How It's Done-Forensic Toxicology Studies

How The Evidence Is Gathered

Specimens sent for toxicology [1-8] testing is generally gathered by the forensic pathologist [9-12] (who may likewise be a named “medical examiner” or "coroner" in a few purviews) or mortuary technician during a post-mortem examination [13-16]. Specimens must be legitimately distinguished, named and fixed when practicable after gathering. All Specimens relating to a case must be gathered and sacked independently in carefully designed holders. Remarkable numbered seals are utilized to track all confirmation for every case. Like whatever other cases, the chain of care must be safe guarded at all times, from the mortuary through the research centre testing, reporting and capacity, for court purposes. In the event that the coherence of confirmation is traded off, it can bring about the case being released in court.

Specimen Collection

Table 1 gives a preview of the sorts of tests generally asked for when examining diverse behavior of death, in spite of the fact that there might be special case needs that must be tended to for a few examinations. For instance, presentation to unpredictable substances requires a specimen of the liquid in the lung. Skeletal remains can be helpful to decide earlier introduction to drugs and different substances. In these cases hair can likewise be tested.

Blood, urine, liver

Blood is regularly the example of decision for identifying, evaluating and deciphering drugs and other toxicant focuses [17-20]. Convergences of medications and different toxicants in blood might be valuable for setting up late medication ingestion and to decide the impact of a medication on the expired at the season of death, or at the time the blood was taken. This can convolute the examination when somebody has been taking physician endorsed drugs for quite a while. For cases including doctor's facility treatment before death, blood tests taken not long after confirmation and quickly before death, ought to likewise be explored especially when harming is suspected before induction into healing centre. Any treatment given can change the aftereffects of toxicology tests or be useful in the examination [21-24].

Posthumous blood presents issues because of frequently variable condition and changes to focuses starting with one place then onto the next in the body after death. The level of disintegration can likewise meddle with testing as these examples can be hard to examine.

Urine is the most widely recognized example utilized for medication testing as a part of the work environment; however it is not generally accessible for after death testing [25-29]. Urine testing results don't straightforwardly connect to medication influences at the season of test accumulation due to the time it takes the body to dispense with these medications or their metabolites (the body's breakdown items) in the urine. Its helpfulness lies in the way that the nearness of a substance in the urine is an indication that the substance had been in the blood at a prior time (typically inside a couple days) and had been to some degree prepared (distinguishing these metabolites gives evidence that the medication had been ingested). At the point when urine is accessible, tests are additionally directed for nearness of medications of misuse. Maybe contingent upon the case and the aftereffects of beginning testing different tissues ought to be broke down, perhaps including stomach substance, liver and so on (Table 1).

Table 1: Recommended specimens collected in post-mortem cases

The liver is an essential strong tissue for use in after death toxicology since it is the place the body metabolizes most medications and toxicants [30]. Numerous medications get to be amassed in the liver and can be found notwithstanding when there are no levels in the blood. In this last circumstance, translation of discoveries is unpredictable.

Vitreous Humour is the unmistakable, gel-like substance that fills the eye. It can be a helpful liquid to screen for a scope of medications. Vitreous cleverness is regularly investigated for blood liquor focuses. This is specifically compelling in engine vehicle injury, working environment mischances, suicides and man’s laughter. Vitreous amusingness liquor fixations are somewhat higher than blood (around 20% by and large), accepting there has been no corruption [31]. Elucidation of other toxicological discoveries in vitreous funniness is to some degree more intricate.

Other Samples Less Commonly Used For Post-Mortem Toxicology

Stomach contents

Since medications and toxic substances can frequently be ingested, stomach substance can give imperative investigative pieces of information [32-35]. For a situation of potential overdose or intense harming, high convergences of medications or poisons might be distinguished, contingent upon the amount of time passed amongst ingestion and demise. By and large of intense harming, undisclosed cases or tablets might be found, permitting moderately straightforward medication or toxic substance ID. The aggregate sum of a medication or toxic substance present in the stomach is more essential than its fixation since it has not been handled by the body yet.

