Drug Screening Market by Technology (Chromatography, Immunoassay, Mass Spectrometry), Drug Type (Amphetamines, Cocaine, Opiates), Sample Type, End User - Global Forecast 2026-2032
Description
The Drug Screening Market was valued at USD 11.36 billion in 2025 and is projected to grow to USD 13.06 billion in 2026, with a CAGR of 15.40%, reaching USD 30.98 billion by 2032.
Establishing context for drug screening decisions through an integrated lens of technology, operations, policy, and stakeholder expectations
The drug screening landscape today sits at the intersection of accelerating technological capability, evolving regulatory expectations, and shifting patterns of substance use that demand both agility and reliability from laboratories and service providers. As decision-makers evaluate their testing portfolios, they must consider advancements in analytical techniques, the operational implications of sample throughput, and the broader policy environment that shapes procurement and reimbursement priorities. Consequently, organizations that align technical selection with operational workflows and regulatory compliance demonstrate clearer pathways to sustained performance and stakeholder trust.
Over the past several years, laboratories have increasingly integrated high-specificity platforms alongside rapid prescreening tools to balance speed and confirmatory assurance. At the same time, the diversification of sample matrices and the rise of decentralized testing models require robust handling protocols and quality controls. Transitional pressures such as supply chain fragility and workforce constraints further complicate operational continuity, prompting leaders to prioritize strategic sourcing, cross-training, and resilient supplier relationships. In sum, this introduction sets the stage for an analysis that links technological choices and end-user requirements to practical operational responses, enabling readers to translate insights into concrete programmatic improvements.
How converging technological advancements, decentralized testing models, and regulatory tightening are redefining operational and investment priorities across drug screening
The drug screening domain is undergoing transformative shifts driven by converging technological innovations and changing service models that reframe how testing is performed, interpreted, and delivered. Increased adoption of advanced mass spectrometry instruments elevates analytical specificity and expands detectable compound panels, while innovations in chromatography and immunoassay technologies continue to push the boundaries of throughput and turnaround time. As a result, laboratories are recalibrating their workflows to integrate rapid presumptive techniques with high-fidelity confirmatory methods, creating hybrid testing ecosystems that optimize both cost and clinical confidence.
Concurrently, decentralized testing modalities, including point-of-collection and home testing approaches, are expanding access and driving new requirements for quality assurance, result interpretation, and data integration. Regulatory scrutiny and accreditation practices are adapting in response, emphasizing method validation, chain-of-custody integrity, and traceability. Moreover, the broader life sciences sector is seeing increased emphasis on automation, data analytics, and interoperability, enabling more scalable operations and enhanced decision support. Together, these trends signal a fundamental reshaping of how stakeholders invest in instrumentation, train personnel, and structure services to meet evolving clinical, forensic, and occupational demands.
Assessing the complex supply chain repercussions and procurement adaptations prompted by United States tariff measures enacted in 2025
United States tariff adjustments in 2025 are exerting multifaceted pressure across the drug screening supply chain, influencing procurement strategies, component sourcing, and long-term capital planning. Tariffs on imported laboratory instruments and assay consumables raise direct acquisition costs and can disrupt standard procurement cycles, prompting laboratories and distributors to reassess vendor portfolios and inventory practices. In response, many organizations are diversifying suppliers, rerouting orders to countries subject to more favorable trade conditions, and increasing forward inventory to hedge against intermittent supply disruptions.
Indirectly, tariff-induced cost inflation accelerates conversations about localization and nearshoring of manufacturing for critical assay reagents and instrument components. Policymakers and industry stakeholders are discussing incentives that could foster domestic manufacturing capacity and supply chain resilience, which in turn shapes procurement criteria and capital allocation. Additionally, tariffs can lengthen lead times for specialized equipment, affecting lab expansion and replacement schedules; as a consequence, stakeholders are prioritizing flexible agreements, longer-term service contracts, and modular instrument configurations that allow incremental upgrades without full replacements. Taken together, these dynamics underscore the need for strategic sourcing, diversified supplier networks, and contingency planning to maintain continuity of testing services under a shifting tariff regime.
