Home > Back to Publisher > Report Information

Drugs of Abuse Testing Markets

TriMark Publications
July 1, 2011
281 Pages - SKU: TRI6444223

Abstract Table of Contents Related Reports

This TriMark Publications report describes the specific segment of the in vitro diagnostics (IVD) market known as drugs of abuse testing. In the current medical diagnostics market, drugs of abuse testing offers promise for significant growth and innovation. Examined in this study are assays for alcohol, cannabinoids, cocaine, amphetamines, opiates and phencyclidine, as well as assays for addictive prescription drugs such as OxyContin. Moreover, special attention is paid to Substance Abuse and Mental Health Service Administration (SAMHSA) requirements, which aims to prevent substance abuse in the U.S. and so requires that certain corporations comply with anti-drug policies and testing. This review covers the leading market players, the competitive landscape, and the promising pipeline products in the drugs of abuse testing markets. Specifically, areas examined in this study include: available and developing technologies in the field, the U.S. and global market size for drugs of abuse tests, and the profiles of companies that are focusing on the drugs of abuse testing market. Detailed charts with sales forecasts and market share data for the U.S. and global drugs of abuse testing markets are included.

1. Overview: 1.1 Statement of Report; 1.2 About This Report; 1.3 Scope of the Report; 1.4 Objectives; 1.5 Methodology; 1.6 Executive Summary
2. Introduction to Drugs of Abuse testing: 2.1 Drugs of Abuse Overview; 2.2 Initiation of Illicit Drug Use; 2.3 Major Drugs of Abuse; 2.4 Alcohol Testing; 2.5 Test Methodologies; 2.6 Drug Panels by Toxidromes; 2.7 Drugs of Abuse Home Use Test
3. Drugs of Abuse Testing Markets: 3.1 IVD Global Clinical Diagnostic Testing Market; 3.2 Drugs of Abuse Testing Market Analysis; 3.3 Diagnostic Testing in the Future
4. Market Size and Analysis for Drugs of Abuse Testing: 4.1 Global Drugs of Abuse Testing Analysis; 4.2 U.S. Drugs of Abuse Testing Analysis; 4.3 European Union Drugs of Abuse Testing Analysis; 4.4 Rest of World Drugs of Abuse Testing Analysis; 4.5 Market Drivers; 4.6 Market Restraints; 4.7 Market and Technology Trends; 4.8 Strategic Recommendations
5. Specific Market Sectors for Drugs of Abuse Testing: 5.1 Workplace Drugs of Abuse Laboratory Testing Methods; 5.2 Prescription Drugs of Abuse Market; 5.3 Human Sports Drugs of Abuse Testing Markets
6. Company Specific Instrumentation and Test Kit Review: 6.1 Biosite Diagnostics (Inverness, now called Alere); 6.2 Abbott Diagnostics; 6.3 Roche Diagnostics; 6.4 BioScan Screening Systems, Inc.; 6.5 American Bio Medica Corp.; 6.6 Phamatech, Inc.; 6.7 First Check Medical Corp.; 6.8 OraSure; 6.9 Avitar, Inc.; 6.10 Concateno; 6.11 Pathtech; 6.12 Alfa Scientific Designs, Inc.; 6.13 TCPI, Inc.; 6.14 Roche; 6.15 Biophor Diagnostics; 6.16 Alpha Scientific Designs; 6.17 Princeton BioMeditech, Inc.; 6.18 American BioMedica; 6.19 Beckman Coulter; 6.20 Bio-Rad; 6.21 Siemens Healthcare Diagnostics; 6.22 Thermo Fisher Scientific; 6.23 Agilent Technologies; 6.24 Randox; 6.25 Awareness Technology; 6.26 Carolina Chemistries; 6.27 Horiba Medical; 6.28 Ortho Clinical Diagnostics—Johnson & Johnson; 6.29 Medica Corporation, Inc.; 6.30 Tecan