Bone and bone marrow

Bone, specifically bone marrow [36-40], can be utilized for testing when essential, yet the accessibility and state of bones in skeletal remains may confine their value. There are no information to recommend that bones from one a player in the body are superior to anything others for toxicology tests. Be that as it may, it is constantly less demanding to concentrate tests from bigger bones. Translation of these discoveries is regularly troublesome when helping with a demise examination, on the grounds that the time that these poisons were stored in the bones can't be resolved with sensible conviction.

Hair and nails

Hair examples, generally taken from the back of the head, can be utilized to test for introduction to substantial metals and medications over a time of weeks to months. Hair is prevalently used to test for medications, for example, amphetamines [41], cocaine [42], weed (THC) and heroin, and all the more as of late tests have been made to figure out whether the expired was drinking intensely in the most recent couple of months before death. Drug examination should likewise be possible on finger-and toenails with a specific end goal to give a much more potential window of presentation than hair. Notwithstanding, moderately little is thought about how the nails procedure poisons, so understanding of results is more troublesome. Hair is liable to outside sullying issues that can moderate its quality, so exceptional example arrangements in the lab might be required for a given case.

Testing

The testing of natural liquids and/or tissues for medications and different substances is a perplexing procedure requiring refined instrumentation and uncommonly prepared experts. In the run of the mill post-mortem examination [43,44], liquids and tissue tests are gathered particularly for toxicology testing. The sorts of tests gathered from the body, and the testing focuses in these natural liquids and tissues, are dictated by circumstances of the case and the state of the body.

Once at the research centre, a progression of tests will be led, for the most part on blood, for a huge scope of over-the-counter, remedy and unlawful medications and in addition liquor and different toxicants [45-48]; e.g., metals, inhalants, natural (pesticides, bug sprays), carbon monoxide, cyanide and numerous other conceivable poisons relying upon investigative signs or particular tests asked. Table 2 and the "Methodical Toxicological Analysis" segment (both gave underneath) spell out the numerous materials the medicinal inspector may collect from a body amid examination, and how they can be immediately screened in "really obscure" cases. The natural cases from post-mortem examinations are expected to bolster both "basic" lab tests and explore some certain potential reasons for death.

Table 2: Drugs included in routine post-mortem toxicology

The organic cases from examinations are expected to bolster both "basic" lab tests and explore some particular potential reasons for death.

Routine testing, or testing without particular guidelines to search for a specific substance, will for the most part incorporate the medications appeared beneath in Table 3, however not all medications. The rundown of the most widely recognized medications distinguished is incorporated into a standard connection to all toxicology reports.

Table 3: Drugs not routinely included in death investigation toxicology screens

Poison

Death by toxic substance [49,50] can happen in an assortment of courses, for instance through recreational introduction by breathing in solvents, for example, butane lighter liquid or energizes, ingesting plant-inferred substances like Angel's Trumpet, unplanned presentation to a substance utilized as a part of the working environment or even accidently created in the home (like carbon monoxide), or self-destructive ingestion of a toxic substance, for example, strychnine, pesticides, cyanide, and so on [51-55]. These all require specific tests and the research center is cautioned to their conceivable utilization or inclusion in the passing when solicitations for toxicology testing are submitted [56-60].

Who directs the examination?

Researchers/toxicologists investigate the examples submitted and afterward give translation of the noteworthiness of the outcomes in view of data got about the case. These investigators may work in wrongdoing research facilities, restorative analyst’s workplaces, government wellbeing labs or even autonomous suppliers, contingent upon the criminal equity structure in a given group.

Accreditation for people in the United States and Canada as a legal toxicology expert or diplomate is accessible through the American Board of Forensic Toxicology (ABFT) [61-66]. Affirmation is based upon the hopeful's close to home and expert record of instruction and preparing, background, accomplishment and a formal examination. In Europe, people may turn out to be a piece of the European Register of Toxicologists through EuroTox, through a comparable procedure. In Japan, the Japanese Society of Toxicology (JSOT) has a diplomate procedure. Global exchange and cooperation in toxicology is far reaching.

