The TIAFT Continuing Education Committee is excited to present its inaugural webinar. This is an ongoing initiative that will be offered as an alternative educational opportunity and allows us to gather together virtually.

On July 13th 2021 via the ZOOM platform, we are very fortunate to have 5 world-class presenters addressing the topics of Therapeutic use of Psychedelic Drugs and Minimum Requirements of Drug Identification. It promises to be an informative and very interesting day.

Registration fees

  • Standard, Honorary, and Retired Members: $5
  • DCF Members: FREE
  • Non-Members: $50

Register here

Program

All times are in Eastern Daylight Time (EDT).

Registered attendees will be provided meeting details within 24 hours of the start of the event.

Session 1 - Therapeutic use of Psychedelic Drugs

  • 8:00-8:10 - Dr Marc LeBeau (Virginia, USA)
    Introduction and Welcome from the TIAFT President
  • 8:10-10:00 - Prof. Dr. Med. Torsten Passie (Hanover, Germany)
    The use of LSD, Psilocybin and MDMA in the Treatment of Psychiatric and Neurological Disorders

    Psycholytic therapy (a term meaning “soul-loosening”, coined 1960 by psychiatrist Ronald Sandison) using LSD started in Europe after the publication of Stoll’s first clinical study of low-dose LSD published in 1947. Psycholytic therapists were eager to activate unconscious conflicts, memories, and archetypes to further therapeutic abreactions and “working through” (as conceptualized by psychoanalytic/psychodynamic therapy). During the 1950s and 1960s, 18 major European universities provided or researched “psycholytic therapy” and around 500 publications dealt with psycholytic therapy in the 1955 to 1975 timeframe. Psychedelic therapy, i.e. the use of one high-dose session to induce a personality-transforming transcendental experience, was established in Canada and the US, but never used in Europe.

    After the strict legislation against LSD and psilocybin, mainly initiated by the US in the late 1960s, most treatments were stopped and just a few experts left.

    Since the introduction of the very benign psychedelic methylenedioxymethamphetamine (MDMA), psycholytic therapy was on the rise again in the early 1980s, but it took more than 25 years to conduct the appropriate studies needed to establish the efficacy of these treatment models.

    However, since 2010 multiple methodologically sound studies have been published about the therapeutic use of psilocybin, LSD and MDMA in the treatment of serious psychiatric disorders as Posttraumatic Stress Disorder, anxiety, depression and the addictions.

    This lecture will provide an overview of the history and features of psycholytic and psychedelic therapy, including their psychological neurobiological mechanisms. It will also provide an update of the recent developments, which have led to diverse Phase 2 and Phase 3 trials to establish these treatments.

    After having attended this presentation, one will

    a) know about the long history of the use of substance-assisted psychotherapies in psychiatry.

    b) Know about the three established methods of substance-assisted psychotherapy, their practices and their psychological and neurobiological mechanisms.

    c) know about the recent developments in the field of substance-assisted psychotherapies, including the ongoing phase 2 and phase 3 trials.

  • 10:00-11:00 - Dr Felix Müller (Basel, Switzerland)
    Advances and Challenges in Neuroimaging Studies on the Effects of Serotonergic Hallucinogens

    The effects of hallucinogenic drugs on the human brain have been studied since the earliest days of neuroimaging in the 1990s. However, approaches are often hard to compare and results are heterogeneous. This presentation summarizes studies which have investigated the effects of hallucinogens on the resting brain, with a special emphasis on replicability and limitations. It will also be discussed how these findings might be related to the mechanism of action of hallucinogenic drugs.

    After having attended this presentation, one will

    a) gain an overview about the current state of neuroimaging of serotonergic hallucinogens

    b) have an understanding how neuroimaging findings might relate to acute drug effects

    c) know the most important limitations of this field

Session 2 - Minimum Requirements for Drug Identification

  • 15:00-16:00 - Prof. Dr. Gérard Hopfgartner (Geneva, Switzerland)
    From Colorimetry to Mass Spectrometry for QUAL/QUANT Analysis

    Depending on the fit of purpose, identification and quantification of drugs and metabolites in biological matrices require different analytical approaches. Detection can be as simple as colorimetry up to more complex techniques such as multidimensional mass spectrometry.

    After having attended this presentation, one will

    a) Get a better picture of the hyphenation of separation sciences (GC, LC, SFC) to single and tandem mass spectrometry with different ionization. Applications to the analysis of polar and apolar analytes.

    b) Knowledgeable about strengths and limitations of low resolution versus high resolution mass spectrometry for qualitative and quantitative analysis

    c) Be aware of some of the latest LC-MS(/MS) developments including data independent acquisition, ion mobility, electron induced dissociation and photodissociation.

  • 16:00-17:00 - Dr Marc LeBeau (Quantico, USA)
    Identification of Drugs and Metabolites in Forensic Toxicology: A Point-Based Approach

    Traditionally, forensic toxicologists have “screened” biological specimens for the presence of individual drugs, drug classes, or their metabolites. The purpose of these screens is to rule out the presence of analytes that are detected by these techniques or to indicate when further testing is warranted. The presence of analytes that screen positive is then “confirmed” by a second analytical technique that is based upon one or more different chemical principles than the screening technique. In general, it has been accepted that following this approach you have established adequate proof to declare the analyte as “identified” in the biological specimen. However, there are a wide array of techniques and instrumentation in forensic toxicology laboratories and each technique offers a range of identification potential.

    Other fields of analytical chemistry have attempted to make the identification process more objective through a point-based system. In the United States, a current National Standard is under development to do the same. The document sets minimum criteria – based on a point system – for analyte identification during forensic toxicology testing. It allows laboratories to evaluate each analytical technique to determine if their testing regimen is sufficient to meet or exceed a minimum point threshold for identification. This talk will discuss the development of the point-based system for forensic toxicology and demonstrate how it may be used in a laboratory setting.

    After having attended this presentation, one will

    a) Understand the standards development process and how it is being used to develop an American National Standard for analyte identifications in forensic toxicology

    b) Learn the proposed point system for analyte identification

    c) Apply the point system to your laboratory’s different analytical schemes towards analyte identification

  • 17:00-18:00 - Dr Frank Peters (Jena, Germany)
    Method Validation – From Plan to Practice

    Careful planning and performance of validation experiments are the key to successful method validation. Generic experimental designs help streamlining the validation process, but certain situations may require specific validation solutions.

    After having attended this presentation, one will

    a) know which general information needs to be included in a validation plan and which specific parameters and processes need to be defined.

    b) understand how the sequence of validation experiments may help identifying performance problems early in the validation study and how experimental designs help streamlining the validation process.

    c) understand how specific analytical problems (e. g. analyte endogenously present in matrix, unique sample matrix) may be addressed by modified/alternative validation approaches.