ArticleAnalytical and bioanalytical chemistry2010
Generic sample preparation combined with high-resolution liquid chromatography-time-of-flight mass spectrometry for unification of urine screening in doping-control laboratories.
Article in Analytical and bioanalytical chemistry, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 51 citations in OpenAlex.
- Polar licit and illicit ingredients in dietary supplements: chemometric optimization of extraction and HILIC-MS/MS analysis.Analytical and bioanalytical chemistry · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A unification of doping-control screening procedures of prohibited small molecule substances--including stimulants, narcotics, steroids, beta2-agonists and diuretics--is highly urgent in order to free resources for new classes such as banned proteins. Conceptually this may be achieved by the use of a combination of one gas chromatography-time-of-flight mass spectrometry method and one liquid chromatography-time-of-flight mass spectrometry method. In this work a quantitative screening method using high-resolution liquid chromatography in combination with accurate-mass time-of-flight mass spectrometry was developed and validated for determination of glucocorticosteroids, beta2-agonists, thiazide diuretics, and narcotics and stimulants in urine. To enable the simultaneous isolation of all the compounds of interest and the necessary purification of the resulting extracts, a generic extraction and hydrolysis procedure was combined with a solid-phase extraction modified for these groups of compounds. All 56 compounds are determined using positive electrospray ionisation with the exception of the thiazide diuretics for which the best sensitivity was obtained by using negative electrospray ionisation. The results show that, with the exception of clenhexyl, procaterol, and reproterol, all compounds can be detected below the respective minimum required performance level and the results for linearity, repeatability, within-lab reproducibility, and accuracy show that the method can be used for quantitative screening. If qualitative screening is sufficient the instrumental analysis may be limited to positive ionisation, because all analytes including the thiazides can be detected at the respective minimum required levels in the positive mode. The results show that the application of accurate-mass time-of-flight mass spectrometry in combination with generic extraction and purification procedures is suitable for unification and expansion of the window of screening methods of doping laboratories. Moreover, the full-scan accurate-mass data sets obtained still allow retrospective examination for emerging doping agents, without re-analyzing the samples.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.