7. In Vitro Diagnostic Technologies and Potential Applications: 7.1 Performance Characteristics Required for Implementation of FDA-Approved/Cleared Tests; 7.2 Immunoassays; 7.3 Technology Principle; 7.4 Enzyme Immunoassays; 7.5 Future Trends of Immunoassays; 7.6 Latex Agglutination; 7.7 Immunoprecipitation (IP); 7.8 Flow-injection Liposome Immunoanalysis (FIIA); 7.9 Clinical Immunoanalyzer Instrument Market by Sector
8. Business Analysis of Drugs of Abuse Testing Market: 8.1 Ultra-large Clinical Chemistry Analyzers; 8.2 Mid-Size Clinical Chemistry Analyzers; 8.3 Small Volume Chemistry Analyzers; 8.4 Advance of Technology Trends; 8.5 Ultra-Large Clinical Chemistry Analyzer Market Analysis; 8.6 High Volume Clinical Chemistry Market; 8.7 Mid-Size Clinical Chemistry Analyzers; 8.8 Small-Volume Chemical Analyzer Market; 8.9 Competitive Analysis
9. SWOT Analysis: 9.1 Main Drivers of Drugs of Abuse Testing Market; 9.2 Potential Threats and Restraints of the Drugs of Abuse Testing Market; 9.3 Challenges of this Market Place Going Forward; 9.4 Summary of Market Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats; 9.5 Summary of Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats of Drugs of Abuse Test Market
10. Reimbursement Systems: 10.1 Reimbursement for Laboratory Medicine; 10.2 Public and Private Sector Payers; 10.3 Components of Reimbursement Systems; 10.4 Medicare Coverage Decisions; 10.5 Medicaid Coverage Decisions; 10.6 Private Sector Coverage Decisions; 10.7 Payment Methodologies; 10.8 Medicare Payment Methodologies; 10.9 Prospective Payment Systems for Inpatient and Hospital Outpatient Care; 10.10 Using Fee Schedules for Laboratory Tests and Services; 10.11 Clinical Laboratory Fee Schedule; 10.12 Coding System Used for Qualitative Drug Tests
11. Government Regulation: 11.1 U.S. Regulation; 11.2 U.K. Regulation; 11.3 E.U. Regulation; 11.4 French Regulation; 11.5 Japanese Regulation; 11.6 Korean Regulation; 11.7 Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments (CLIA); 11.8 Omnibus Transportation Employee Testing Act; 11.9 Employer Drug and Alcohol Compliance; 11.10 Regulations Governing Drug Abuse Testing; 11.11 The U.S. Anti-Doping Agency; 11.12 Drugs of Abuse Testing in the Criminal Justice System
12. Company Profiles: 12.1 Abbott Laboratories; 12.2 AdnaGen; 12.3 Ambrilia Biopharma; 12.4 Radient Pharmaceuticals (Formerly AMDL); 12.5 Beckman Coulter, Inc.; 12.6 Biomedical Diagnostics (Belgium); 12.7 bioMérieux; 12.8 Bio-Rad Laboratories; 12.9 CanAg Diagnostics; 12.10 Dako; 12.11 DiaSorin; 12.12 Eiken Chemical; 12.13 Fujirebio; 12.14 Instrumentation Laboratory; 12.15 Johnson & Johnson; 12.16 Kyowa Medex; 12.17 Matritech; 12.18 Roche; 12.19 Siemens AG; 12.20 Sysmex; 12.21 Thermo Fisher Scientific; 12.22 Tosoh; 12.23 Trinity Biotech; 12.24 Wako; 12.25 Wallac
INDEX OF FIGURES: Figure 2.1: Drug Classification according to Mean Harm Rating; Figure 2.2: Percentage of U.S. 12th Grade Students Reporting Past Month Use of Cigarettes and Marijuana, 1975-2010; Figure 2.3: Percentage of U.S. 12th Grade Students Reporting Daily Marijuana Use verses Perceived Risk of Regular Marijuana Use, 1975-2010; Figure 2.4: Prevalence of Drug Abuse Occurring in 12th Grade Students, 2010; Figure 2.5: Past Month Illicit Drug Use among Persons Aged 12 or Older, 2009; Figure 2.6: Past Month Use of Selected Illicit Drugs among Persons Aged 12 or