How AndWhere The Analysis Is Performed

Forensic toxicologists utilize countless procedures to decide the medications or toxic substances pertinent to a case examination; the limit of a research center to lead routine toxicological investigation will shift subordinate upon hardware, specialized capacity and examiner experience. Whenever required, there are strength toxicology labs that can test for essentially any potential poison or metabolite in practically every sort of after death test.
A research facility ought to be licensed to play out the expository work and should be liable to standard reviews by endorsed accreditation staff. Confirmation for legal toxicology labs in the United States and Canada is likewise accessible through ABFT, and is intentional and extra to accreditation [67,68]. All research centre tests must be approved, completely archived and fit for reason. This will guarantee that lab can replicate precise and dependable results for medico lawful examinations. All lab tests ought to fit in with standard working techniques, results are affirmed to meet benchmarks, and reported results are companion looked into by a second toxicologist before being discharged. Truth be told, the American toxicology group as of late finished a two-year push to enhance these benchmarks, under the name of "Logical Working Group on Toxicology" (SWGTOX), keeping in mind the end goal to meet more stringent legitimate and exploratory difficulties.

Immunoassays

Most normally utilized medication screening tests include immunoassay systems [69-75]. Immunoassays are research centre tests those utilization antibodies to identify a response with particular substances. Immunoassay screening tests are intended to distinguish whether an example is sure or negative for the focused on medication. Four elucidations of a screening drug test are conceivable [76-80].

A genuine positive result happens when the test accurately recognizes the nearness of a medication

A false-positive result is one where the test erroneously recognizes the nearness of a medication where no medication is available.

A genuine negative result happens when the test effectively confirms the nonappearance of a medication.

A false-negative result is one where the test neglects to recognize the nearness of a medication when it is available.

For those examples that give positive screening results, affirmation tests ought to be performed, ideally utilizing mass spectrometry (MS) location. Particular immunoassay tests are accessible for some medication classes including every one of the medications of misuse and additionally a scope of novel mixes, for example, buprenorphine, "Shower Salts" and "Flavour" and other new engineered drugs.

Chromatographic methods

Chromatographic recognition is an expository system utilized for partition of mixes/medications and is much of the time in view of either elite fluid chromatography (HPLC) or gas chromatography (GC) combined with MS [81-86]. This is the complete method utilized as a part of toxicology to set up verification of structure of obscure substances. With the broad advancement of business MS innovation at a moderate cost, GC/MS and HPLC-MS (ordinarily known as LC/MS) have turned out to be progressively prominent apparatuses in the present day toxicology research facility [87-90].

Methodical toxicological investigation

The typical practice in toxicological examination starts with the preparatory distinguishing cases of liquor and screening of a wide range of acidic, unbiased and essential natural medications or toxic substances [91-94]. On the off chance that a poison is distinguished, corroborative and if essential, quantitative testing must be performed. Quantitative testing decides the amount of the substance is included. By and large, a positive ID is accomplished utilizing no less than two autonomous examinations and ideally utilizing diverse testing strategies. For instance, utilizing an immunoassay for introductory testing and afterward GC-MS or LC-MS to affirm results would suffice. A chromatographic affirmation test could likewise decide evaluation, improving the testing procedure.

Conclusion

The fundamental utilization of forensic Toxicology studies is for motivations behind law requirement to examine violations, for example, homicide, robbery, or extortion [95-100]. Forensic scientists are likewise required in examining mishaps, for example, prepare or plane collides with build-up on the off chance that they were incidental or an aftereffect of injustice. The systems created by measurable science are additionally utilized by the armed force to break down the likelihood of the nearness of synthetic weapons, high explosives or to test for charge stabilizers. The Daubert choice maintained that there are sure critical contrasts between the mission for truth in the research centre and the journey for truth in the court. Exploratory conclusions are not elite and are liable to never-ending correction. Then again, it is the obligation of the legal to determine question at long last and rapidly. In criminal cases charged gatherings are indicted on the premise of confirmation from measurable science specialists, hence much relies on the dependability of cases introduced under the steady gaze of Court of Law. It is exceptionally prescribed that law implementation authorities and the individuals from society they serve must guarantee that legal systems are solid. In this way before criminological cases is conceded in the Court, the procedures to discover that confirmation must be legitimately contemplated and their exactness must be checked. Experimental cases are important to a fruitful criminal indictment, as well as significant according to numerous members of the jury.

