Forensic Toxicology Laboratory Guidelines: Analytical Method Validation (Version 2.0)
Article content
Abstract
Since postmortem forensic toxicology involves analyzing body fluids and organs from death cases, interpreting that information and studying the sudden unexpected and/or unexplained deaths as coroner’s cases or fall under the jurisdiction of the medical examiner. Reliable results and valid analytical data are an essential requirement for proper interpretation of forensic toxicology cases, especially when evaluating scientific studies and daily routine work, and when presenting any toxicological findings as criminal evidence.
In contrast, the results of unreliable analyses can be disputed in court and can also lead to unfair legal judgments against the defendant, or can result in wrong treatment in cases of rehabilitation of patients. In order to establish strong evidence and make a correct decision, the lab is asked to give high quality data that are based on reliable analytical methods. For that reason, all new analytical methods used in forensic toxicology including the clinical diagnosis of causes of death require careful care during the development of the analytical method and during its application. This is also an urgent need in the context of quality management and accreditation, especially as those issues have become increasingly important in the science of poisons and drug analysis in recent years.
Keywords
Forensic Sciences, Forensic Toxicology, Method Validation, Guidelines
Downloads
References
1. Andri, B., Lebrun, P., Dispas, A., Klinkenberg, R.
g., Streel, B., Ziemons, E., Marini, R., & Hubert, P.
(2017). Optimization and validation of a fast super-
critical fluid chromatography method for the quan-103
الثاين (الإ�صدار التحليلية الطرق �صالحية من التحقق :اجلنائية ال�سموم خمتربات يف التوجيهية )املبادئ
ceutical industry perspective. Journal of pharmaceuti- titative determination of vitamin D3 and its related
cal and biomedical analysis, 21(6), 1249-1273. impurities. Journal of Chromatography A, 1491, 171-
Kintz, P., Salomone, A., & Vincenti, M. (2015). Hair
analysis in clinical and forensic toxicology: Academ-
ic Press.
Klimenko, L. Y., Trut, S., Petyunin, G., & Ivanchuk,
Araujo, P. (2009). Key aspects of analytical method
validation and linearity evaluation. Journal of chro-
matography B, 877(23), 2224-2234.
I. (2013). Validation of UV-spectrophotometric meth- 3. Bressolle, F., Bromet-Petit, M., & Audran, M. (1996).
ods of quantitative determination in forensic and tox- Validation of liquid chromatographic and gas chro-
icological analysis: recovery matographic methods Applications to pharmacoki-
Kruve, A., R. Rebane, et al. (2015). “Tutorial review
on validation of liquid chromatography–mass spec-
trometry methods: Part I.” Analytica chimica acta
: 29-44.
Kruve, A., R. Rebane, et al. (2015). “Tutorial review
on validation of liquid chromatography–mass spec-
trometry methods: Part II.” Analytica chimica acta
: 8-28.
netics. Journal of Chromatography B: Biomedical
Sciences and Applications, 686(1), 3-10.
Bruce, P., Minkkinen, P., & Riekkola, M.-L. (1998).
Practical method validation: validation sufficient for
an analysis method. Microchimica Acta, 128(1), 93-
Chesher, D. (2008). Evaluating assay precision. Clin
Biochem Rev, 29(Suppl 1), S23-S26.
Lynch, K. L. (2016). CLSI C62-A: a new standard for 6. CHMP. (2015). Committee for Medicinal Products
clinical mass spectrometry. Clinical chemistry, 62(1), for Human Use (CHMP) -Guideline on bioanalytical
-29. method validation (0277-6715).
Matuszewski, B., Constanzer, M., & Chavez-Eng, 7. Cooper, G. A., Paterson, S., & Osselton, M. D. (2010).
C. (2003). Strategies for the assessment of matrix The United Kingdom and Ireland association of fo-
effect in quantitative bioanalytical methods based rensic toxicologists: forensic toxicology laboratory
on HPLC− MS/MS. Analytical chemistry, 75(13), guidelines (2010). Science & Justice, 50(4), 166-176.
-3030.
Moffat, A. C., Osselton, M. D., Widdop, B., & Watts,
J. (2011). Clarke’s analysis of drugs and poisons:
Pharmaceutical Press,.
Papoutsis, I. I., Athanaselis, S. A., Nikolaou, P. D.,
De Bievre, P., & Günzler, H. (2005). Validation in
chemical measurement: Springer.
Drummer, O. H. (2007). Requirements for bioanalyti-
cal procedures in postmortem toxicology. Analytical
and bioanalytical chemistry, 388(7), 1495-1503.
Pistos, C. M., Spiliopoulou, C. A., & Maravelias, C. 10. Findlay, J., Smith, W., Lee, J., Nordblom, G., Das, I.,
P. (2010). Development and validation of an EI-GC- DeSilva, B., Khan, M., & Bowsher, R. (2000). Val-
MS method for the determination of benzodiazepine idation of immunoassays for bioanalysis: a pharma-
ASFSFM 2020; Volume 2 Issue (1)اجلنائي ال�سموم لعلم العربية العلمية العمل جمموعة 104
ing Group for Forensic Toxicology.
Tiscione, N. B., & Wegner, K. (2017). Validation
drugs and their metabolites in blood: Applications in
clinical and forensic toxicology. Journal of pharma-
of the Neogen® Fentanyl ELISA Kit for Blood and ceutical and biomedical analysis, 52(4), 609-614.
Urine. Journal of analytical toxicology, 41(4), 313- 19) Penders, J., & Verstraete, A. (2006). Laboratory
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
(2013). Bioanalytical Method Validation. Food and
Drug Administration, Guidance for Industry,.
guidelines and standards in clinical and forensic tox-
icology. Accreditation and quality assurance, 11(6),
-290.
Peters, F. T., & Maurer, H. H. (2002). Bioanalytical
UNODC. (2009). Guidance for the Validation of An- method validation and its implications for forensic
alytical Methodology and Calibration of Equipment and clinical toxicology: a review, Validation in chem-
used for Testing of Illicit Drugs in Seized Materials ical measurement (pp. 1-9): Springer.
and Biological Specimens, A commitment to quality 21) Peters, F. T., Drummer, O. H., & Musshoff, F. (2007).
and continuous improvement. UNITED NATIONS. Validation of new methods. Forensic science interna-
UNODC. (2009). Guidance for the Validation of An-
tional, 165(2), 216-224.
alytical Methodology and Calibration of Equipment 22) Remane, D., Meyer, M. R., Wissenbach, D. K., &
used for Testing of Illicit Drugs in Seized Materials Maurer, H. H. (2010). Ion suppression and enhance-
and Biological Specimens. ment effects of co-eluting analytes in multi-ana-
Viswanathan, C., Bansal, S., Booth, B., DeStefano, lyte approaches: systematic investigation using ul-
A. J., Rose, M. J., Sailstad, J., Shah, V. P., Skelly, J. tra-high-performance liquid chromatography/mass
P., Swann, P. G., & Weiner, R. (2007). Quantitative spectrometry with atmospheric pressure chemical
bioanalytical methods validation and implementa- ionization or electrospray ionization. Rapid Commu-
tion: best practices for chromatographic and ligand nications in Mass Spectrometry, 24(21), 3103-3108.
binding assays. Pharmaceutical research, 24(10), 23) SWOGTOX. (2013). Standard Practices for Method
-1973.
ASFSFM 2020; Volume 2 Issue (1)
Validation in Forensic Toxicology, Scientific Work-
Article details

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
You must read and accept the copyright terms and conditions(click here for copyright terms).