Codeine influences the serum and urinary profile of endogenous androgens but does not interact with the excretion rate of administered testosterone
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Today's doping tests involve longitudinal monitoring of urinary steroids including the testosterone glucuronide and epitestosterone glucuronide ratio (T/E) in an Athlete Biological Passport (ABP). The aim of this study was to investigate the possible influence of short-term use of codeine on the urinary excretion of androgen metabolites included in the steroidal module of the passport prior to and after the co-administration with testosterone. The study was designed as an open study with the subjects being their own control. Fifteen healthy male volunteers received therapeutic doses of codeine (Kodein Meda) for 6 days. On Day 3, 500 mg or 125 mg of testosterone enanthate (Testoviron®-Depot) was administered. Spot urine samples were collected for 17 days, and blood samples were collected at baseline, 3, 6, and 14 days after codeine intake. The circulatory concentration of total testosterone decreased significantly by 20% after 3 days' use of codeine (p = 0.0002) and an atypical ABP result was noted in one of the subjects. On the other hand, the concomitant use of codeine and testosterone did not affect the elevated urinary T/E ratio. In 75% of the individuals, the concentration of urinary morphine (a metabolite of codeine) was above the decision limit for morphine. One of the participants displayed a morphine/codeine ratio of 1.7 after codeine treatment, indicative of morphine abuse. In conclusion, our study shows that codeine interferes with the endogenous testosterone concentration. As a result, the urinary steroid profile may lead to atypical findings in the doping test.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 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".