Strategic segmentation insights linking analytical methods, sample matrices, drug chemistries, and end-user needs to practical laboratory decisions
Segmentation insight reveals that a nuanced alignment between technology selection and end-user requirements drives practical value across different testing contexts. Technologies such as chromatography, encompassing both gas chromatography and liquid chromatography, provide robust separation capabilities that laboratories rely on for detailed compound resolution, while immunoassays-including chemiluminescent immunoassay, enzyme-linked fluorescent assay, and enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay-offer scalable screening throughput for routine applications. Mass spectrometry platforms, particularly gas chromatography mass spectrometry and liquid chromatography–tandem mass spectrometry, deliver high-specificity confirmatory data that laboratories use for forensic-level certainty and complex casework.
When considering drug types like amphetamines, cocaine, opiates, phencyclidine, and tetrahydrocannabinol, the analytical strategy often calls for a layered approach wherein rapid immunoassay screens are followed by chromatographic separation and mass spectrometric confirmation to resolve false positives and quantify metabolites. The opiates subset-comprising codeine, heroin, and morphine-illustrates the need for targeted protocols that distinguish between closely related molecular structures and their metabolites. Sample type also materially affects workflow design; matrices such as blood, hair, oral fluid, saliva, and urine each present unique extraction challenges, stability considerations, and interpretive frameworks that influence method validation and reporting conventions. Finally, end users including clinical laboratories, drug treatment centers, forensic laboratories, home testing channels, and workplace testing programs require distinct service levels and turnaround expectations, which in turn determine instrument selection, staffing models, and accreditation priorities.
Regional regulatory, operational, and infrastructure distinctions that determine priorities for suppliers, laboratories, and policy interventions across major global regions
Regional dynamics shape how suppliers, laboratories, and policymakers prioritize investment, with each geography presenting distinct regulatory regimes, supply chain footprints, and clinical imperatives. In the Americas, regulatory authorities and large-scale public health initiatives often drive demand for scalable screening programs and centralized laboratory capacity, while procurement practices emphasize cost-effective throughput and payer-aligned validation standards. This context encourages integration of high-throughput immunoassays for routine screening and strategic deployment of chromatographic–mass spectrometric confirmatory platforms for complex casework.
Across Europe, the Middle East and Africa, regulatory heterogeneity and diverse infrastructure maturity require adaptable solutions that balance performance with ease of deployment. Laboratories in these regions often prioritize systems with flexible configuration options, reliable local service support, and validated methods that align with regional accreditation frameworks. In the Asia-Pacific arena, rapid technological uptake, strong manufacturing capabilities, and expanding clinical and forensic testing volumes foster innovation in both instrumentation and reagent availability. Stakeholders there frequently focus on automation, supply chain optimization, and strategic partnerships to support growing decentralized testing networks. Taken together, these regional insights underscore the importance of tailoring product, service, and market engagement strategies to local regulatory, operational, and infrastructural realities.
How technology breadth, interoperability, validation services, and localized support are becoming decisive differentiators among leading solution providers
Leading companies in the drug screening ecosystem are differentiating through a combination of technological breadth, validated method portfolios, and comprehensive service offerings that span instrument supply, assay development, and ongoing technical support. Market participants that invest in cross-platform interoperability and modular instrument architectures enable laboratory managers to optimize workflows by integrating rapid screens with confirmatory platforms, thereby improving throughput without sacrificing analytical rigor. Furthermore, firms that provide robust method validation packages, training programs, and consumable continuity plans reduce adoption barriers and accelerate time-to-use for clinical and forensic laboratories.
Strategic partnerships between instrument manufacturers and reagent developers also prove pivotal, as they streamline verification processes and promote consistency across installations. Companies emphasizing automation, remote diagnostics, and predictive maintenance deliver tangible operational advantages, lowering downtime and enabling predictable budgeting for service costs. In addition, providers that demonstrate responsiveness to regional compliance requirements and offer localized training and after-sales support typically achieve higher customer retention. Together, these differentiators guide procurement committees toward vendors that combine technical performance with lifecycle support and demonstrable quality management systems.
