Novel psychoactive substances (NPS) represent significant analytical and interpretive challenges to forensic and clinical toxicologists. Timely access to case reports and reports of adverse incidents of impairment or toxicity is imperative to clinical diagnosis and treatment, as well as to interpretation of forensic results. Delays in identifying the presence of a novel intoxicating agent have significant consequences for public health and public safety. Adverse effects of intoxications with novel cannabinoids, stimulants, hallucinogens, benzodiazepines and opioids spanning January 2013 through December 2016 as reported in emergency departments, death investigations, impaired driving cases and other forensic contexts are the subject of this review. Discussion of the chemistry, pharmacology and adverse events associated with novel drug classes is summarized and described within. Adverse effects or symptoms associated with ingestion of more than 45 NPS have been abstracted and summarized in tables, including demographics, case history, clinical or behavioral symptoms, autopsy findings and drug confirmations with quantitative results when provided. Based on these findings and gaps in the available data, we provide recommendations for future toxicological testing of these evolving substances. These include development and management of a national monitoring program to provide real-time clinical and toxicological data, confirmed analytically, on emerging drugs and their known toxidromes and side effect profiles. Increased efforts should be made to analytically confirm the agents responsible for clinical intoxications involving adverse events in emergency department admissions or hospitalizations. Evidence-based community preparedness among analytical laboratories gained through active communication and sharing of toxicological findings and trends in NPS is imperative to assist in enabling early detection of new drugs in forensic and clinical populations.

Synthetic cannabinoids (SCs) were initially developed as pharmacological tools to probe the endocannabinoid system and as novel pharmacotherapies, but are now highly abused. This is a serious public health and social problem throughout the world and it is highly challenging to identify which SC was consumed by the drug abusers, a necessary step to tie adverse health effects to the new drug's toxicity. Two intrinsic properties complicate SC identification, their often rapid and extensive metabolism, and their generally high potency relative to the natural psychoactive Δ⁹-tetrahydrocannabinol in cannabis. Additional challenges are the lack of reference standards for the major urinary metabolites needed for forensic verification, and the sometimes differing illicit and licit status and, in some cases, identical metabolites produced by closely related SC pairs, i.e., JWH-018/AM-2201, THJ-018/THJ-2201, and BB-22/MDMB-CHMICA/ADB-CHMICA. We review current SC prevalence, establish the necessity for SC metabolism investigation and contrast the advantages and disadvantages of multiple metabolic approaches. The human hepatocyte incubation model for determining a new SC's metabolism is highly recommended after comparison to human liver microsomes incubation, in silico prediction, rat in vivo, zebrafish, and fungus Cunninghamella elegans models. We evaluate SC metabolic patterns, and devise a practical strategy to select optimal urinary marker metabolites for SCs. New SCs are incubated first with human hepatocytes and major metabolites are then identified by high-resolution mass spectrometry. Although initially difficult to obtain, authentic human urine samples following the specified SC exposure are hydrolyzed and analyzed by high-resolution mass spectrometry to verify identified major metabolites. Since some SCs produce the same major urinary metabolites, documentation of the specific SC consumed may require identification of the SC parent itself in either blood or oral fluid. An encouraging trend is the recent reduction in the number of new SC introduced per year. With global collaboration and communication, we can improve education of the public about the toxicity of new SC and our response to their introduction.

The rising use of designer benzodiazepines (DBZD) is a cat-and-mouse game between organized crime and law enforcement. Non-prohibited benzodiazepines are introduced onto the global drug market and scheduled as rapidly as possible by international authorities. In response, DBZD are continuously modified to avoid legal sanctions and drug seizures and generally to increase the abuse potential of the DBZD. This results in an unpredictable fluctuation between the appearance and disappearance of DBZD in the illicit market. Thirty-one DBZD were considered for review after consulting the international early warning database, but only 3-hydroxyphenazepam, adinazolam, clonazolam, etizolam, deschloroetizolam, diclazepam, flualprazolam, flubromazepam, flubromazolam, meclonazepam, phenazepam and pyrazolam had sufficient data to contribute to this scoping review. A total of 49 reports describing 1 drug offense, 2 self-administration studies, 3 outpatient department admissions, 44 emergency department (ED) admissions, 63 driving under the influence of drugs (DUID) and 141 deaths reported between 2008 and 2021 are included in this study. Etizolam, flualprazolam flubromazolam and phenazepam were implicated in the majority of adverse-events, drug offenses and deaths. However, due to a general lack of knowledge of DBZD pharmacokinetics and toxicity, and due to a lack of validated analytical methods, total cases are much likely higher. Between 2019 and April 2020, DBZD were identified in 48% and 83% of postmortem and DUID cases reported to the UNODC, respectively, with flualprazolam, flubromazolam and etizolam as the most frequently detected substances. DBZD toxicology, public health risks and adverse events are reported.