Atypical postmortem redistribution in chronic methadone consumers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Available literature demonstrates that methadone is prone to moderate postmortem redistribution, but subject to high interindividual variability in the central to peripheral blood concentration ratios (C/P). In this case series, 10 cases of chronic methadone users displaying C/P < 1 (range 0.26-0.82) are described. Femoral, cardiac and ante-mortem blood concentrations of methadone and its metabolite 2-ethylidene-1,5-dimethyl-3,3-diphenylpyrrolidine (EDDP) are reported for all cases, as well as sex, age, case history, results of the pathological investigation, other toxicological findings and cause and manner of death. EDDP blood concentrations, similar in both central and peripheral blood, as well as antemortem blood concentration results in Case 4, demonstrate that this atypical C/P < 1 finding is attributable to postmortem changes and not analytical or pre-analytical artifacts. Case 4 is a particularly instructive example, with femoral blood concentration (966 ng/mL) approximately twice as high as cardiac blood (499 ng/mL) and ante-mortem blood (418 ng/mL, collected 38 min prior to death)-clearly demonstrating that cardiac blood methadone concentration is more representative of the antemortem blood concentration in this case. In Case 4 and four others, toxicological interpretation based on femoral blood concentration alone would have been misleading. Based on these results and evidence from the literature, it is hypothesized that methadone bioaccumulates in the tissues of chronic users and redistributes from thigh tissues into femoral blood, increasing the concentration postmortem. This case series highlights how femoral blood is not always preserved from postmortem changes and that the analysis of multiple blood sources is necessary to avoid a misleading toxicological interpretation-particularly for cases of chronic methadone users.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".