Older, 2002-2009; Figure 2.7: Past Month Non-medical Use of Types of Psychotherapeutic Drugs among Persons Aged 12 or Older, 2002-2009; Figure 2.8: Past Month Illicit Drug Use among Persons Aged 12 or Older, by Age, 2008 and 2009; Figure 2.9: Past Month Illicit Drug Use among Persons Aged 12 or Older, by Age, 2002-2009; Figure 2.10: Past Month Use of Selected Illicit Drugs among Youths Aged 12 to 17, 2002-2009; Figure 2.11: Past Month Use of Selected Illicit Drugs among Young Adults Aged 18 to 25, 2002-2009; Figure 2.12: Past Month Illicit Drug Use among Adults Aged 50 to 59, 2002-2009; Figure 2.13: Past Month Marijuana Use among Youths Aged 12 to 17, by Gender, 2002-2009; Figure 2.14: Past Month Illicit Drug Use among Persons Aged 12 or Older, by Race/Ethnicity, 2009; Figure 2.15: Past Month Illicit Drug Use among Persons Aged 18 or Older, by Employment Status, 2008 and 2009; Figure 2.16: Past Month Illicit Drug Use among Persons Aged 12 or Older, by County Type; Figure 2.17: Current, Binge, and Heavy Alcohol Use among Persons Aged 12 or Older, by Age; Figure 2.18: Current, Binge, and Heavy Alcohol Use among Persons Aged 12 or Older, by Race/Ethnicity; Figure 2.19: Heavy Alcohol Use among Adults Aged 18 to 22, by College Enrollment, 2002-2009; Figure 2.20: First Specific Drug Associated with Initiation of Illicit Drug Use among Past Year Illicit Drug Initiates Aged 12 or Older; Figure 2.21: Past Year Initiates of Specific Illicit Drugs among Persons Aged 12 or Older; Figure 2.22: Mean Age at First Use for Specific Illicit Drugs among Past Year Initiates Aged 12 to 49; Figure 2.23: Past Year Marijuana Initiates among Persons Aged 12 or Older and Mean Age at First Use of Marijuana among Past Year Marijuana Initiates Aged 12 to 49, 2002-2009; Figure 2.24: Past Year Hallucinogen Initiates among Persons Aged 12 or Older, 2002-2009; Figure 2.25: Past Year Methamphetamine Initiates among Persons Aged 12 or Older and Mean Age at First Use of Methamphetamine among Past Year Methamphetamine Initiates Aged 12 to 49, 2002-2009; Figure 2.26: Substance Dependence or Abuse in the Past Year among Persons Aged 12 or Older, 2002-2009; Figure 2.27: Dependence on or Abuse of Specific Illicit Drugs in the Past Year among Persons Aged 12 or Older; Figure 2.28: Substance Dependence or Abuse in the Past Year, by Age and Gender; Figure 2.29: Number of Abusers of Marijuana in the U.S., 2007-2009; Figure 2.30: Number of U.S. Abusers of Cocaine, 2006-2009; Figure 2.31: Number of U.S. Abusers of Psychotherapeutic Drugs, 2007-2009; Figure 2.32: Methamphetamine User Prevalence, 2006-2009; Figure 2.33: Chemical Structure of Amphetamine; Figure 2.34: Chemical Structure of Barbituates; Figure 2.35: Chemical Structure of Benzodiazepines; Figure 2.36: Chemical Structure of Cannabinoid/Marijuana; Figure 2.37: Chemical Structure of Cocaine; Figure 2.38: Chemical Structure of Lysergic Acid Diethylamide (LSD); Figure 2.39: Chemical Structure of Methadone; Figure 2.40: Chemical Structure of Methaqualone; Figure 2.41: Chemical Structure of Phenylcyclidine; Figure 2.42: Chemical Structure of Heroin; Figure 2.43: Chemical Structure of OxyContin; Figure 3.1: Roche Diagnostics Sales Volume, 2008-2010; Figure 3.2: Roche Diagnostics Core Operating Profit, 2008-2010; Figure 3.3: Roche Diagnostics Sales by Global Region, 2010; Figure 3.4: Abbott Laboratories