Actionable strategies for leaders to enhance resilience, quality, workforce capacity, and regulatory engagement across drug screening operations
Industry leaders should pursue a strategic set of actions to strengthen resilience, expand capabilities, and safeguard quality across drug screening operations. First, align technology portfolios to end-user needs by pairing rapid immunoassay screening solutions with chromatographic and mass spectrometric confirmatory tools that address the full spectrum of analytical requirements. This alignment reduces decision friction, enhances diagnostic confidence, and supports diverse case types ranging from clinical toxicology to forensic investigations. Second, prioritize supply chain diversification and long-term service agreements to mitigate tariff exposure and component scarcity, while also exploring partnerships with manufacturers that offer modular upgrades rather than wholesale replacements.
Third, invest in workforce development and automation to offset labor shortages and improve consistency in sample processing and data interpretation. Training programs that emphasize method validation, quality control, and cross-platform proficiency produce more adaptable teams. Fourth, proactively engage with regulators and accreditation bodies to influence pragmatic guidelines that balance access with analytical integrity, and to anticipate changes in specimen handling or reporting requirements. Finally, adopt robust data governance and interoperability standards that allow seamless integration of decentralized testing results with laboratory information systems, thereby improving traceability and enabling more informed clinical and occupational decisions.
A mixed-methods research approach combining literature synthesis, expert laboratory input, and protocol audits to ground actionable technical and operational insights
The research methodology behind this analysis blends systematic literature synthesis, expert interviews, and primary laboratory practice reviews to ensure findings are grounded in operational reality and current scientific practice. Secondary sources included peer-reviewed publications, regulatory guidance documents, and professional society recommendations, which provided technical context for assay performance characteristics, validation expectations, and specimen-specific considerations. To complement these sources, subject-matter experts from clinical, forensic, and occupational testing laboratories contributed practical insights on workflow design, method selection, and procurement priorities.
In addition, laboratory audits and protocol reviews furnished real-world evidence about instrument utilization patterns, sample handling challenges, and maintenance needs. Data synthesis focused on identifying recurring operational themes and technology adoption barriers rather than producing quantitative market estimates. Throughout the process, emphasis remained on transparency of methods, reproducibility of technical recommendations, and alignment with established standards for analytical validation and quality management. This mixed-methods approach ensures the analysis reflects both scientific rigor and practical applicability for decision-makers.
Synthesis of technological opportunities and operational imperatives that laboratories must address to maintain quality, continuity, and adaptability in testing services
Concluding the analysis, the drug screening field presents a compelling blend of technological opportunity and operational responsibility. Laboratories and service providers that thoughtfully match analytical capabilities to sample types and end-user expectations will realize improvements in diagnostic confidence, workflow efficiency, and stakeholder satisfaction. At the same time, external pressures such as trade policy shifts, supply chain fragility, and evolving regulatory frameworks necessitate proactive strategies in sourcing, validation, and workforce development to preserve continuity and quality of testing services.
Looking ahead, the most resilient organizations will be those that adopt modular technological strategies, invest in staff competencies, and cultivate supplier relationships that prioritize both performance and continuity. By doing so, they can navigate tariff-induced procurement challenges, expand access through decentralized modalities, and uphold rigorous standards for interpretive accuracy. Taken together, these conclusions encourage leaders to act deliberately, balancing near-term operational imperatives with long-term investments in capability and compliance.
Note: PDF & Excel + Online Access - 1 Year
Establishing context for drug screening decisions through an integrated lens of technology, operations, policy, and stakeholder expectations
The drug screening landscape today sits at the intersection of accelerating technological capability, evolving regulatory expectations, and shifting patterns of substance use that demand both agility and reliability from laboratories and service providers. As decision-makers evaluate their testing portfolios, they must consider advancements in analytical techniques, the operational implications of sample throughput, and the broader policy environment that shapes procurement and reimbursement priorities. Consequently, organizations that align technical selection with operational workflows and regulatory compliance demonstrate clearer pathways to sustained performance and stakeholder trust.