References

1. Officioso A, et al. Nutritional Aspects of Food Toxicology: Mercury Toxicity and Protective Effects of Olive Oil Hydroxytyrosol. J Nutr Food Sci. 2016;6:539.
2. Wikoff DS, et al. The Role of Systematic Review in the Practice of Toxicology and Risk Assessment–An Appreciation for the Primary Tool in Evidence-Based Practice. Toxicol open access. 2016;2:110.
3. Durisova M. Mathematical Modeling Formation of 7-hydroxymethotrexate from Methotrexate in Patients Undergoing Treatment for Psoriasis with Methotrexate. J Drug Metab Toxicol. 2016;7:205.
4. Trinh KX, et al. A Novel Anti-tumor Protein from CalloselasmaRhodostoma Venom in Vietnam. Anat Physiol. 2016;6:213.
5. Dar SA, et al. An Introduction about Genotoxicology Methods as Tools for Monitoring Aquatic Ecosystem: Present Status and Future Perspectives. Fish Aquac J. 2016;7:158.
6. Kendall RJ. Wildlife Toxicology: Where We Have Been and Where We Are Going. J Environ Anal Toxicol. 2016;6:348.
7. Saganuwan AS. Toxicology: The Basis for Development of Antidotes. Toxicol open access. 2015;1:e101. 
8. Agyare E, et al. Delivery of Polymeric Nanoparticles to Target Vascular Diseases. J Biomol Res Ther.2014;S1:001.
9. Bruce-Chwatt RM. Fitness to Transfer and/or Deport to a Foreign Country, Political and Other Pressures on the FME and The Ethical Considerations of Such Transfers. J Forensic Res. 2010;1:110.
10. McIntyre IM, et al. Postmortem Drug Redistribution. J Forensic Res. 2012;3:e108.
11. Bruce-Chwatt RM. Grevious Bodily Harm by Deliberate and Reckless Infection with HIV by Unprotected Hetero-Sexual Intercourse. J Forensic Res. 2012;3:142.
12. Bruce-Chwatt RM. Open Tuberculosis in Police Custody Suites, the Risks to those Working there and Current United Kingdom Public Health Legislation. J Forensic Res. 2011;2:129.
13. McIntyre IM, et al. Postmortem Methamphetamine Distribution. J Forensic Res. 2011;2:122. 
14. Jiang K, et al. Drusen and Proinflammatory Mediators in the Post-Mortem Human Eye. J Clinic Experiment Ophthalmol. 2012;3:208.
15. Baniak N, et al. Vitreous Humor: A Short Review on Post-mortem Applications. J Clin ExpPathol. 2015;5:199.
16. Teske K, et al. Modulation of Transcription Mediated by the Vitamin D Receptor and the Peroxisome Proliferator-Activated Receptor d in the Presence of GW0742 Analogs. J Biomol Res Ther. 2014;3:111.
17. Saith SE, et al. All-cause Mortality of High-normal Random Blood Glucose using Basic Demographics. J Cardiovasc Dis Diagn.2016;4:248.
18. Oladosu TO, et al. CD4 Profile and Relationship with Bacterial Isolates from the Blood of HIV-1 Patients attending art Clinic at a Tertiary Healthcare Institution in Southwest, Nigeria. HIV Curr Res. 2016;1:109.
19. Pezzella F. Cancer and Blood Vessels: A Complex Relationship. J Lung Cancer Diagn Treat. 2016;1:104.
20. Kovacs L, et al. The Critical Role of Calpain in Cell Proliferations. J Biomol Res Ther. 2014;3:112.
21. Bassett RA. Finger Pain out of Proportion to Exam: A Case of Occult Hydrofluoric Acid Toxicity. Med chem. 2015;5:152-153.
22. Yadav S, et al. MicroRNAs are Emerging as Most Potential Molecular Biomarkers. Biochem Anal Biochem. 2015;4:191.
23. Marzan LW, et al. Molecular Investigation on Clinopathological, Genetic and Biochemical Changes in Channapunctata Infected with Internal Parasites and Subjected to Metals Pollution in Chittagong, Bangladesh. J Biomol Res Ther. 2014;3:113.
24. Olalekan O, et al. NMDA R/VDR in Fish Melanocytes; Receptor Targeted Therapeutic Model and Mechanism in Parkinson's disease. J Biomol Res Ther. 2014;3:114.
