Search

Humankind has used and abused psychoactive drugs for millennia. Formally, a psychoactive drug is any agent that alters cognition and mood. The term "psychotropic drug" is neutral and describes the entire class of substrates, licit and illicit, of interest to governmental drug policy. While these drugs are prescribed for issues ranging from pain management to anxiety, they are also used recreationally. In fact, the current opioid epidemic is the deadliest drug crisis in American history. While the topic is highly politicized with racial, gender, and socioeconomic elements, there is no denying the toll drug mis- and overuse is taking on this country. Overdose, fueled by opioids, is the leading cause of death for Americans under 50 years of age, killing ca. 64,000 people in 2016. From a chemistry standpoint, the question is in what ways, if any, did organic chemists contribute to this problem? In this targeted review, we provide brief historical accounts of the main classes of psychoactive drugs and discuss several foundational total syntheses that ultimately provide the groundwork for producing these molecules in academic, industrial, and clandestine settings.

In the United States of America (USA), the abuse potential assessment of a drug is performed as part of the safety evaluation of a drug under development, and to evaluate if the drug needs to be subject to controls that would minimize the abuse of the drug once on the market. The assessment of the abuse potential of new drugs consists of a scientific and medical evaluation of all data related to abuse of the drug. This paper describes the regulatory framework for evaluating the abuse potential of new drugs, in general, including novel stimulants. The role of the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in the evaluation of the abuse potential of drugs, and its role in drug control are also discussed. A definition of abuse potential, an overview of the currently accepted approaches to evaluating the abuse potential of a drug, as well as a description of the criteria that applies when recommending a specific level of control (i.e., a Schedule) for a drug under the Controlled Substances Act (CSA). This article is part of the Special Issue entitled 'CNS Stimulants'., (Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

Synthetic cathinones are an emerging class of designer drugs abused for psychostimulant and hallucinogenic effects similar to cocaine, methylenedioxymethamphetamine (MDMA), or other amphetamines. Abuse of synthetic cathinones, frequently included in products sold as 'bath salts', became prevalent in early 2009, leading to legislative classification throughout Europe in 2010 and schedule I classification within the United States in 2011. Recent pre-clinical and clinical studies indicate that dysregulation of central monoamine systems is a principal mechanism of synthetic cathinone action and presumably underlie the behavioral effects and abuse liability associated with these drugs. This review provides insight into the development of synthetic cathinones as substances of abuse, current patterns of their abuse, known mechanisms of their action and toxicology, and the benefits and drawbacks of their classification., (© 2013.)

Background: This study examines whether Mexico's controls on ephedrine and pseudoephedrine, the two precursor chemicals that yield the most potent form of methamphetamine, d-methamphetamine, impacted the prevalence/availability of less potent types of methamphetamine in the United States-types associated with the alternative precursor chemical P2P., Method: Using ARIMA-intervention time series analysis of monthly drug exhibits (a prevalence/availability indicator) from the System to Retrieve Information from Drug Evidence (STRIDE), we tested whether Mexico's controls, which began in 2005, were associated with growth/decline in d-methamphetamine and growth/decline in P2P-associated, less potent l-methamphetamine, racemic methamphetamine (a 50:50 ratio of d- and l-isomers), and mixed isomer methamphetamine (an unequal ratio of d- and l-isomers). Heroin, cocaine and marijuana exhibits were used for quasi-control (01/2000-04/2011)., Results: Mixed-isomer exhibits constituted about 4% of the methamphetamine exhibits before Mexico's controls, then rose sharply in association with them and remained elevated, constituting about 37% of methamphetamine exhibits in 2010. d-Methamphetamine exhibits dropped sharply; l-methamphetamine and racemic methamphetamine exhibits had small rises. d-Methamphetamine exhibits partially recovered in the US West, but little recovery occurred in the US Central/South. Quasi-control series were generally unaffected., Conclusion: The US methamphetamine market changed. Widespread emergence of less potent methamphetamine occurred in conjunction with Mexico's controls. And prevalence/availability of the most potent type of the drug, d-methamphetamine, declined, a partial recovery in the West notwithstanding. Granting that lower potency drugs typically engender less dependence and attendant problems, these findings suggest that, following Mexico's controls, the potential harm of a sizeable amount of the US methamphetamine supply decreased., (Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Abuse of the psychoactive "designer drug" methylenedioxypyrovalerone (MDPV) has become a serious international public health concern because of the severity of its physical and behavioral toxicities. MDPV is the primary ingredient in so-called "bath salts," labeled as such to avoid criminal prosecution and has only been classified recently as a controlled substance in the United States and some other countries. However, it remains a danger because of illegal sources, including the Internet. MDPV is a synthetic, cathinone-derivative, central nervous system stimulant and is taken to produce a cocaine- or methamphetamine-like high. Administered via oral ingestion, nasal insufflation, smoking, intravenous or intramuscular methods, or the rectum, the intoxication lasts 6 to 8 hours and has high addictive potential. Overdoses are characterized by profound toxicities, causing increased attention by emergency department and law enforcement personnel. Physical manifestations range from tachycardia, hypertension, arrhythmias, hyperthermia, sweating, rhabdomyolysis, and seizures to those as severe as stroke, cerebral edema, cardiorespiratory collapse, myocardial infarction, and death. Behavioral effects include panic attacks, anxiety, agitation, severe paranoia, hallucinations, psychosis, suicidal ideation, self-mutilation, and behavior that is aggressive, violent, and self-destructive. Treatment is principally supportive and focuses on counteracting the sympathetic overstimulation, including sedation with intravenous benzodiazepines, seizure-prevention measures, intravenous fluids, close (eg, intensive care unit) monitoring, and restraints to prevent harm to self or others. Clinical presentation is often complicated by coingestion of other psychoactive substances that may alter the treatment approach. Clinicians need to be especially vigilant in that MDPV is not detected by routine drug screens and overdoses can be life-threatening., (Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Various "legal high" products were tested for synthetic cannabinoids and synthetic stimulants to qualitatively determine the active ingredient(s). Ultra-performance liquid chromatography with accurate mass time-of-flight mass spectrometry (UPLC-TOF) was used to monitor the non-biological specimens utilizing a customized panel of 65+ compounds comprised of synthetic cannabinoids, synthetic stimulants and other related drugs. Over the past year, the United States Drug Enforcement Agency has controlled five synthetic cannabinoid compounds (JWH-018, JWH-073, JWH-200, CP-47,497 and CP-47,497-C8) and three synthetic stimulant compounds (3,4-methylenedioxypyrovalerone, mephedrone and methylone) that were previously reported to be detected in these legal high products. Through our analyses of first and second generation products, it was shown that many of these banned substances are no longer used and have been replaced by other derivatives that are federally legal. Since enactment of the federal bans on synthetic cannabinoids and synthetic stimulants, 4.9% of the products analyzed at our facility contained at least one controlled substance. The remaining 95.1% of products contained only uncontrolled drugs. We demonstrate the UPLC-TOF methodology to be a powerful tool in the qualitative identification of these designer drugs, thus enabling a laboratory to keep current with the drugs that are being sold as these designer products.

