Hypoxia‐inducible factor stabilizers and other small‐molecule erythropoiesis‐stimulating agents in current and preventive doping analysis
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Increasing the blood's capacity for oxygen transport by erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs) constitutes a prohibited procedure of performance enhancement according to the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA). The advent of orally bio-available small-molecule ESAs such as hypoxia-inducible factor (HIF) stabilizers in the development of novel anti-anaemia therapies expands the list of potential ESA doping techniques. Here, the erythropoiesis-stimulating properties and doping relevance of experimental HIF-stabilizers, such as cobaltous chloride, 3,4-dihydroxybenzoic acid or GSK360A, amongst others, are discussed. The stage of clinical trials is reviewed for the anti-anaemia drug candidates FG-2216, FG-4592, GSK1278863, AKB-6548, and BAY85-3934. Currently available methods and strategies for the determination of selected HIF stabilizers in sports drug testing are based on liquid chromatography-electrospray ionization-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-ESI-MS/MS). For the support of further analytical assay development, patents claiming distinct compounds for the use in HIF-mediated therapies are evaluated and exemplary molecular structures of HIF stabilizers presented. Moreover, data concerning the erythropoiesis-enhancing effects of the GATA inhibitors K7174 and K11706 as well as the lipidic small-molecule ESA PBI-1402 are elucidated the context of doping analysis.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it