Over the past several years, laboratories have increasingly integrated high-specificity platforms alongside rapid prescreening tools to balance speed and confirmatory assurance. At the same time, the diversification of sample matrices and the rise of decentralized testing models require robust handling protocols and quality controls. Transitional pressures such as supply chain fragility and workforce constraints further complicate operational continuity, prompting leaders to prioritize strategic sourcing, cross-training, and resilient supplier relationships. In sum, this introduction sets the stage for an analysis that links technological choices and end-user requirements to practical operational responses, enabling readers to translate insights into concrete programmatic improvements.
How converging technological advancements, decentralized testing models, and regulatory tightening are redefining operational and investment priorities across drug screening
The drug screening domain is undergoing transformative shifts driven by converging technological innovations and changing service models that reframe how testing is performed, interpreted, and delivered. Increased adoption of advanced mass spectrometry instruments elevates analytical specificity and expands detectable compound panels, while innovations in chromatography and immunoassay technologies continue to push the boundaries of throughput and turnaround time. As a result, laboratories are recalibrating their workflows to integrate rapid presumptive techniques with high-fidelity confirmatory methods, creating hybrid testing ecosystems that optimize both cost and clinical confidence.
Concurrently, decentralized testing modalities, including point-of-collection and home testing approaches, are expanding access and driving new requirements for quality assurance, result interpretation, and data integration. Regulatory scrutiny and accreditation practices are adapting in response, emphasizing method validation, chain-of-custody integrity, and traceability. Moreover, the broader life sciences sector is seeing increased emphasis on automation, data analytics, and interoperability, enabling more scalable operations and enhanced decision support. Together, these trends signal a fundamental reshaping of how stakeholders invest in instrumentation, train personnel, and structure services to meet evolving clinical, forensic, and occupational demands.
Assessing the complex supply chain repercussions and procurement adaptations prompted by United States tariff measures enacted in 2025
United States tariff adjustments in 2025 are exerting multifaceted pressure across the drug screening supply chain, influencing procurement strategies, component sourcing, and long-term capital planning. Tariffs on imported laboratory instruments and assay consumables raise direct acquisition costs and can disrupt standard procurement cycles, prompting laboratories and distributors to reassess vendor portfolios and inventory practices. In response, many organizations are diversifying suppliers, rerouting orders to countries subject to more favorable trade conditions, and increasing forward inventory to hedge against intermittent supply disruptions.
Indirectly, tariff-induced cost inflation accelerates conversations about localization and nearshoring of manufacturing for critical assay reagents and instrument components. Policymakers and industry stakeholders are discussing incentives that could foster domestic manufacturing capacity and supply chain resilience, which in turn shapes procurement criteria and capital allocation. Additionally, tariffs can lengthen lead times for specialized equipment, affecting lab expansion and replacement schedules; as a consequence, stakeholders are prioritizing flexible agreements, longer-term service contracts, and modular instrument configurations that allow incremental upgrades without full replacements. Taken together, these dynamics underscore the need for strategic sourcing, diversified supplier networks, and contingency planning to maintain continuity of testing services under a shifting tariff regime.
Strategic segmentation insights linking analytical methods, sample matrices, drug chemistries, and end-user needs to practical laboratory decisions
Segmentation insight reveals that a nuanced alignment between technology selection and end-user requirements drives practical value across different testing contexts. Technologies such as chromatography, encompassing both gas chromatography and liquid chromatography, provide robust separation capabilities that laboratories rely on for detailed compound resolution, while immunoassays-including chemiluminescent immunoassay, enzyme-linked fluorescent assay, and enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay-offer scalable screening throughput for routine applications. Mass spectrometry platforms, particularly gas chromatography mass spectrometry and liquid chromatography–tandem mass spectrometry, deliver high-specificity confirmatory data that laboratories use for forensic-level certainty and complex casework.
When considering drug types like amphetamines, cocaine, opiates, phencyclidine, and tetrahydrocannabinol, the analytical strategy often calls for a layered approach wherein rapid immunoassay screens are followed by chromatographic separation and mass spectrometric confirmation to resolve false positives and quantify metabolites. The opiates subset-comprising codeine, heroin, and morphine-illustrates the need for targeted protocols that distinguish between closely related molecular structures and their metabolites. Sample type also materially affects workflow design; matrices such as blood, hair, oral fluid, saliva, and urine each present unique extraction challenges, stability considerations, and interpretive frameworks that influence method validation and reporting conventions. Finally, end users including clinical laboratories, drug treatment centers, forensic laboratories, home testing channels, and workplace testing programs require distinct service levels and turnaround expectations, which in turn determine instrument selection, staffing models, and accreditation priorities.
