Evaluation of markers out of the steroid profile for the screening of testosterone misuse. Part I: Transdermal administration
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although the introduction by the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) of the steroid module of the athlete biological passport (ABP) marked an important step forward in the screening of testosterone (T) misuse, it still remains one of the most difficult challenges in doping control analysis. The urinary determination of alternative markers has been recently reported as a promising tool for improving the screening of T oral administration. However, their evaluation for other, commonly used, administration routes is still required. The main goal of this study is the evaluation of the potential of 2 groups of metabolites (cysteinyl conjugated and glucuronoconjugated) after transdermal and intramuscular administration of T. Their suitability was evaluated in individuals with both low basal (L-T/E) and medium basal (M-T/E) values of T/E. In this Part I, we evaluated the urinary excretion profile of these 2 groups of T metabolites after the administration of 3 doses of T gel to 12 volunteers (6 L-T/E and 6 M-T/E) for 3 consecutive days. For this purpose, 9 different concentration ratios (5 cysteinyl conjugated and 4 glucuronoconjugated markers) were studied. Both, the intra-individual variability and the detection windows (DW) obtained by each ratio were evaluated. Cysteinyl conjugates showed a general low intra-individual variability and DWs that were shorter than any other tested marker. Despite the relatively large intra-individual variability, the DWs reached by glucuronoconjugates (2-3 days) were similar to those obtained by markers currently included in the ABP. Overall; this evaluation advises for the introduction of additional glucuronoconjugated markers in the screening of transdermal T administration.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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".