No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

Pseudoephedrine (PSE) as a sympathomimetic is an ingredient of many proprietary medicines which are available on the medical market over the counter (OTC drugs). It can be converted to cathine (CATH, norpseudoephedrine) inside the body. Until the end of 2003, PSE had been a banned substance in sport in case its urinary concentration was greater than 25 mircog/ml. Then the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) removed PSE from the prohibited list. Prior to 2004 CATH was a forbidden substance and it is still one. CATH is included on the WADA prohibited list in the group of stimulants. The results of a doping control concerning PSE conducted in the Department of Anti-Doping Research of Institute of Sport in Warsaw in the years 2001-2003 and 2004-2007 have been compared. Moreover, several dozen of urine samples collected from the patients taking OTC drugs with PSE have been analysed. In these samples the concentration of PSE and CATH has been estimated. The results of this study have shown that athletes were using PSE frequently and in high doses between 2004 and 2007 when this substance was permitted by WADA. It is possible that athletes can obtain a positive result of doping control with CATH after the use of PSE.

BACKGROUND Mycophenolic acid (MPA) prodrugs are anti-proliferative immunosuppressive agents commonly used after organ transplantation. Although they are generally well tolerated by patients, adverse effects may occur. It is postulated that MPA metabolites could also contribute to these adverse effects. MATERIAL AND METHODS The objective of this study was the assessment of concentrations of total MPA and its metabolites, phenyl glucuronide (MPAG), acyl glucuronide (AcMPAG) and glucoside (GluMPA), using liquid chromatography combined with mass spectrometry (LC/MS/MS) in two groups: kidney transplant recipients and liver transplant patients. Associations of MPA and its metabolites with adverse effects were analyzed. RESULTS The study group consisted of 211 recipients of liver or kidney transplants who received immunosuppressive therapy, including MPA prodrugs. Multivariant analysis showed a positive influence of MPA on gastroenterotoxicity in kidney transplant recipients. In liver patients, gastroenterotoxicity was associated with lower MPAG concentrations. A positive influence of AcMPAG on bacterial infections in liver transplant patients was observed. In liver transplant recipients, a positive influence of MPA and a negative influence of GluMPA levels on the PLT count were revealed. MPA and its metabolites did not influence the hemoglobin levels in both groups. There were no significant relationships among MPA, its metabolites and WBC counts. CONCLUSIONS In kidney transplant recipients, total MPA trough concentration is associated with gastroenterotoxicity and its monitoring could have important role in management of gastrointestinal complications. The quantification of AcMPAG in liver recipients receiving MPA may be helpful in avoiding bacterial infections. GluMPA seems to have a toxic effect on thrombopoiesis.