Regional regulatory, operational, and infrastructure distinctions that determine priorities for suppliers, laboratories, and policy interventions across major global regions
Regional dynamics shape how suppliers, laboratories, and policymakers prioritize investment, with each geography presenting distinct regulatory regimes, supply chain footprints, and clinical imperatives. In the Americas, regulatory authorities and large-scale public health initiatives often drive demand for scalable screening programs and centralized laboratory capacity, while procurement practices emphasize cost-effective throughput and payer-aligned validation standards. This context encourages integration of high-throughput immunoassays for routine screening and strategic deployment of chromatographic–mass spectrometric confirmatory platforms for complex casework.
Across Europe, the Middle East and Africa, regulatory heterogeneity and diverse infrastructure maturity require adaptable solutions that balance performance with ease of deployment. Laboratories in these regions often prioritize systems with flexible configuration options, reliable local service support, and validated methods that align with regional accreditation frameworks. In the Asia-Pacific arena, rapid technological uptake, strong manufacturing capabilities, and expanding clinical and forensic testing volumes foster innovation in both instrumentation and reagent availability. Stakeholders there frequently focus on automation, supply chain optimization, and strategic partnerships to support growing decentralized testing networks. Taken together, these regional insights underscore the importance of tailoring product, service, and market engagement strategies to local regulatory, operational, and infrastructural realities.
How technology breadth, interoperability, validation services, and localized support are becoming decisive differentiators among leading solution providers
Leading companies in the drug screening ecosystem are differentiating through a combination of technological breadth, validated method portfolios, and comprehensive service offerings that span instrument supply, assay development, and ongoing technical support. Market participants that invest in cross-platform interoperability and modular instrument architectures enable laboratory managers to optimize workflows by integrating rapid screens with confirmatory platforms, thereby improving throughput without sacrificing analytical rigor. Furthermore, firms that provide robust method validation packages, training programs, and consumable continuity plans reduce adoption barriers and accelerate time-to-use for clinical and forensic laboratories.
Strategic partnerships between instrument manufacturers and reagent developers also prove pivotal, as they streamline verification processes and promote consistency across installations. Companies emphasizing automation, remote diagnostics, and predictive maintenance deliver tangible operational advantages, lowering downtime and enabling predictable budgeting for service costs. In addition, providers that demonstrate responsiveness to regional compliance requirements and offer localized training and after-sales support typically achieve higher customer retention. Together, these differentiators guide procurement committees toward vendors that combine technical performance with lifecycle support and demonstrable quality management systems.
Actionable strategies for leaders to enhance resilience, quality, workforce capacity, and regulatory engagement across drug screening operations
Industry leaders should pursue a strategic set of actions to strengthen resilience, expand capabilities, and safeguard quality across drug screening operations. First, align technology portfolios to end-user needs by pairing rapid immunoassay screening solutions with chromatographic and mass spectrometric confirmatory tools that address the full spectrum of analytical requirements. This alignment reduces decision friction, enhances diagnostic confidence, and supports diverse case types ranging from clinical toxicology to forensic investigations. Second, prioritize supply chain diversification and long-term service agreements to mitigate tariff exposure and component scarcity, while also exploring partnerships with manufacturers that offer modular upgrades rather than wholesale replacements.
Third, invest in workforce development and automation to offset labor shortages and improve consistency in sample processing and data interpretation. Training programs that emphasize method validation, quality control, and cross-platform proficiency produce more adaptable teams. Fourth, proactively engage with regulators and accreditation bodies to influence pragmatic guidelines that balance access with analytical integrity, and to anticipate changes in specimen handling or reporting requirements. Finally, adopt robust data governance and interoperability standards that allow seamless integration of decentralized testing results with laboratory information systems, thereby improving traceability and enabling more informed clinical and occupational decisions.