25. Zhang X, et al. Nuclear Receptor FXR: A Potential Therapeutic Target for the Treatment of Diseases with Impaired Urine Concentration . J Mol Biomarkers Diagn. 2016;7:278. 
26. Yang L, et al. Urine Protein Biomarker Candidates for Autism. J Proteomics Bioinform. 2016;S14:004.
27. Jain RB. Associated Complex of Urine Creatinine, Serum Creatinine, and Chronic Kidney Disease. Epidemiology (Sunnyvale). 2016;6:234.
28. Devrim B, et al. Preparation and Characterization of Proteinloaded Lipid-polymer Hybrid Nanoparticles with Polycaprolactone as Polymeric Core Material. J Biomol Res Ther. 2014;3:115.
29. Jigar N Shah, et al. NanoparticulateTransscleral Ocular Drug Delivery. J Biomol Res Ther. 2014;3:116.
30. Tennekes HA, et al. Time-Dependent Toxicity of Neonicotinoids and Other Toxicants: Implications for a New Approach to Risk Assessment. J Environment Analytic Toxicol. 2011;S4:001.
31. Míguez-Burbano MJ, et al. Thrombocytopenia, Liquor Use and Marijuana are Associated with Non-invasive Markers of Liver Fibrosis in People Living with HIV. J Alcohol Drug Depend. 2014;2:168. 
32. Gulhuseyn AG, et al. Intelligent Information System of Diagnosis and Monitoring Application in the Emergency Medical Aid for Poisonings by Toxic Substances. J Health Med Informat. 2013;4:125.
33. Otrísal P. Selected Perspective Methods of Research of Barrier materials Resistance against Permeability of under interest Toxic Substances. J DefManag. 2011;1:e102.
34. Abdalla KO. An Overview of the Therapeutic Effects of Camel Milk in the Treatment of Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus. J Biomol Res Ther. 2014;3:118.
35. Li X, et al. MicroRNA Biomarkers for Early Detection of Embryonic Malformations in Pregnancy. J Biomol Res Ther. 2014;3:119.
36. Khallaf FG, et al. The Effect of Serum from Acute Traumatic Brain or Spinal Cord Injury Patients on the Growth of Human Bone Marrow- Derived Mesenchymal Stem Cells. J Trauma Treat.2016;5:299.
37. Firoj KM, et al. Influence of Bone Marrow Stem Cell Transplantation on Cardiac Function in Remodeled Left Ventricle of Rats after AMI. Cardiovaspathol.2016;1:110.
38. Oh MH, et al. Protective Effect of S-Adenosyl-LMethionine on Oxidative Stress-Induced Apoptosis Regulates Nrf2 via IGF-I in Rat Bone Marrow Mesenchymal Stem Cells. J Stem Cell Res Ther. 2016;6:323.
39. Keromnes N, et al. FDG PET/CT for Initial Staging of Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma: Is Diffuse Bone Marrow Uptake a Reflection of Disease Involvement? J Bone Marrow Res. 2016;4:164. 
40. Balducci L, et al. Therapeutic Potential of Human Mesenchymal Stromal Cells Secretome. J Biomol Res Ther. 2016;5:e144. 
41. Klos J, et al. Pilot Study of the Estimation of Amphetamines Consumption in the Polish City of Poznan. J Forensic Res. 2013;4:203.
42. Schütz CG. High Dose Stimulant Substitution for the Treatment of Cocaine and Crystal Meth Use Disorders. J Addict Res Ther. 2015;6:e131.
43. Jiang K, et al. Drusen and Proinflammatory Mediators in the Post-Mortem Human Eye. J Clinic Experiment Ophthalmol. 2012;3:208.
44. Baniak N, et al. Vitreous Humor: A Short Review on Post-mortem Applications. J Clin ExpPathol. 2015;5:199.
45. Enayetallah A, et al. Assessing Hepatoxicants based on High-throughput Quantitative SILAC Proteomics and Causal Biological Networks.J Proteomics Bioinform. 2015;8:049-059.
46. Sinha BK. Roles of Free Radicals in the Toxicity of Environmental Pollutants and Toxicants. J Clinic Toxicol. 2013;S13:e001.
