Enhancing Drug Evidence Processing with Portable Mass Spectrometers

1. Assessing the Impact of Portable Mass Spectrometers (MS) for On-Site Drug Evidence Processing Jamie R. Wieland, Ph.D., Department of Management & Quantitative Methods Christopher C. Mulligan, Ph.D., Department of Chemistry Michael Gizzi, Ph.D., Department of Criminal Justice Sciences *Project supported by NIJ Award No. 2015-IJ-CX-K011 NIJ FORENSIC SCIENCE R&D SYMPOSIUM American Academy of forensic sciences, 2018

2. Lab Workload and Backlog (2014 BJS Census*) 33% of all requests were related to controlled substances Other 2014 Findings: • Controlled substances accounted for 37% of the 570,000 sample backlog • 40% of labs outsourced casework * Publicly Funded Forensic Crime Laboratories: Resources and Services, 2014. Bureau of Justice Statistics, Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice, NCJ 250151

3. Proposed Solution Rapid Screening Techniques On-Site Analysis of Drug Evidence Ambient Ionization on a Portable Mass Spectrometer (AI-MS) for Screening Evidentiary Value of Samples • Field practitioners quickly screen high-priority samples • Determine most pertinent samples to send for off-site confirmation (if needed) • Reduce Forensic Backlog • Expedite Investigations

4. FLIR Systems AI-MS 1.2 • Portable, Ruggedized, and Field-Ready for Ambient Ionization • 24”x20”x15” (L/W/H) • 98 lb. • Atmospheric pressure inlet • On-board AC/DC voltage • Syringe pumping (if needed) • Robust Power Options • Multiple power input options (110/220/24V) • Noise filtering • Generator Operation • Chemical Identification via Tandem MS • Highly selective • Cylindrical ion trap (CIT) mass analyzer

5. Paper Spray Ionization (PSI) • Allows quick screening of unprepared samples • Sample can be dipped,spotted, or swabbedonto paper substrate • Addition of solvent and high voltage through clip elutes/ ionizes analytes from paper • Combines aspects of paper chromatography and electrospray ionization Settings • Spray solvent aliquot = ~ 2 μL • Spray voltage = 4 kV • 1:1 MeOH:H2O (0.1% formic acid) • No nebulizing gas

6. Robust Screening of Diverse Evidence Types White Powders: Synthetic Cathinone “Bath Salts” Paraphernalia: “N-Bomb” Phenethylamines on Blotter Paper (Courtesy of Dr. Sabra Botch-Jones) Illicit Tablets & Adulterated E-cig Liquid: α-PVP (“Flakka”) Injectable Drugs: Morphine and Fentanyl/Droperidol (Seized in Bloomington, IL) ɸ

7. Error Rates Across Users • All users were subjected to a 15-min training session where ~10 samples were tested. • Higher education levels and experience increased the detection rate and reduced the false positive rate. • Environmental factors (i.e. temperature, humidity, wind) were shown to have minimal impact on error rate How do these results compare with error rates observed in forensic labs?

8. Error Rates Across Users • All users were subjected to a 15-min training session where ~10 samples were tested. • Higher education levels and experience increased the detection rate and reduced the false positive rate. • Environmental factors (i.e. temperature, humidity, wind) were shown to have minimal impact on error rate How do these results compare with error rates observed in forensic labs? → False positives were attributed to user errors in both studies.

9. Economic Impact: Comparative Cost Analysis • Constructed a comprehensive model to asses the comparative costs of forensic analyses across all phases of the current and proposed processes as follows: • Instrument Transportation Costs • Vehicle costs per mile, labor costs for drive time • On-Site Costs • Evidence handling, documentation, analysis, and reporting • Precinct Costs • Evidence handling, documentation, and analysis/reporting* • * In some cases, such as undercover “vice” operations, it may be preferable • for evidence analysis to occur at the precinct vs. on-site. • Evidence Transportation Costs • Both to and from the associated forensic service laboratory • In-Lab Costs • Evidence handling, documentation, analysis, reporting, and administrative review • Instrumentation Costs: Acquisition and upkeep considered separately • Not Considered: Facility fixed and overhead costs (property rental/taxes, heating/cooling, janitorial, office supplies, etc.)

