Recommendations for Provoked Challenge Urine Testing
- 801 Downloads
“Urine mobilization test,” “challenge test,” and “provoked urine test” are all terms used to describe the administration of a chelating agent to a person prior to collection of their urine to test for metals. There is no standard, validated challenge test. Despite recommendations by professional and government organizations against the use of provoked urine testing, the tests are still commonly used and recommended by some practitioners. Challenge testing utilizes a variety of chelating agents, including dimercaptosuccinic acid (DMSA), dimercaptopropanesulfonate (DMPS), and ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA). The agents are given by a variety of routes of administration, doses used are inconsistent, and urine collection procedures vary. Additional problems with challenge tests include comparison of results to inappropriate reference ranges and creatinine correction of urine obtained within hours of chelator administration. Human volunteer studies demonstrate that mercury is detected in the urine of most people even in the absence of known exposure or chelator administration, and that urinary mercury excretion rises after administration of a chelator, regardless of exposure history and in an unpredictable fashion. Studies also demonstrate that challenge testing fails to reveal a “body burden” of mercury due to remote exposure. Chelating agents have been associated with adverse reactions. Current evidence does not support the use of DMPS, DMSA, or other chelation challenge tests for the diagnosis of metal toxicity. Since there are no established reference ranges for provoked urine samples in healthy subjects, no reliable evidence to support a diagnostic value for the tests, and potential harm, these tests should not be utilized.
KeywordsProvoked urine test Challenge test Urine mobilization test Metal chelation
Conflict of interest
For the work under consideration for publication, Dr. Ruha received an honorarium (which she donated to MTF) and reimbursement for travel through the ACMT/ATSDR Cooperative Agreement. As relevant financial activities outside the submitted work, Dr. Ruha is a BTG and RDT paid speaker.
- 2.Charlton N, Wallace KL (2009) Post-chelator challenge urinary metal testing. AMCT position statement. http://www.acmt.net/cgi/page.cgi/zine_service.html?aid=2999&zine=show. Accessed 28 July 2013
- 4.Barrett S. How the urine toxic metals test is used to defraud patients. http://www.quackwatch.com/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/Tests/urine_toxic.html. Accessed 28 July 2013
- 5.Nichols A. Heavy metal poisoning and safe detoxification. http://evenbetterhealth.com/heavy-metal-poisoning.asp. Accessed February 2012
- 6.The Great Plains Laboratory. Metals urine testing. http://greatplainslaboratory.com/home/eng/metals_urine.asp. Accessed 28 July 2013
- 7.Patients Medical (2013) Health AZ. http://patientsmedical.com. Accessed Feb 2012
- 8.Crinnion WJ (2009) The benefit of pre- and post-challenge urine heavy metal testing: part 2. Alternat Med Rev 14(2):103–108Google Scholar
- 12.Proudfoot AT (1995) Antidotes: benefits and risks. Tox Let 82/83:770–783Google Scholar
- 18.Archbold GP, McGuckin RM, Campbell NA (2004) Dimercaptosuccinic acid loading test for assessing mercury burden in healthy individuals. Ann Clin Biochem 41:33–236Google Scholar
- 19.Ruha AM, Curry SC, Gerkin RD, Caldwell KL, Osterloh JD, Wax PM (2008) Urine mercury excretion following DMSA challenge in fish eaters. Arch Pathol Lab Med 132:4–9Google Scholar
- 20.Gonzalez-Ramirez D, Maiorino RM, Zuniga-Charles M, Xu Z, Hurlbut KM, Junco-Munoz P et al (1995) Sodium 2,3-dimercaptopropane-1-sulfonate challenge test for mercury in humans: II. Urinary mercury, porphyrins, and neurobehavioral changes of dental workers in Monterrey, Mexico. J Pharmacol Exp Ther 272(1):264–274PubMedGoogle Scholar