Global Annual Sales, 2007-2010; Figure 3.5: Abbott Laboratories Operating Cash Flow, 2007-2010; Figure 3.6: Abbott Laboratories Net Sales—Diagnostics Division, 2008-2010; Figure 3.7: Siemens Market Share by Geographic Region, 2010; Figure 3.8: Thermo Fisher Revenue Generated by Geographic Region, 2010; Figure 3.9: Beckman Coulter Revenue by Geographic Region, 2009; Figure 3.10: Beckman Coulter Division of Sales, 2009; Figure 3.11: Revenue Generated by OraSure’s Oral Fluid Collection Devices, 2008-2010; Figure 4.1: Global Revenue of Drugs of Abuse Testing Market Forecast, 2007-2015; Figure 4.2: U.S. Revenue of Drugs of Abuse Testing Market Forecast, 2007-2015; Figure 4.3: E.U. Revenue of Drugs of Abuse Testing Market Forecast, 2007-2015; Figure 4.4: Rest of World Revenue of Drugs of Abuse Testing Market Forecast, 2007-2015; Figure 4.5: Global In-Vitro Diagnostic Market Revenue Forecast, 2010-2016; Figure 5.1: Percentage of U.S. Workforce Testing Positive for Drugs of Abuse, 1988-2010; Figure 5.2: Total U.S. Prescription Market Revenue, 2006-2010; Figure 5.3: Total Spending on Prescription Narcotic Analgesics in the U.S., 2006-2010; Figure 5.4: Total Number of Narcotic Analgesic Prescriptions in the U.S., 2006-2010; Figure 5.5: Number of U.S. Prescriptions for Hydrocodone/Acetaminophen, 2006-2010; Figure 5.6: Number of U.S. Prescriptions for Oxycodone/Acetaminophen, 2006-2010; Figure 5.7: Total OxyContin Sales in the U.S., 2006-2010; Figure 5.8: Total Market Share of Prescription Drugs in the Global Market, 2010; Figure 5.9: Projected Annual Peak Sales of Selected Pain Drugs including Opioids; Figure 5.10: Comparison of Total Annual Healthcare Cost of U.S. Opioid Abuser and Demographically-matched Comparison Non-Abuser; Figure 5.11: Direct All-Cause U.S. Healthcare Costs Per Person Associated with Opioid Abuse; Figure 5.12: Anti-Doping Organization Activity Summary as Reported by Code Signatory Anti-Doping Organizations; Figure 5.13: World Anti-Doping Agency Positive Statistics for Urine Testing; Figure 5.14: World Anti-Doping Agency Positive Statistics for EPO Testing; Figure 5.15: World Anti-Doping Agency Positive Statistics for Blood Testing; Figure 5.16: International Funds Received by UNESCO for the International Convention against Doping in Sport Voluntary Fund; Figure 5.17: International Funds Granted By UNESCO for the International Convention against Doping in Sport Voluntary Fund; Figure 7.1: Principles of Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbant Assay (ELISA); Figure 7.2: Enzyme Multiplied Immunoassay Technique (EMIT); Figure 8.1: Market Share Ultra-Large Clinical Chemistry Analyzers U.S.; Figure 8.2: Market Share Ultra-Large Clinical Chemistry Analyzers Non-U.S.; Figure 8.3: Global Sales of Chemical Analyzers from Roche Diagnostics, 2010; Figure 10.1: Fiscal Year 2010 Federal Outlays; Figure 10.2: Rise in the Number of Medicare Beneficiaries, 1966-2010; Figure 10.3: Clinical Laboratory Revenue Payment Breakdown; Figure 10.4: Hospital Insurance Medicare Benefit Payments, 2010; Figure 10.5: Supplementary Medical Insurance Medicare Benefit Payments, 2010; Figure 10.6: Coding Strategy for Qualitative Drug Tests, 2010; Figure 10.7: Coding Strategy for Qualitative Drug Tests, 2011; Figure 10.8: Specific Coding for Qualtitative Drug Tests; Figure 11.1: Prevalence of U.S. Adults in Prison, Jail, or on Parole or Probation, 1980-2009