A mixed-methods research approach combining literature synthesis, expert laboratory input, and protocol audits to ground actionable technical and operational insights
The research methodology behind this analysis blends systematic literature synthesis, expert interviews, and primary laboratory practice reviews to ensure findings are grounded in operational reality and current scientific practice. Secondary sources included peer-reviewed publications, regulatory guidance documents, and professional society recommendations, which provided technical context for assay performance characteristics, validation expectations, and specimen-specific considerations. To complement these sources, subject-matter experts from clinical, forensic, and occupational testing laboratories contributed practical insights on workflow design, method selection, and procurement priorities.
In addition, laboratory audits and protocol reviews furnished real-world evidence about instrument utilization patterns, sample handling challenges, and maintenance needs. Data synthesis focused on identifying recurring operational themes and technology adoption barriers rather than producing quantitative market estimates. Throughout the process, emphasis remained on transparency of methods, reproducibility of technical recommendations, and alignment with established standards for analytical validation and quality management. This mixed-methods approach ensures the analysis reflects both scientific rigor and practical applicability for decision-makers.
Synthesis of technological opportunities and operational imperatives that laboratories must address to maintain quality, continuity, and adaptability in testing services
Concluding the analysis, the drug screening field presents a compelling blend of technological opportunity and operational responsibility. Laboratories and service providers that thoughtfully match analytical capabilities to sample types and end-user expectations will realize improvements in diagnostic confidence, workflow efficiency, and stakeholder satisfaction. At the same time, external pressures such as trade policy shifts, supply chain fragility, and evolving regulatory frameworks necessitate proactive strategies in sourcing, validation, and workforce development to preserve continuity and quality of testing services.
Looking ahead, the most resilient organizations will be those that adopt modular technological strategies, invest in staff competencies, and cultivate supplier relationships that prioritize both performance and continuity. By doing so, they can navigate tariff-induced procurement challenges, expand access through decentralized modalities, and uphold rigorous standards for interpretive accuracy. Taken together, these conclusions encourage leaders to act deliberately, balancing near-term operational imperatives with long-term investments in capability and compliance.
Note: PDF & Excel + Online Access - 1 Year
Table of Contents
189 Pages
- 1. Preface
- 1.1. Objectives of the Study
- 1.2. Market Definition
- 1.3. Market Segmentation & Coverage
- 1.4. Years Considered for the Study
- 1.5. Currency Considered for the Study
- 1.6. Language Considered for the Study
- 1.7. Key Stakeholders
- 2. Research Methodology
- 2.1. Introduction
- 2.2. Research Design
- 2.2.1. Primary Research
- 2.2.2. Secondary Research
- 2.3. Research Framework
- 2.3.1. Qualitative Analysis
- 2.3.2. Quantitative Analysis
- 2.4. Market Size Estimation
- 2.4.1. Top-Down Approach
- 2.4.2. Bottom-Up Approach
- 2.5. Data Triangulation
- 2.6. Research Outcomes
- 2.7. Research Assumptions
- 2.8. Research Limitations
- 3. Executive Summary
- 3.1. Introduction
- 3.2. CXO Perspective
