may be considered: (1) The overall appearance of a dosage unit of the substance, including its shape, color, size, markings or lack of markings, taste, consistency, and any other identifying physical characteristics. (2) How the substance is packaged for sale or distribution, including the shape, color, size, markings or lack of markings, and any other identifying physical characteristics of the packaging. (3) Any statement made by the owner or person in control of the substance concerning the substance's nature, use, or effect. (4) Any statement made to the buyer or recipient of the substance suggesting or implying that the substance is a synthetic drug. (5) Any statement made to the buyer or recipient of the substance suggesting or implying that the substance may be resold for profit. (6) The overall circumstances under which the substance is distributed, including whether: (A) the distribution included an exchange of, or demand for, money or other property as consideration; and (B) the amount of the consideration was substantially greater than the reasonable retail market value of the substance the seller claims the substance to be.
All legislative approaches based upon the controlled substance act are: Reactionary Restricted In the realm of chemicals consumed by people, DEA has jurisdiction over controlled substances, FDA has everything else FDA has provided significant assistance
Most states likely have FDA-like statutes modeled after Federal statutes Meant for pharmaceuticals Never intended for drugs of abuse But…
Basis for past cases in KS General approach These products contain a psychoactive substance “Not for human consumption” is a fraud None of the packages are properly labeled County in Florida assesses vendors a fine of $500 per pack
Definition for “drug” “articles, other than food, intended to affect the structure or any function of the body of man or other animals.” Definition for “new drug” “any drug the composition of which is such that such drug is not generally recognized, among experts qualified by scientific training and experience to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of drugs, as safe and effective for use under the conditions prescribed, recommended, or suggested in the labeling thereof…”
Must be licensed to deal with “new drugs” No person shall sell, deliver, offer for sale, hold for sale or give away any new drug unless (1) an application with respect thereto has been approved and such approval has not been withdrawn under 21 U.S.C.A. 355, or (2) when not subject to the federal act, unless such drug has been tested and has been found to be safe for use and effective in use under the conditions prescribed, recommended, or suggested in the labeling thereof If neither of the two requirements are met, then the person can be charged with unlawful distribution of a new drug
Local smoke shop selling packets of “3,4-CTMP pellets” Analysis confirms 3,4- dichloromethylphenidate Non-controlled substance FDA approach requirements Meets definition of “drug”? Meets definition of “new drug”? Verify vendor has no license for distributing “new drugs”?
Laws already on the books Broad enough to cover all future drugs of abuse No need for pharmacological or structural comparisons Will require more leg-work by all Addresses dealers, not personal possession Different application than what intended? Violation may only be a misdemeanor
Legislators have controlled it Prosecutors wish to move forward with a case Do we have sufficient data to conclude that a compound detected in an item of evidence meets the criteria to be a controlled substance? Primarily an issue with chemical class definitions Also an awareness of related isomers and instrument limitations
The answers mean we have to talk about boring and confusing chemical technical stuff. Sorry.
Any compound containing a 3-(1-naphthoyl)indole structure with substitution at the nitrogen atom of the indole ring by a alkyl, haloalkyl, alkenyl, cycloalkylmethyl, cycloalkylethyl, 1-(N-methyl-2-piperidinyl)methyl or 2-(4-morpholinyl)ethyl group, whether or not further substituted in the indole ring to any extent and whether or not substituted in the naphthyl ring to any extent.
The supporting data is likely there. Potentially long process between data collection and confident presentation of results Understanding theory of instrument Re-introduction of organic chemistry (headaches) Knowing chemical structure of the compound Understanding past work on structurally similar compounds Interpretation of mass spectra (major headaches)
Any compound containing a 3-(1-naphthoyl)indole structure with substitution at the nitrogen atom of the indole ring by a alkyl, haloalkyl, alkenyl, cycloalkylmethyl, cycloalkylethyl, 1-(N-methyl-2-piperidinyl)methyl or 2-(4-morpholinyl)ethyl group, whether or not further substituted in the indole ring to any extent and whether or not substituted in the naphthyl ring to any extent. M + - 17
Confirming “AM-2201” locks in the fluorine at the 5-pentyl position 63
64 Do not under-estimate the value of retention times in GC/MS analyses!
Reporting “Confirmed AM-2201” may require purchasing multiple standards Only one standard if reporting “Confirmed 1- fluoropentyl-3-(1-naphthoyl)indole ” 65
If the compound contains a benzene ring and no other aromatic groups (e.g., indole system), di- substituted compounds can be differentiated by specific infrared absorbance bands 1,2-disubstituted735-770 cm -1 1,3-disubstituted 690-710 cm -1 810-850 cm -1 1,4-disubstituted810-840 cm -1 68
Schedule I reads: Any compound structurally derived from 3-(1- naphthoyl)indole or 1H-indol-3-yl-(1-naphthyl)methane by substitution at the nitrogen atom of the indole ring by alkyl, haloalkyl, alkenyl, cycloalkyl methyl, cycloalkyl ethyl, 1-(N- methyl-2-piperidinyl)methyl or 2-(4-morpholinyl)ethyl group, whether or not further substituted in the indole ring to any extent, whether or not substituted in the naphthyl ring to any extent. Including, but not limited to: JWH-018, or 1-pentyl-3-(1-naphthoyl)indole; “Synthetic cannabinoid” defined as: “any natural or synthetic material, compound, mixture, or preparation that contains any quantity of a substance that is a cannabinoid receptor agonist, including but not limited to any substance listed in paragraph (ll) of subdivision (4) of subsection 2”
Mass spec and retention time of single component in an item match the data for a known standard of JWH- 018
What do you think about the following report wording? Analysis confirmed the presence of 1-pentyl-3- (1-naphthoyl)indole (JWH-018), a Schedule I controlled substance.
Two issues: Finding the standards (easy part) Using the standards for casework (hard part)
Cayman Chemical Most common source ~$100 to $200 for 10 mg “Traceable standards” are more expensive Toronto Research Chemicals National Measurement Institute Cerilliant Grace Analytical Sigma
Most labs require verifying the standard prior to it being used in casework Requires published spectra from peer-reviewed source Generally GC/MS (sufficient for 10 mg standards) Positional isomer determination (3- or 4- fluoroamphetamine) requires FTIR analysis (can be an issue for 10 mg standards) Biggest obstacles are finding a reference spectrum and sufficient sample for FTIR
Analytical difficulties with emerging drugs of abuse are significantly greater in toxicology Extraction from biological matrices Multiple metabolites rather than single compounds Little to no info on absorption, distribution, elimination Little to no info on human pharmcokinetics These things take time – something not afforded
Immunoassay screening techniques are slow to evolve Expensive and labor intensive Available screening kits deal with compounds long gone GC/MS screening techniques generally developed in-house and validated too late
Confirmation LC/MS/MS best option (not a routine technique) Metabolite standards non-existent or expensive Published data on metabolite standards? Interpretation of any obtained results is very difficult (i.e., “Were they impaired?”) Essentially, the compounds in these products and the resultant laws are changing faster than toxicology sections can keep up
If the toxicology results are critical to the case, often times the best option will be using a private laboratory. Budget issues Instrumentation issues Back-log issues Drug life-cycle issues