The use of the new psychoactive substances is continuously growing and the implementation of accurate and sensible analysis in biological matrices of users is relevant and fundamental for clinical and forensic purposes. Two different analytical technologies, high-sensitivity gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS) and ultra-high-performance liquid chromatography-high-resolution mass spectrometry (UHPLC-HRMS) were used for a screening analysis of classic drugs and new psychoactive substances and their metabolites in urine of formed heroin addicts under methadone maintenance therapy. Sample preparation involved a liquid-liquid extraction. The UHPLC-HRMS method included Accucore™ phenyl Hexyl (100 × 2.1 mm, 2.6 μm, Thermo, USA) column with a gradient mobile phase consisting of mobile phase A (ammonium formate 2 mM in water, 0.1% formic acid) and mobile phase B (ammonium formate 2 mM in methanol/acetonitrile 50:50 (v/v), 0.1% formic acid) and a full-scan data-dependent MS2 (ddMS2) mode for substances identification (mass range 100–1000 m/z). The GC-MS method employed an ultra-Inert Intuvo GC column (HP-5MS UI, 30 m, 250 µm i.d, film thickness 0.25 µm; Agilent Technologies, Santa Clara, CA, USA) and electron-impact (EI) mass spectra were recorded in total ion monitoring mode (scan range 40–550 m/z). Urine samples from 296 patients with a history of opioid use disorder were examined. Around 80 different psychoactive substances and/or metabolites were identified, being methadone and metabolites the most prevalent ones. The possibility to screen for a huge number of psychotropic substances can be useful in suspected drug related fatalities or acute intoxication/exposure occurring in emergency departments and drug addiction services.

Background: In clinical practice, there is the need to have clinical and biological markers to identify induced depression. The objective was to investigate clinical, biological and genetic differences between Primary Major Depression (Primary MD) and Alcohol Induced MD (AI-MD). Methods: Patients, of both genders, were recruited from psychiatric hospitalisation units. The PRISM instrument was used to establish the diagnoses. Data on socio-demographic/family history, clinical scales for depression, anxiety, personality and stressful life events were recorded. A blood test was performed analysing biochemical parameters and a Genome Wide Association Study (GWAS) to identify genetic markers associated with AI-MD. Results: A total of 80 patients were included (47 Primary MD and 33 AI-MD). The AI-MD group presented more medical comorbidities and less family history of depression. There were differences in traumatic life events, with higher scores in the AI-MD (14.21 ± 11.35 vs. 9.30 ± 7.38; p = 0.021). DSM-5 criteria were different between groups with higher prevalence of weight changes and less anhedonia, difficulties in concentration and suicidal thoughts in the AI-MD. None of the genetic variants reached significance beyond multiple testing thresholds; however, some suggestive variants were observed. Conclusions: This study has found clinical and biological features that may help physicians to identify AI-MD and improve its therapeutic approach.

Background: Cocaine use is a growing global health problem and patients with cocaine use disorders (CUD) present several complications, including high rates of major depression. These subjects present two types of major depressive disorder (MDD): primary major depressive disorder (P-MDD) and cocaine-induced major depressive disorder (CI-MDD). To improve treatment, it is necessary to distinguish between both types. The aim of this study was to assess the differences in depressive symptomatology criteria (P-MDD vs CI-MDD) in CUD patients. Methods: Secondary data analysis was carried out with a cross-sectional sample of 160 patients presenting CUD and MDD. Clinical assessment was performed using the Psychiatric Research Interview for Substance and Mental Disorders (PRISM). A differential diagnosis was obtained between P-MDD and CI-MDD. Results: Men represented 80% of the sample, the mean age was 38.61 years, and 64.5% had elementary studies. CI-MDD diagnosis (61.3%) was more frequent than P-MDD (38.7%). There was a younger age of CUD onset in CI-MDD patients. In addition, 79.4% of the patients had another substance use disorder diagnosis. The criterion “Changes in weight or appetite” was more prevalent (57.1%) in P-MDD group. Conclusions: We found differences in the criterion “Changes in weight or appetite”. Further research is needed in this field to establish a differential diagnosis and thus provide better treatment for CUD patients.