In urine drug testing, enantiomer analysis is used to determine whether a positive methamphetamine result could be due to use of an over-the-counter (OTC) nasal inhaler containing L-methamphetamine. D-methamphetamine at more than 20% of the total is considered indicative of a source other than an OTC product. This interpretation is based on a 1991 Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Technical Advisory. We performed studies to verify the methamphetamine enantiomer content of current OTC nasal inhalers and to evaluate current laboratory testing capabilities. This study demonstrated that OTC inhalers contain less than 1% D-methamphetamine. A proficiency testing (PT) set for HHS-certified laboratories performing methamphetamine enantiomer testing found D-methamphetamine percentages that were consistently 1 to 3% higher than theoretical due to optical impurity of the derivatizing reagent N-trifluoroacetyl-L-prolyl chloride (L-TPC). The PT results also demonstrate that laboratories can accurately determine 20% D-methamphetamine in samples with total methamphetamine concentrations down to 250 ng/mL. Based on these studies, the guideline of >20% D-methamphetamine is appropriate for interpreting results obtained using current laboratory methods.

Aims: Reducing drug purity is a major, but largely unstudied, goal of drug suppression. This study examines whether US methamphetamine purity was impacted by the suppression policy of US and Canadian precursor chemical regulation., Design: Autoregressive integrated moving average (ARIMA)-intervention time-series analysis., Setting: Continental United States and Hawaii (1985-May 2005). Interventions US federal regulations targeting precursors, ephedrine and pseudoephedrine, in forms used by large-scale producers were implemented in November 1989, August 1995 and October 1997. US regulations targeting precursors in forms used by small-scale producers (e.g. over-the-counter medications) were implemented in October 1996 and October 2001. Canada implemented federal precursor regulations in January 2003 and July 2003 and an essential chemical (e.g. acetone) regulation in January 2004., Measurements: Monthly median methamphetamine purity series., Findings: US regulations targeting large-scale producers were associated with purity declines of 16-67 points; those targeting small-scale producers had little or no impact. Canada's precursor regulations were associated with purity increases of 13-15 points, while its essential chemical regulation was associated with a 13-point decrease. Hawaii's purity was consistently high, and appeared to vary little with the 1990s/2000s regulations., Conclusions: US precursor regulations targeting large-scale producers were associated with substantial decreases in continental US methamphetamine purity, while regulations targeting over-the-counter medications had little or no impact. Canada's essential chemical regulation was also associated with a decrease in continental US purity. However, Canada's precursor regulations were associated with purity increases: these regulations may have impacted primarily producers of lower-quality methamphetamine, leaving higher-purity methamphetamine on the market by default. Hawaii's well-known preference for 'ice' (high-purity methamphetamine) may have helped to constrain purity there to a high, attenuated range, possibly limiting its sensitivity to precursor regulation.

Since 2000 researchers have reported a decline in the administration of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) medications given by school nurses, although no decline has been noted in the incidence of ADHD in school-age populations. Government data for the same period show reduced levels of methylphenidate abuse as measured by its involvement in hospital emergency department (ED) admissions. Offsetting this, however, is an increase in the involvement of amphetamine-dextroamphetamine in hospital ED admissions for the same period. Because ADHD medications are often administered in the school setting, a survey of school nurses was undertaken to identify factors related to the administration as well as to the diversion, theft, and misuse of ADHD medications. Of 311 school nurses responding, 295 (95%) reported a significant or moderate decline between 2002 and 2004 in the need for school-based administration of ADHD medications. Respondents also reported reductions in diversion, theft, and misuse of ADHD drugs.

Methylphenidate is a commonly used medication in the United States. This central nervous system stimulant has a mechanism of action distinct from that of amphetamine. The Food and Drug Administration has approved methylphenidate for the treatment of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder and narcolepsy. Treatment with methylphenidate has been advocated in patients with traumatic brain injury and stroke, cancer patients, and those with human immunodeficiency virus infection. Placebo-controlled trials have documented its efficacy as an adjunctive agent in the treatment of depression and pain. This article reviews the current understanding of the mechanism of action and efficacy of methylphenidate in various clinical conditions.