An integrative ‘Omics’ solution to the detection of recombinant human erythropoietin and blood doping
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Administration of recombinant human erythropoietin (rHumanEPO) improves sporting performance and hence is frequently subject to abuse by athletes, although rHumanEPO is prohibited by the WADA. Approaches to detect rHumanEPO doping have improved significantly in recent years but remain imperfect. A new transcriptomic-based longitudinal screening approach is being developed that has the potential to improve the analytical performance of current detection methods. In particular, studies are being funded by WADA to identify a 'molecular signature' of rHumanEPO doping and preliminary results are promising. In the first systematic study to be conducted, the expression of hundreds of genes were found to be altered by rHumanEPO with numerous gene transcripts being differentially expressed after the first injection and further transcripts profoundly upregulated during and subsequently downregulated up to 4 weeks postadministration of the drug; with the same transcriptomic pattern observed in all participants. The identification of a blood 'molecular signature' of rHumanEPO administration is the strongest evidence to date that gene biomarkers have the potential to substantially improve the analytical performance of current antidoping methods such as the Athlete Biological Passport for rHumanEPO detection. Given the early promise of transcriptomics, research using an 'omics'-based approach involving genomics, transcriptomics, proteomics and metabolomics should be intensified in order to achieve improved detection of rHumanEPO and other doping substances and methods difficult to detect such a recombinant human growth hormone and blood transfusions.
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 | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".