- 3.3. Market Size & Growth Trends
- 3.4. Market Share Analysis, 2025
- 3.5. FPNV Positioning Matrix, 2025
- 3.6. New Revenue Opportunities
- 3.7. Next-Generation Business Models
- 3.8. Industry Roadmap
- 4. Market Overview
- 4.1. Introduction
- 4.2. Industry Ecosystem & Value Chain Analysis
- 4.2.1. Supply-Side Analysis
- 4.2.2. Demand-Side Analysis
- 4.2.3. Stakeholder Analysis
- 4.3. Porter’s Five Forces Analysis
- 4.4. PESTLE Analysis
- 4.5. Market Outlook
- 4.5.1. Near-Term Market Outlook (0–2 Years)
- 4.5.2. Medium-Term Market Outlook (3–5 Years)
- 4.5.3. Long-Term Market Outlook (5–10 Years)
- 4.6. Go-to-Market Strategy
- 5. Market Insights
- 5.1. Consumer Insights & End-User Perspective
- 5.2. Consumer Experience Benchmarking
- 5.3. Opportunity Mapping
- 5.4. Distribution Channel Analysis
- 5.5. Pricing Trend Analysis
- 5.6. Regulatory Compliance & Standards Framework
- 5.7. ESG & Sustainability Analysis
- 5.8. Disruption & Risk Scenarios
- 5.9. Return on Investment & Cost-Benefit Analysis
- 6. Cumulative Impact of United States Tariffs 2025
- 7. Cumulative Impact of Artificial Intelligence 2025
- 8. Drug Screening Market, by Technology
- 8.1. Chromatography
- 8.1.1. Gas Chromatography
- 8.1.2. Liquid Chromatography
- 8.2. Immunoassay
- 8.2.1. Chemiluminescent Immunoassay
- 8.2.2. Enzyme-Linked Fluorescent Assay
- 8.2.3. Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay
- 8.3. Mass Spectrometry
- 8.3.1. Gas Chromatography Mass Spectrometry
- 8.3.2. Liquid Chromatography–Tandem Mass Spectrometry
- 9. Drug Screening Market, by Drug Type
- 9.1. Amphetamines
- 9.2. Cocaine
- 9.3. Opiates
- 9.3.1. Codeine
- 9.3.2. Heroin
- 9.3.3. Morphine
- 9.4. Phencyclidine
- 9.5. Tetrahydrocannabinol
- 10. Drug Screening Market, by Sample Type
- 10.1. Blood
- 10.2. Hair
- 10.3. Oral Fluid
- 10.4. Saliva
- 10.5. Urine
- 11. Drug Screening Market, by End User
- 11.1. Clinical Laboratories
- 11.2. Drug Treatment Centers
- 11.3. Forensic Laboratories
- 11.4. Home Testing
- 11.5. Workplace Testing
- 12. Drug Screening Market, by Region
- 12.1. Americas
- 12.1.1. North America
- 12.1.2. Latin America
- 12.2. Europe, Middle East & Africa
- 12.2.1. Europe
- 12.2.2. Middle East
- 12.2.3. Africa
- 12.3. Asia-Pacific
- 13. Drug Screening Market, by Group
- 13.1. ASEAN
- 13.2. GCC
- 13.3. European Union
- 13.4. BRICS
- 13.5. G7
- 13.6. NATO
- 14. Drug Screening Market, by Country
- 14.1. United States
- 14.2. Canada
- 14.3. Mexico
- 14.4. Brazil
- 14.5. United Kingdom
- 14.6. Germany
- 14.7. France
- 14.8. Russia
- 14.9. Italy
- 14.10. Spain
- 14.11. China
- 14.12. India
- 14.13. Japan
- 14.14. Australia
- 14.15. South Korea
- 15. United States Drug Screening Market
- 16. China Drug Screening Market
- 17. Competitive Landscape
- 17.1. Market Concentration Analysis, 2025
- 17.1.1. Concentration Ratio (CR)
- 17.1.2. Herfindahl Hirschman Index (HHI)
- 17.2. Recent Developments & Impact Analysis, 2025
- 17.3. Product Portfolio Analysis, 2025
- 17.4. Benchmarking Analysis, 2025
- 17.5. Abbott Laboratories
- 17.6. Agilent Technologies, Inc.
- 17.7. Becton, Dickinson and Company
- 17.8. Bio-Rad Laboratories, Inc.
- 17.9. Danaher Corporation
- 17.10. Eurofins Scientific SE
- 17.11. Laboratory Corporation of America Holdings
- 17.12. OraSure Technologies, Inc.
- 17.13. Quest Diagnostics Incorporated
- 17.14. Revvity, Inc.
- 17.15. Roche Holding AG
- 17.16. Siemens Healthineers AG
- 17.17. Sysmex Corporation
- 17.18. Thermo Fisher Scientific Inc.
Pricing
Currency Rates
Questions or Comments?
Our team has the ability to search within reports to verify it suits your needs. We can also help maximize your budget by finding sections of reports you can purchase.
