Effect of thyroid hormones administration on urinary endogenous steroid profile of the athlete biological passport
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This work focused on the possible alterations of the markers of the steroidal module of the athlete biological passport, considering samples of athletes declaring and not-declaring the supplementation of thyroid hormones (TH) in the Doping Control Form (DCF). Concentrations of 5α-androstane-3α,17β-diol (5α-Adiol), 5β-androstane-3α,17β-diol (5β-Adiol), testosterone (T), androsterone (A), etiocholanolone (Etio), epitestosterone (E), pregnanediol (PD), dehydroepiandrosterone (DHEA), and 11β-hydroxy-androsterone (OHA) were calculated using internal standards and external calibration by gas chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry. Also, ratios between the above biomarkers were also estimated. The data set was composed of samples from females and males declaring and not-declaring TH supplementation in the DCF. To corroborate these observations, a controlled urinary excretion study was carried out with multiple doses of sodium liothyronine (T3). Female data showed significant differences for the concentrations of 5α-Adiol, A, DHEA, E, OHA, and T and the ratio A/Etio between FD and FND groups, whereas the male groups only showed significant differences in OHA concentration. In both cases, males and females declaring the consumption of levothyroxine showed narrower data distribution and diminished percentiles from 17% to 67% with respect to the not-declaring corresponding groups (p < 0.05). Concentrations of 5α-metabolites showed a higher depression for the FND, and both FD and MD groups showed a peculiar behavior for the PD concentrations. The controlled study agreed with the observations, mainly for the female group with significant differences for concentrations of E, Etio, 5α-Adiol, and 5β-Adiol after TH administration. The interpretation of the steroid markers of the ABP should consider TH administrations.
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".