Gene doping detection in the era of genomics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recent progress in gene editing has enabled development of gene therapies for many genetic diseases, but also made gene doping an emerging risk in sports and competitions. By delivery of exogenous transgenes into human body, gene doping not only challenges competition fairness but also places health risk on athletes. World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) has clearly inhibited the use of gene and cell doping in sports, and many techniques have been developed for gene doping detection. In this review, we will summarize the main tools for gene doping detection at present, highlight the main challenges for current tools, and elaborate future utilizations of high-throughput sequencing for unbiased, sensitive, economic and large-scale gene doping detections. Quantitative real-time PCR assays are the widely used detection methods at present, which are useful for detection of known targets but are vulnerable to codon optimization at exon-exon junction sites of the transgenes. High-throughput sequencing has become a powerful tool for various applications in life and health research, and the era of genomics has made it possible for sensitive and large-scale gene doping detections. Non-biased genomic profiling could efficiently detect new doping targets, and low-input genomics amplification and long-read third-generation sequencing also have application potentials for more efficient and straightforward gene doping detection. By closely monitoring scientific advancements in gene editing and sport genetics, high-throughput sequencing could play a more and more important role in gene detection and hopefully contribute to doping-free sports in the future.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".