MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2468048255 · doi:10.1002/dta.2011

Mass spectrometric characterization of the hypoxia‐inducible factor (HIF) stabilizer drug candidate BAY 85‐3934 (molidustat) and its glucuronidated metabolite BAY‐348, and their implementation into routine doping controls

2016· article· en· W2468048255 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Josef Dib, Cynthia Mongongu, Corinne Buisson, Wilhelm Schänzer, Uwe Thuß, Mario Thevis

Bibliographic record

VenueDrug Testing and Analysis · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCancer, Hypoxia, and Metabolism
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersWorld Anti-Doping Agency
KeywordsAnalyteUrineMetaboliteDrugSolid phase extractionChemistryChromatographyPharmacologyMass spectrometryMedicineInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The development of new therapeutics potentially exhibiting performance‐enhancing properties implicates the risk of their misuse by athletes in amateur and elite sports. Such drugs necessitate preventive anti‐doping research for consideration in sports drug testing programmes. Hypoxia‐inducible factor (HIF) stabilizers represent an emerging class of therapeutics that allows for increasing erythropoiesis in patients. BAY 85‐3934 is a novel HIF stabilizer, which is currently undergoing phase‐2 clinical trials. Consequently, the comprehensive characterization of BAY 85‐3934 and human urinary metabolites as well as the implementation of these analytes into routine doping controls is of great importance. The mass spectrometric behaviour of the HIF stabilizer drug candidate BAY 85‐3934 and a glucuronidated metabolite (BAY‐348) were characterized by electrospray ionization‐(tandem) mass spectrometry (ESI‐MS(/MS)) and multiple‐stage mass spectrometry (MS n ). Subsequently, two different laboratories established different analytical approaches (one each) enabling urine sample analyses by employing either direct urine injection or solid‐phase extraction. The methods were cross‐validated for the metabolite BAY‐348 that is expected to represent an appropriate target analyte for human urine analysis. Two test methods allowing for the detection of BAY‐348 in human urine were applied and cross‐validated concerning the validation parameters specificity, linearity, lower limit of detection (LLOD; 1–5 ng/mL), ion suppression/enhancement (up to 78%), intra‐ and inter‐day precision (3–21%), recovery (29–48%), and carryover. By means of ten spiked test urine samples sent blinded to one of the participating laboratories, the fitness‐for‐purpose of both assays was provided as all specimens were correctly identified applying both testing methods. As no post‐administration study samples were available, analyses of authentic urine specimens remain desirable. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.202
Threshold uncertainty score0.586

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.236 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations18
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDrug Testing and AnalysisSame topicCancer, Hypoxia, and MetabolismFrench-language works237,207