Determination of Phenyltetrahydroimidazothiazole Enantiomers (Levamisole/Dexamisole) in Illicit Cocaine Seizures and in the Urine of Cocaine Abusers via Chiral Capillary Gas Chromatography-Flame-Ionization Detection: Clinical and Forensic Perspectives
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Illicit cocaine laboratories in South America have been adding phenyltetrahydroimidazothiazole enantiomers (levamisole and/or tetramisole) to refined illicit cocaine for over 8 years. A chiral capillary gas chromatographic methodology is presented for phenyltetrahydroimidazothiazole enantiomer determination in illicit cocaine samples and in the urine of cocaine abusers. Illicit cocaine samples (N = 752) and urine specimens from cocaine abusers (N = 50) that contained phenyltetrahydroimidazothiazole were analyzed for enantiomeric composition. Legitimate commercial preparations of phenyltetrahydroimidazothiazole are either 100% levamisole or a 50:50 mixture of levamisole and dexamisole (tetramisole). Specimens that contain phenyltetrahydroimidazothiazole mixtures that are other than 50:50 preparations will be enhanced in one isomer over the other, and they are referred to as either "levamisole-enhanced" or "dexamisole-enhanced". Cocaine samples were found to contain levamisole (N = 495, 66%), tetramisole (N = 143, 19%), and levamisole-enhanced enrichment (N = 114, 15%); urine specimens contained levamisole (N = 23, 46%), levamisole-enhanced enrichment (N = 10, 20%), and dexamisole-enhanced enrichment (N = 13, 26%). The toxicological and forensic aspects of these findings are discussed.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".