INDEX OF TABLES: Table 2.1: Primary Site of Action and Neurotransmitters involved in Drugs of Abuse Mechanism of Action; Table 2.2: Level of Drug Abuse in Britain and Average Cost of Agent; Table 2.3: Trends in Prevalence of Various Drug Abuse for 8th-Graders, 10th-Graders and 12th-Graders, 2007-2010; Table 2.4: Trends in Prevalence of Various Drugs for 8th-Graders, 10th-Graders and 12th-Graders, 2003-2006; Table 2.5: Trends in Prevalence of Various Drugs for 8th-Graders, 10th-Graders and 12th-Graders, 1999-2002; Table 2.6: Trends in Prevalence of Various Drugs for 8th-Graders, 10th-Graders and 12th-Graders, 1995-1998; Table 2.7: Short Term Effects of Amphetamine Abuse; Table 2.8: Long Term Effects of Amphetamine Abuse; Table 2.9: Short Term Effects of Barbiturates; Table 2.10: Long Term Effects of Barbiturates; Table 2.11: Barbiturates under International Control; Table 2.12: Common Benzodiazepines on Prescription in the U.S.; Table 2.13: Sedative/Hypnotic Benzodiazepines under International Control; Table 2.14: Anxiolytic Benzodiazepines under International Control; Table 2.15: Short Term Effects of Benzodiazepines; Table 2.16: Long Term Effects of Benzodiazepines; Table 2.17: Short Term Effects of Cannabinoid/Marijuana Use; Table 2.18: Long Term Effects of Cannabinoid/Marijuana use; Table 2.19: Short Term Effects of Cocaine; Table 2.20: Long Term Effects of Cocaine; Table 2.21: Physical Short Term Effects of LSD; Table 2.22: Psychedelic Short Term Effects of LSD; Table 2.23: Adverse Side Effects of LSD; Table 2.24: Long Term Effects of LSD; Table 2.25: Short Term Effects of Methadone; Table 2.26: Short Term Effects of Phenylcyclidine; Table 2.27: Adverse Effects of Phencyclidine; Table 2.28: Long Term Effects of Phencyclidine; Table 2.29: Short Term Effects of Heroin Use; Table 2.30: Long Term Effects of Heroin Use; Table 2.31: Side Effects of OxyContin; Table 2.32: Device Specifications for POCT Breath Alcohol Analysis; Table 2.33: Reasons why U.S. Employers Comply with SAMHSA Guidelines; Table 2.34: “SAMHSA -5”—Basic Drug Categories to be Tested; Table 2.35: Extended Drugs of Abuse Panel; Table 2.36: Accredited Laboratories for SAMHSA Drug Testing; Table 2.37: Comparison of Blood, Urine, Hair, Saliva and Sweat Patch Testing for SAMHSA-5 Test (Marijuana, Cocaine, Amphetamines, Opiates and PCP); Table 2.38: Immunoassay and Gas Chromatography Cut-off levels for SAMHSA-5 Drugs of Abuse; Table 2.39: Detection Periods of SAMHSA-5 Drugs in Blood, Saliva, Sweat, Urine and Hair; Table 2.40: Drugs of Abuse Test; Table 2.41: Commonly Used Product Codes for Drugs of Abuse Tests; Table 3.1: Worldwide Geographic Distribution of IVD Testing, 2010; Table 3.2: Global Clinical Diagnostics Testing Market: Market Drivers Ranked in Order of Impact; Table 3.3: Global Clinical Diagnostics Market: Market Restraints Ranked in Order of Impact; Table 3.4: Key Diagnostic Companies for Drugs of Abuse Testing; Table 4.1: Global Revenue from Drugs of Abuse Testing, 2007-2015; Table 4.2: U.S. Revenue from Drugs of Abuse Testing, 2007-2015; Table 4.3: E.U. Revenue from Drugs of Abuse Testing, 2007-2015; Table 4.4: Rest of World Revenue from Drugs of Abuse Testing, 2007-2015; Table 4.5: Worldwide Distribution of Drug Abuse Testing, 2010; Table 4.6: U.S. Clinical Laboratory Diagnostic Test Retail