Doping control analysis of trimetazidine and characterization of major metabolites using mass spectrometric approaches

The laboratory anti-doping services during XXII Winter Olympic and XI Paralympic games in Sochi in 2014 were provided by a satellite laboratory facility located within the strictly secured Olympic Park. This laboratory, established and operated by the personnel of Antidoping Center, Moscow, has been authorized by the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) to conduct doping control analyses. The 4-floor building accommodated the most advanced analytical instrumentation and became a place of attraction for more than 50 Russian specialists and 25 foreign experts, including independent observers. In total, 2134 urine and 479 blood samples were delivered to the laboratory and analyzed during the Olympic Games (OG), and 403 urine and 108 blood samples - during the Paralympic Games (PG). The number of erythropoietin tests requested in urine was 946 and 166 at the OG and PG, respectively. Though included in the test distribution plan, a growth hormone analysis was cancelled by the Organizing Committee just before the Games. Several adverse analytical findings have been reported including pseudoephedrine (1 case), methylhexaneamine (4 cases), trimetazidine (1 case), dehydrochloromethyltestosterone (1 case), clostebol (1 case), and a designer stimulant N-ethyl-1-phenylbutan-2-amine (1 case).

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Anti‐doping analyses at the Sochi Olympic and Paralympic Games 2014

Sobolevsky¹,

Krotov²,

Dikunets³

et al. 2014

“…Routine doping control urine samples were prepared for initial testing purposes regarding stimulants according to established protocols described elsewhere . Instrumental analysis was conducted employing gas chromatography‐mass spectrometry (GC‐MS) with simultaneous acquisition of a nitrogen‐phosphorus detector (NPD) signal.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Monitoring 2‐phenylethanamine and 2‐(3‐hydroxyphenyl)acetamide sulfate in doping controls

Sigmund

Dib

Tretzel

et al. 2015

Self Cite

2-Phenylethanamine (phenethylamine, PEA) represents the core structure of numerous drugs with stimulant-like properties and is explicitly featured as so-called specified substance on the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) Prohibited List. Due to its natural occurrence in humans as well as its presence in dietary products, studies concerning the ability of test methods to differentiate between an illicit intake and the renal elimination of endogenously produced PEA were indicated. Following the addition of PEA to the Prohibited List in January 2015, retrospective evaluation of routine doping control data of 10 190 urine samples generated by combined gas chromatography-mass spectrometry and nitrogen phosphorus-specific detection (GC-MS/NPD) was performed. Signals for PEA at approximate concentrations > 500 ng/mL were observed in 31 cases (0.3%), which were subjected to a validated isotope-dilution liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (ID-LC-MS/MS) test method for accurate quantification of the target analyte. Further, using elimination study urine samples collected after a single oral administration of 250 mg of PEA hydrochloride to two healthy male volunteers, two tentatively identified metabolites of PEA were observed and evaluated concerning their utility as discriminative markers for PEA intake. The ID-LC-MS/MS approach was extended to allow for the simultaneous detection of PEA and 2-(3-hydroxyphenyl)acetamide sulfate (M1), and concentration ratios of M1 and PEA were calculated for elimination study urine samples and a total of 205 doping control urine samples that returned findings for PEA at estimated concentrations of 50-2500 ng/mL. Urine samples of the elimination study with PEA yielded concentration ratios of M1/PEA up to values of 9.4. Notably, the urinary concentration of PEA did increase with the intake of PEA only to a modest extent, suggesting a comprehensive metabolism of the orally administered substance. Conversely, doping control urine samples with elevated (>50 ng/mL) amounts of PEA returned quantifiable concentrations of M1 only in 3 cases, which yielded maximum ratios of M1/PEA of 0.9, indicating an origin of PEA other than an orally ingested drug formulation. Consequently, the consideration of analyte abundance ratios (e.g. M1/PEA) is suggested as a means to identify the use of PEA by athletes, but further studies to support potential decisive criteria are warranted.

“…Both assays proved fit‐for‐purpose with LODs concerning trimetazidine of 0.5 ng/mL respectively 14 ng/mL, and controlled elimination studies indicated detection windows of > 24 h after a single therapeutic dose of the coronary vasodilator. Until its inclusion in the list of prohibited substances in January 2014, the prevalence of trimetazidine use among athletes resulted in up to 39 identifications per year or 0.23% of findings …”

Section: Hormone and Metabolic Modulatorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

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

Thevis

Kuuranne

Walpurgis

et al. 2016

Self Cite

The aim of improving anti-doping efforts is predicated on several different pillars, including, amongst others, optimized analytical methods. These commonly result from exploiting most recent developments in analytical instrumentation as well as research data on elite athletes' physiology in general, and pharmacology, metabolism, elimination, and downstream effects of prohibited substances and methods of doping, in particular. The need for frequent and adequate adaptations of sports drug testing procedures has been incessant, largely due to the uninterrupted emergence of new chemical entities but also due to the apparent use of established or even obsolete drugs for reasons other than therapeutic means, such as assumed beneficial effects on endurance, strength, and regeneration capacities. Continuing the series of annual banned-substance reviews, literature concerning human sports drug testing published between October 2014 and September 2015 is summarized and reviewed in reference to the content of the 2015 Prohibited List as issued by the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA), with particular emphasis on analytical approaches and their contribution to enhanced doping controls.