MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3036546621 · doi:10.1519/jsc.0000000000003665

Effect of Caffeine on Endurance Performance in Athletes May Depend on HTR2A and CYP1A2 Genotypes

2020· article· en· W3036546621 on OpenAlexaff
Nanci S. Guest, Paul Corey, Pascal N. Tyrrell, Ahmed El‐Sohemy

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCoffee research and impacts
Canadian institutionsPublic Health OntarioUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCaffeineCYP1A2PlaceboAthletesInternal medicineMedicineEndocrinologyPharmacologyAnimal scienceChemistryPhysical therapyBiologyMetabolismCytochrome P450

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT: Guest, NS, Corey, P, Tyrrell, PN, and El-Sohemy, A. Effect of caffeine on endurance performance in athletes may depend on HTR2A and CYP1A2 genotypes. J Strength Cond Res 36(9): 2486-2492, 2022-This investigation determined whether variation in the HTR2A (serotonin receptor) gene modifies the ergogenic effects of caffeine on endurance and further modifies performance by the CYP1A2 genotype. Male athletes ( n = 100; 25 ± 4 years) completed 10-km cycling time trials under 3 conditions as follows: 0, 2, or 4 mg of caffeine per kg body mass. Using a randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled design, data were analyzed using analysis of covariance to compare changes in cycling time between placebo (0 mg·kg -1 ) and each caffeine dose and adjusted for the placebo trial and order of treatment. A significance of ρ ≤ 0.05 was used. Subjects were genotyped for HTR2A (rs6313) and CYP1A2 (rs762551). A significant caffeine- HTR2A interaction ( p = 0.003) was observed; however, after adjustment for placebo trials, the interaction was no longer significant ( p = 0.37). Because of the strong caffeine- CYP1A2 interaction ( p < 0.0001) previously reported in these subjects, where the 4-mg dose resulted in divergent effects (slower and faster) on the 10-km cycling time, we conducted a simplified model to examine these same factors by the HTR2A genotype. The post hoc analysis excluded HTR2A CT heterozygotes and 2-mg·kg -1 caffeine trials. Among CYP1A2 fast metabolizers alone, a significant difference (1.7 minutes; p = 0.006) was observed when comparing (4- vs. 0-mg·kg -1 caffeine trials) between the HTR2A CC ( n = 16; 2.4 minutes) and TT ( n = 7; 0.7 minutes) genotypes. Our results show that 4-mg·kg -1 caffeine improves performance in individuals with the HTR2A CC genotype but only in those who are also CYP1A2 AA fast metabolizers. This study was registered with clinicaltrials.gov (NCT02109783).

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.556
Threshold uncertainty score0.345

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.358
Teacher spread0.321 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations19
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Strength and Conditioning ResearchSame topicCoffee research and impactsFrench-language works237,207