Value Market Segments, 2008; Table 4.7: Drugs of Abuse Testing Market: Market Drivers Ranked in Order of Impact; Table 4.8: Drugs of Abuse Testing Market: Market Restraints Ranked in Order of Impact; Table 5.1: Drugs of Abuse Tested for and cut-off Values for Employees; Table 5.2: U.S. Workforce Testing Positive for Opiates using Oral Fluid Drug Tests, 2007-2010; Table 5.3: U.S. Workforce Annual Positivity Rates using Urine Drug Tests, 1988-2010; Table 5.4: U.S. Workforce Positivity Rates by Testing Category using Urine Drug Tests, 2006-2010; Table 5.5: U.S. DOA Positivity Rates by Testing Reason using Urine Drug Tests for Federally Mandated, Safety-Sensitive Workforce, 2006-2010; Table 5.6: U.S. DOA Positivity Rates by Testing Reason using Urine Drug Tests for General U.S. Workforce, 2006-2010; Table 5.7: Positivity Rates by Drug Category using Urine Drug Tests for Federally Mandated, Safety-Sensitive Workforce, 2006-2010; Table 5.8: Positivity Rates by Drug Category using Urine Drug Tests for General U.S. Workforce, 2006-2010; Table 5.9: Comparison of Saliva and Urine for Use in Drugs of Abuse Testing; Table 5.10: Main Devices for Saliva Collection on the Market; Table 5.11: Selected Mass Spectrometric Methods used to Quantify Common Drugs in Oral Fluid; Table 5.12: Top Ten Most-Prescribed Drugs in the U.S., 2010; Table 5.13 Top Ten U.S. Prescription drugs by Sales, 2010; Table 5.14: Prescription Dispensing Location by Spending in the U.S., 2006-2010; Table 5.15: Comprehensive Steroid Panel in Drugs of Abuse Testing; Table 5.16: Comprehensive Diuretic Panel in Drugs of Abuse Testing; Table 5.17: Comprehensive Stimulant Panel in Drugs of Abuse Testing; Table 5.18: World Anti-Doping Agency Accredited Laboratories; Table 5.19: Laboratory Criteria Required for World Anti-Doping Agency Accreditation; Table 5.20: Relevant provisions of International Standard for Laboratories, as Applied to the Process and Requirements for WADA Approval; Table 5.21: Anti-Doping Organization Activity Summary as Reported by Code; Signatory Anti-Doping Organizations; Table 5.22: World Anti-Doping Agency Testing Statistics; Table 5.23: UNESCO International Convention against Doping in Sport Voluntary Fund Guidelines; Table 6.1: Major Competitors in the Drugs of Abuse Oral Testing Market Segment; Table 6.2: Major Competitors in the Drugs of Abuse Urine Testing Market Segment; Table 6.3: OraSure Portfolio of Drugs of Abuse Detection Methodologies; Table 6.4: Avitar’s Aimstep ORALINE-4 Drugs of Abuse Cut-off Levels; Table 6.5: Alpha Scientific Designs Drugs of Abuse Testing Cut-Off Level; Table 6.6: Regulatory Clearance of Alpha Scientific Products for Drugs of Abuse Testing; Table 6.7: Available 510K Cleared Analytes for the Vision Integrated Drugs of Abuse Test Cup; Table 6.8: Drugs of Abuse Analytes and Cut-off Level Detected by the Oral-View Saliva Multi-Drugs of Abuse; Table 6.9: Drugs of Abuse Cut-Off Levels for the TOX/See Test by Bio-Rad; Table 7.1: Performance Characteristics required before Implementation of FDA-Approved/Cleared Tests; Table 7.2: Comparison of Monoclonal and Polyclonal Antibody Characteristics; Table 7.3: Samples and Sample Handling Features of Centaur CP; Table 7.4: Large- and Mid-Size Immunochemistry Analyzers; Table 7.5: Small- to Mid-Volume Immunoassay Analyzers; Table 8.1: Overview of the ADVIA 2400; Table 