Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2008 Mar-Apr;43(2):187-91.
doi: 10.1093/alcalc/agm175. Epub 2008 Jan 29.

Comparison between the urinary alcohol markers EtG, EtS, and GTOL/5-HIAA in a controlled drinking experiment

Gudrun Høiseth  1 , Jean Paul Bernard, Nicolai Stephanson, Per T Normann, Asbjørg S Christophersen, Jørg Mørland, Anders Helander
Affiliations
Comparative Study

Comparison between the urinary alcohol markers EtG, EtS, and GTOL/5-HIAA in a controlled drinking experiment

Gudrun Høiseth et al. Alcohol Alcohol. 2008 Mar-Apr.

Abstract

Aim: Urinary ethyl glucuronide (EtG), ethyl sulfate (EtS), and the ratio between 5-hydroxytryptophol-glucuronide and 5-hydroxyindole-3-acetic acid (GTOL/5-HIAA) are all suggested as biomarkers for recent alcohol ingestion with longer detection times than measurement of ethanol itself. The aim of this controlled study was to compare the sensitivities and detection times of EtG, EtS, and GTOL/5-HIAA, after a single ingestion of ethanol.

Methods: 0.5 g ethanol/kg body weight was ingested by 10 healthy male volunteers in a fasted state. Ethanol, EtG, EtS, and GTOL/HIAA levels were measured in urine samples collected during a 45-50 h period. The total amount of ethanol excreted as EtG and EtS was also determined.

Results: Urinary EtG, EtS, and GTOL/5-HIAA showed 100% sensitivity as biomarkers for recent drinking. Compared to ethanol testing in urine, the detection times for GTOL/5-HIAA were approximately 5 h longer and for EtG and EtS approximately 25 h longer. The maximum EtG concentrations were higher than for EtS in all subjects, and a higher fraction of the ethanol dose was excreted as EtG (median 0.019%) compared with EtS (median 0.011%).

Conclusions: This study is the first controlled experiment comparing the time-courses for ethanol, EtG, EtS, and GTOL/5-HIAA in urine. In cases where surveillance of alcohol relapse is needed, measurements of urinary EtG and EtS are sensitive and specific alternatives to ethanol testing. The GTOL/5-HIAA ratio is equally sensitive but with a much shorter window of detection.

PubMed Disclaimer

Publication types