10. Monte Carlo Simulation • Uses a random number generator to assess the variability and sensitivity of the model output with respect to the model input. • 55 Model Inputs • Input Data obtained/estimated from the various sources, including: • Bureau of Labor Statistics, US Dept. of Labor, US Dept. of the Treasury, American Automobile Association (AAA), State-Level Forensic Labs, United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC), Google Maps, and the American Chemical Society (ACS) • Input modelling was used to determine appropriate probability distributions for the model inputs which encompass significant uncertainty and/or high levels of variability. • Model Output: Estimates the expected cost per sample • 100,000 Independent Cases were Simulated (# of Replications) • The number of replications was chosen to assure that the sampling error for the estimated costs per sample were sufficiently small (i.e. less than 2%).

11. Example Usage Modes and Model Assumptions • Model is flexible in that users can toggle indicator variables to accommodate a wide variety of usage modes.

12. Example Usage Modes and Model Assumptions • Model is flexible in that users can toggle indicator variables to accommodate a wide variety of usage modes.

13. Example Usage Modes and Model Assumptions • Model is flexible in that users can toggle indicator variables to accommodate a wide variety of usage modes.

14. Novel Implementation Modes • Model is flexible in that users can toggle indicator variables to accommodate a wide variety of usage modes.

15. Simulation Output: Estimated Sample Costs

16. Simulation Output: Estimated Sample Costs

17. Simulation Output: Estimated Sample Costs

18. Simulation Output: Estimated Sample Costs

19. Estimated Cost Savings per Year Mid-to-large urban area with at least 10,000 evidence samples per year (approximately 30 per day) processed via Portable MS

20. Legality of Use • Areas of Interest • (1) Fourth Amendment Rights (Prevents Unreasonable Search & Seizure) • Example: Traffic Stops and Probable Cause • (2) Forensic Analyses Would Not be Conducted by a Third Party • Is the arresting officer also conducting the field analysis? • Process could be similar to a breathalyzer test, conducted by an officer on-site. • This could result in an increased propensity for user bias. Bruno, Cleary, O’Leary, Gizzi and Mulligan, Anal. Methods, 2017, 9, 5015-5022.

21. Acknowledgements Mulligan Research Group ISU Dept. of Chemistry Dr. Michael Gizzi ISU Dept. of Criminal Justice Sciences Bloomington (IL) Police Department and Vice Squad

22. Funding Support & Contact Information • This project was supported by Award No. 2015-IJ-CX-K011, awarded by the National Institute of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice. The opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the Department of Justice. • Contact: • Jamie Wieland • Illinois State University • jwiela2@ilstu.edu

23. Applicability of the AI-MS 1.2 To Date, Spectral Library Contains MS and MS/MS Data for 90+ Analytes, including… • All Common Drugs of Abuse • Abused Pharmaceuticals • NPS Classes, such as… • Cathinone “Bath Salts” • 2C series Phenethylamines and NBOMe derivatives • Synthetic Cannabinoids • Fentanyl and Emerging Analogues • Precursors and Solvents in Clandestine Drug Manufacture • Cutting Agents • Masking Agents/Diuretics • Accelerants • Explosives Back to Slide O’Leary, A. E.; Oberacher, H.; Hall, S. E.; Mulligan, C. C. Anal. Method., 2015,7, 3331-3339.

24. Instrument Lifetime and Required Throughput • Number of samples needing to be processed in order to recoup the initial instrument acquisition cost and yearly maintenance/upkeep costs as a function of the instrument lifetime. • An estimated expected lifetime of 9.4 years (U.S. Treasury est. for analytical instruments) yields a target number of samples/year for a specific scenario.

25. New Psychoactive Substances (NPS) • There was more than a 5-fold increase in NPS seizures in Europe between 2005 and 2014 • Over 500 NPS are currently being monitored by European enforcement and drug research organizations • 9 in 10 labs processed NPS in the cannabinoid and cathinone classes,*showing breadth of NPS issue Courtesy of the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction (EMCDDA)

26. Another view of the FLIR AI-MS 1.2

27. Will it Hold Up in Court? – The Daubert Standard • While the judge has the final say, these factors are generally accepted as needing to be fulfilled in order for expert scientific testimony (and their methods) to be considered admissible… • whether the theories and techniques employed by the scientific expert are “falsifiable, refutable and/or testable” • whether they have been subjected to peer review and publication • whether they have a known error rate • the existence and maintenance of standards/controls concerning its operation • the degree of general acceptance by the relevant scientific community Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, 509, U.S. 579 (1993).