8.2: Sample Handling Capability of the ADVIA 2400; Table 8.3: Microvolume Technology Utilized by the ADVIA 2400; Table 8.4: Reaction Area of the ADVIA 2400; Table 8.5: Reagent Handling Capability of the ADVIA 2400; Table 8.6: Parameter Menu of the ADVIA 2400; Table 8.7: Open System Capability of the ADVIA 2400; Table 8.8: ISE Parameters of the ADVIA 2400; Table 8.9: Calibration Parameters of the ADVIA 2400; Table 8.10: Data Management Capability of the ADVIA 2400; Table 8.11: General Specifications of the ADVIA 2400; Table 8.12: Ultra-Large Clinical Chemistry Analyzers; Table 8.13: Overview of ADVIA 1650; Table 8.14: Sample Handling Capabilities of the ADVIA 1650; Table 8.15: Microvolume Technology Capability of the ADVIA 1650; Table 8.16: Reaction Area Associated with the ADVIA 1650; Table 8.17: Reagent Handling Capability of the ADVIA 1650; Table 8.18: Parameter Menu Associated with the ADVIA 1650; Table 8.19: Open System Capability of the ADVIA 1650; Table 8.20: ISE Parameters of the ADVIA 1650; Table 8.21: Calibration Capabilities of the ADVIA 1650; Table 8.22: Data Management Capabilities of the ADVIA 1650; Table 8.23: General Specifications of the ADVIA 1650; Table 8.24: JEOL Analyzer Comparison; Table 8.25: Large Clinical Chemistry Analyzers; Table 8.26: Mid-Size Clinical Chemistry Analyzers; Table 8.27: Small Clinical Laboratory Analyzers; Table 8.28: Heritability Estimates for Drugs of Abuse; Table 8.29: Genetic Associations Implicated in Drug Addiction Phenotypes; Table 8.30: FDA Recognized Pharmacogenomic Biomarkers in to Identify Responders and Non-responders to Medications; Table 8.31: Common Pharmacotherapies for Drug Dependence and Genetic Variations Implicated in Treatment; Table 9.1: Potential Challenges of Drugs of Abuse Testing Market; Table 9.2: Timeline of Legislative Changes from the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act, 2010-2013; Table 11.1: Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments (CLIA) Testing Categories; Table 11.2: Annual Minimum Drug and Alcohol Random Testing Rates Established within DOT Agencies and the USCG, 2011; Table 11.3: General Responsibilities of Employers under The Department of Transportation’s (DOT) rule, 49 Code of Federal Regulations Part 40; Table 11.4: Actions that Employers must take after an Employee Test Result is Verified Positive; Table 11.5: Drugs of Abuse Cut-off Values (Initial Test) as Specified under Article 15 of the Drug Abuse Urine Testing Act; Table 11.6: Drugs of Abuse Cut-off Values (Confirmatory Test) as Specified under Article 18 of the Drug Abuse Urine Testing Act; Table 11.7: Medical Review Officer Requirements in the Department of Transportation Drug Testing Program; Table 11.8: Medical Review Officer Responsibilities in Drug Testing Programs; Table 11.9: Medical Review Officer Requirements when Reporting a Drug Test Result; Table 11.10: International Olympic Committee, U.S. Olympic Committee and NCAA Banned Substances; Table 11.11: Conditions of Sentences by Adult Probationers by Severity of Offense; Table 11.12: Total Federal Drug Control Budget for Fiscal Years 2002-2011; Table 11.13: Federal Drug Control Budget by Function for Fiscal Years 2009-2011

Drugs of Abuse Testing Markets

Share this report

Other tasks

Research Assistance

Related Markets

General Pharmaceuticals Reports

Free Alert Me service