Introduction: New synthetic opioids (NSO), a class of new psychoactive substances (NPS), have recently emerged and pose an upcoming global public health challenge. The effects produced by NSO are similar to those from morphine, but they present greater pharmacological potency and abuse potential. Due to the increasing number of fatal overdoses and seizures in which NSO have been detected as heroin substitutes or adulterants, individuals with Opioid Use Disorder (OUD) represent a vulnerable population. The aim of our study was to describe and characterize from a gender perspective a Spanish cohort of potential conscious or unconscious NSO users. Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted in a cohort of OUD participants under treatment in addiction care services in Barcelona and Badalona, Spain. Clinical evaluation was performed through an ad hoc survey, a scale to evaluate reasons to use an opioid without prescription (range 0–4) and the Wellbeing Index (WHO-5) (range 0–100). Objective consumption of NSO was assessed by urinalysis carried out by two validated methods: high-sensitivity gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (MS) and ultra-high-performance liquid chromatography-high-resolution MS. Results: A total of 154 participants with OUD were enrolled. They were mainly men (72.7%), mean age 47.8 years. Methadone was the predominant medication for opioid agonist treatment (mean dose 61.25 mg/day). A total of 32 (20.8%) participants reported having consumed some opioid to become “high” in the previous 3 months. The principal reasons for consuming illicit opioids were Replacing other drugs (mean 2.03) and Availability (mean 1.62), although Low price, was more highly valued by men (p = 0.045) and Shorter effect duration, most highly rated by women (p = <0.001). In the WHO-5, the mean score was 55 (SD = 30.1) without differences by gender. Fentanyl and derivatives or/and metabolites were detected in 7 (6.1%) participants, but illicit/non-prescribed NSOs were found in 5 out of 114 patients (4.4%), and other non-fentanyl opioids in 36 participants (26 men and 10 women). Conclusion: A non-negligible consumption of NSO-fentanyl’s (positive detection in 6.1% of biological samples) was detected. The reasons for using these substances and also the well-being differed between the genders. There is therefore both voluntary and involuntary NSO consumption in our country which highlights the importance of approaching this potential public health problem.

(1) Background: Since the beginning of the 21st century, the large number and wide chemical variety of new psychoactive substances (NPS) that enter the market every year has become a public health problem. Given the rapidity with which the drug market is changing, many NPS are not clinically investigated and their effects and health risks are unknown. Drug testing is a very useful tool for this purpose, but, unfortunately, it is not very widespread in individuals with opioid-use disorder under detoxification treatment. The aim of this study is to investigate the use of illicit drugs and NPS in opioid-use disorder (OUD) patients on opioid agonist treatment. (2) Methods: A multicenter, descriptive, cross-sectional study was conducted at two addiction care services in Barcelona and Badalona, Spain. Urine samples were collected from OUD individuals attending these two centers, who anonymously donated a urine sample at the time of a periodical visit. Samples were analyzed by high-sensitivity gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS) and ultra-high-performance liquid chromatography-high –resolution mass spectrometry (UHPLC-HRMS). (3) Results: Out of the 187 collected and analyzed urine samples, 27.3% were positive for any type of NPS and 8.6% were positive for new synthetic opioids, including fentanyl and its derivatives (NSO). Other frequently detected substances were benzodiazepines in 46.0% of samples, antipsychotics in 27.8% of samples, or cocaine and cannabis in 23.5% of samples. (4) Conclusion: A wide number of NPS, including NSO, have been detected in urine samples from an OUD population. A lack of NPS detection in standard drug screening among drug users can hide the identification of a potential public health problem.

Background: Integrating peer specialists—individuals with direct lived experience of mental health challenges and navigating recovery —into the facilitation of qualitative research addresses growing calls for more inclusive and community-engaged methodologies. While peers have traditionally contributed to participant recruitment and retention, their involvement in qualitative data collection, particularly as co-facilitators of focus groups, remains under-documented. Methods: This manuscript presents two in-depth case studies where focus groups were co-facilitated by academic researchers and peers: (1) a study of best practices in training veterans as peer supporters for psychedelic-assisted therapy, and (2) a study exploring mental health and well-being among peer support specialists working with individuals who use drugs. Reflections from both peer and investigator co-facilitators are integrated to illuminate the practical dynamics and perceived value of this model. Results: Co-facilitation supported complementary moderator roles—Conductor and Harmonizer—by integrating structured academic oversight with peers’ rapport-building skills and experiential knowledge. This configuration deepened participant engagement, supported trauma-informed group processes, and contributed to rich qualitative data. At the same time, challenges around role negotiation, information flow, and hierarchical dynamics underscored the need for ongoing communication and reflexive debriefing. The analysis also attends to how peer and academic facilitators’ positionalities shaped group dynamics and the meanings participants attached to their contributions. Notably, both peers and academic investigators perceived improvements in group rapport and the authenticity of participants’ narratives. Conclusions: Co-facilitation of focus groups by academic researchers and peers with lived experience holds significant promise for enriching qualitative inquiry. This model supports participant-centered research, and thoughtful planning around moderator roles and power-sharing is essential to maximize benefits.