Annual banned‐substance review: analytical approaches in human sports drug testing

Abstract

a International anti-doping efforts are harmonized and regulated under the umbrella of the World Anti-Doping Code and the corresponding Prohibited List, issued annually by the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA). The necessity for a frequent and timely update of the Prohibited List (as the result of a comprehensive consultation process and subsequent consensual agreement by expert panels regarding substances and methods of performance manipulation in sports) is due to the constantly growing market of emerging therapeutics and thus new options for cheating athletes to illicitly enhance performance. In addition, 'tailor-made' substances arguably designed to undermine sports drug testing procedures are considered and the potential of established drugs to represent a doping substance is revisited in light of recently generated information. The purpose of the annual banned substance review is to support doping controls by reporting emerging and advancing methods dedicated to the detection of known and recently outlawed substances. This review surveys new and/or enhanced procedures and techniques of doping analysis together with information relevant to doping controls that has been published in the literature between October

Hepcidin as a new biomarker for detecting autologous blood transfusion

“…The world anti-doping agency prohibits autologous blood transfusions (ABT) in sports [1,2]. The most common way to detect ABT in the blood matrix is the haematological module of the athlete biological passport (ABP).…”

Circulating microRNAs as Biomarkers for Detection of Autologous Blood Transfusion

“…Autologous blood transfusions are prohibited in sports according to the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) [1]. There is, at present, no direct detection method, and the technique remains a significant problem in all endurance sport disciplines.…”

Gene doping: Present and future

“…The glycosylation patterns (post‐translational modification) of EPO proteins resulting from an endogenous gene and an artificially introduced gene have been shown to be different, which brings an expectation for target detection (Haisma & de Hon, 2006; Lasne et al, 2004; Ye et al, 1999). In the case of the myostatin gene, a study with rats provided very interesting results: liquid chromatography coupled to high‐resolution mass spectrometry (LC‐HRMS) helped to identify the introduced genetic material (small interfering RNA – siRNA) in urine samples after a single intravenous administration (Thevis, Kuuranne, Geyer, & Schänzer, 2014; Thomas et al, 2013).…”