Lab: Delays Followed Suspicious Samples Spike

Officials at a Lexington equine drug-testing laboratory blamed recent long delays in processing samples on a spike of nearly 100 times the number of usual suspicious results this year compared with 2013.

Regulators in Indiana and Kentucky have said that the Lexington lab, LGC, has not been turning around tests in a timely manner this year. Lab officials said Oct. 23 they fell behind because they were not prepared to handle the significant spike in suspicious tests the lab experienced this year.

In the lab-testing process, there is an initial screening to determine if there are any findings that warrant a closer look, known as a confirmatory process. The confirmatory process is significantly more time-consuming than the initial screening, which indicates a level of therapeutic medication that requires more examination or a foreign substance. 

In the confirmatory process, foreign substances need to be identified and therapeutic medication levels have to be determined to see if they are within the bounds of legal thresholds. This is where the Lexington lab, which last year was one of the first two accredited by the Racing Medication and Testing Consortium, fell behind.

LGC managing director David Griffiths, who this month traveled from the company's United Kingdom base to Lexington to meet with affected regulatory bodies, said .1% of the screened samples last year required confirmatory examination. He said this year that number, at times, has spiked to a rate of nearly 10% of samples.

The lab also has taken on added testing responsibilities this year. For the entire year in 2013, LGC screened 17,999 samples. With more than two months left in 2014, that figure already is up 28.3% to 23,100.

"We're quite concerned about the fact that we have a backlog of samples; we're trying to resolve that," Griffiths said. "We're very concerned, and we're making some headway toward reducing the backlog."

Griffiths said employees have been added and additional staff has been brought in from other labs to address the backlog. He said use the of the latest technology also can expedite the process without sacrificing quality.

"We have been making every effort to resolve these difficulties and have brought in additional resources, including highly experienced scientists from our lab in the UK, to help process the samples," Griffiths said. "It will take some time to clear the backlog, but we are working hard to achieve this aim, and our goal is to minimize any adverse impact to our customers and help them assure the integrity of the sport we all love."

Earlier this month Indiana Horse Racing Commission executive director Joe Gorajec said the regulator had commission staff retrieve dozens of delayed samples from the Lexington lab to be shipped to Industrial Laboratories in Colorado. Gorajec noted there had been a spike at the confirmatory level of Indiana samples. Retrieved samples will have to begin the process anew at the Colorado lab.

Kentucky also has seen months-long delays and likely will consider other labs when LGC's contract is up at the end of January. 

Griffiths said changes in threshold levels from the Racing Medication and Testing Consortium and different parameters from state to state also can slow the process.

LGC general manager Pierre Barratt said the screening process typically takes three to five days to complete but the confirmatory process can be much longer, depending on the suspicious substance being examined.

"Our goal is to help our customers protect the integrity of the sport and ensure the safety of the sport," Griffiths said, noting that customers have never questioned the quality of LGC testing. "We are looking at levels that are equivalent to a teaspoon in an Olympic-sized swimming pool, so these are very, very sensitive analytical techniques."

Griffiths noted that he would like to see more standardization of labs, testing techniques, and what is being examined.