Intranasal delivery of Natesto® testosterone gel and its effects on doping markers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The laboratory profile of intranasal testosterone gel has not been previously reported from an anti‐doping perspective. Because intranasal testosterone gel is newly available as a commercial product, we sought to examine the laboratory parameters following administration of this formulation, with particular attention to anti‐doping guidelines. Five healthy and active male subjects were administered testosterone intranasal gel three times daily for four weeks, using a pattern of five consecutive days on, two days off. Urine was collected after each five‐day round of drug administration and analyzed using a full steroid screen and isotope ratio mass spectrometry (IRMS). Windows of detection for elevated testosterone/epitestosterone (T/E) and other steroid ratios, World Anti‐Doping Agency (WADA) athlete biological passport (ABP) findings, and IRMS results were analyzed in this study. In the 0–24 h window post‐administration, 70% of samples were flagged with a suspicious steroid profile and 85% were flagged as atypical passport findings according to the WADA ABP steroid module. In the 24–48 h window, 0% of samples displayed suspicious steroid profiles while 40% resulted in atypical passport findings. IRMS testing confirmed the presence of exogenous testosterone in 90% and 40% of samples in the 0–24 h and 24–48 h windows post‐administration, respectively. Additionally, IRMS data were analyzed to determine commonalities in the population changes in δ 13 C values of testosterone, androsterone, etiocholanolone, 5αAdiol, and 5βAdiol. Though no discernible metabolic trend of the route of administration was identified, we discovered that intranasal gel testosterone is detectable using conventional anti‐doping tests. 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 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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".