47. Ming X. Environmental Toxicants and Autism Spectrum Disorders. Autism. 2012;2:e108.
48. Tennekes HA, et al. Time-Dependent Toxicity of Neonicotinoids and Other Toxicants: Implications for a New Approach to Risk Assessment. J Environment Analytic Toxicol.2011;S4:001.
49. Gulhuseyn AG, et al. Intelligent Information System of Diagnosis and Monitoring Application in the Emergency Medical Aid for Poisonings by Toxic Substances. J Health Med Informat. 2013;4:125.
50. Touzara S, et al. Electrochemical Sensor Based on 2-Benzimidazolethiole Modified Carbon Paste Electrode for Lead Chelation Therapy. J Biomol Res Ther. 2016;5:137. 
51. Gracia R, et al. Cyanide poisoning and its treatment. Pharmacotherapy. 2004;24:1358-65.
52. Hamel J. A review of acute cyanide poisoning with a treatment update. Crit Care Nurse. 2011;31:72-81.
53. Borron SW, et al. Antidotes for acute cyanide poisoning. Curr Pharm Biotechnol. 2012;13:1940-8.
54. Cummings TF. The treatment of cyanide poisoning. Occup Med (Lond). 2004;54:82-5.
55. Mégarbane B, et al. Antidotal treatment of cyanide poisoning. J Chin Med Assoc. 2003;66:193-203.
56. Parasuraman S. Toxicological screening. J PharmacolPharmacother. 2011;2:74–79.
57. Smith ML, et al. Modern Instrumental Methods in Forensic Toxicology. J Anal Toxicol. 2007;31: 237–9A.
58. Cone EJ, et al. Urine toxicology testing in chronic pain management. Postgrad Med. 2009;121:91-102.
59. Tenore PL. Advanced urine toxicology testing. J Addict Dis. 2010;29:436-48.
60. Fielden MR, et al. The role of early in vivo toxicity testing in drug discovery toxicology. Expert Opin Drug Saf. 2008;7:107-10.
61. Smith ML, et al. Modern instrumental methods in forensic toxicology. J Anal Toxicol. 2007;31:237-53.
62. Drummer OH. Forensic toxicology. EXS. 2010;100:579-603.
63. Dinis-Oliveira RJ, et al. Collection of biological samples in forensic toxicology. ToxicolMech Methods. 2010;20:363-414.
64. Gerostamoulos D, et al. Drug screening in clinical or forensic toxicology: are there differences? J Law Med. 2010;18:25-8.
65. Jentzen JM. Forensic toxicology. An overview and an algorithmic approach. Am J Clin Pathol. 1989;92:S48-55.
66. Gunja N. The Clinical and Forensic Toxicology of Z-drugs. J Med Toxicol. 2013;9:155–162.
67. Milone MC. Laboratory Testing for Prescription Opioids. J Med Toxicol. 2012;8:408–416.
68. Drummer OH. Drug Testing in Oral Fluid. Clin Biochem Rev. 2006;27:147–159.
69. Darwish IA. Immunoassay Methods and their Applications in Pharmaceutical Analysis: Basic Methodology and Recent Advances. Int J Biomed Sci. 2006;2:217–235.
70. Yolken RH, et al. Comparison of seven enzyme immunoassay systems for measurement of cytomegalovirus. J Clin Microbiol. 1980;11:546–551.
71. Beebe JL, et al. Evaluation of enzyme-linked immunoassay systems for detection of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 antibody from filter paper disks impregnated with whole blood. J Clin Microbiol. 1990;28:808–810.
72. Montaruli B, et al. Analytical and clinical comparison of different immunoassay systems for the detection of antiphospholipid antibodies. Int J Lab Hematol. 2016;38:172-82.
73. Erler K. Elecsys immunoassay systems using electrochemiluminescence detection. Wien KlinWochenschr. 1998;3:5-10.
74. Hattori N, et al. Variability in the detection of macro TSH in different immunoassay systems. Eur J Endocrinol. 2016;174:9-15.
75. Yücel N, et al. A Comparison of Three Widely Used Immunoassay Systems in Cortisol Measurement. Clin Lab. 2015;61:1947-52.
76. Saxon AJ, et al. Clinical evaluation and use of urine screening for drug abuse. West J Med. 1988; 149:296–303.
77. Barnes KE, et al. The Denver Development Screening Test. A normative study. Am J Public Health. 1975;65:363–369.
78. Knight JR, et al. Validity of the CRAFFT substance abuse screening test among adolescent clinic patients. Arch PediatrAdolesc Med. 2002;156:607-14.
79. Loeb S, et al. The Prostate Health Index: a new test for the detection of prostate cancer. TherAdv Urol. 2014;6:74–77.
80. Britton KE. A feasibility study of a screening test for abnormalities of carotid blood flow using Technetium-99m. J NeurolNeurosurg Psychiatry. 1969;32:379–382.
81. Aliakbarzadeh G, et al. Pattern recognition analysis of chromatographic fingerprints of Crocus sativus L. secondary metabolites towards source identification and quality control. Anal Bioanal Chem. 2016;408:3295-307.
82. Chieli A, et al. Chromatographic and spectroscopic identification and recognition of ammoniacal cochineal dyes and pigments. SpectrochimActa A MolBiomolSpectrosc. 2016;162:86-92.
83. Moser AC, et al. Immunoaffinity chromatography: an introduction to applications and recent developments. Bioanalysis. 2010;2:769–790.
84. Jones C, et al. Current trends in molecular recognition and bioseparation. J Chromatogr A. 1995;707:3-22.
85. Cohen ME, et al. Neural network approach to detection of metastatic melanoma from chromatographic analysis of urine. ProcAnnuSympComputAppl Med Care. 1991;295–299.
86. Hong P, et al. Size-Exclusion Chromatography for the Analysis of Protein Biotherapeutics and their Aggregates. J LiqChromatogrRelat Technol. 2012;35:2923–2950.
87. Thomas RS. Application of genomics to toxicology research. Environ Health Perspect. 2002;110: 919–923.
88. Zyoud SH, et al. A bibliometric analysis of toxicology research productivity in Middle Eastern Arab countries during a 10-year period (2003–2012). Health Res Policy Syst. 2014;12: 4.
89. Dement JM. Workshop on fiber toxicology research needs. Environ Health Perspect. 1990; 88:261–268.
90. Hochstein C, et al. Environmental Health and Toxicology Resources of the United States National Library of Medicine. Med Ref Serv Q. 2007;26:21–45.
91. Szépvölgyi J, et al. Subacute toxicological examination of Dithane M-45. Food ChemToxicol. 1989;27:531-8.
92. Nikolaou P, et al. Toxicological analysis of formalin-fixed or embalmed tissues: a review. Forensic Sci Int. 2013;233:312-9.
93. Venkatasubbu GD, et al. Acute and subchronic toxicity analysis of surface modified paclitaxel attached hydroxyapatite and titanium dioxide nanoparticles. Int J Nanomedicine. 2015;10:137–148.
94. Prado A, et al. A trivalent approach for determining in vitro toxicology: Examination of oxime K027. J ApplToxicol. 2015;35:219-27.
95. Levine BS, et al. Postmortem forensic toxicology. Clin Lab Med. 1990;10:571-89.
96. Lee SK, et al. Forensic toxicological implication of acute fatal poisoning cases due to benfuracarb ingestion. Int J Legal Med. 1999;112:268-70.
97. Peat MA. Advances in forensic toxicology. Clin Lab Med. 1998;18:263-78.
98. Bévalot F, et al. State of the art in bile analysis in forensic toxicology. Forensic Sci Int. 2016;259:133-54.
99. Palmeri A, et al. Drugs in nails: physiology, pharmacokinetics and forensic toxicology. Clin Pharmacokinet. 2000;38:95-110.
100. Goeringer KE, et al. Postmortem forensic toxicology of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors: a review of pharmacology and report of 168cases. J Forensic Sci. 2000;45:633-48.