ArticleDrug testing and analysis2022
Optimizing detection of erythropoietin receptor agonists from dried blood spots for anti-doping application.
Article in Drug testing and analysis, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- Detection of a Single Microdose of Testosterone and Recombinant EPO in Healthy Volunteers.Drug testing and analysis · 2025Article
- Personalized Therapeutic Advances in Erythropoietin Signaling: From Anemia Management to Extensive Clinical Applications.Pharmaceutics · 2025Review
- Detection of doping substances in paired dried blood spots and urine samples collected during doping controls in Danish fitness centers.Drug testing and analysis · 2024Article
- Blood microsampling technologies: Innovations and applications in 2022.Analytical science advances · 2023Review
- Dried blood spot characterization of sex-based metabolic responses to acute running exercise.Analytical science advances · 2023Article
- Optimizing detection of erythropoietin receptor agonists from dried blood spots for anti-doping application.Drug testing and analysis · 2022Article
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
Abstract
The World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) has recently implemented dried blood spots (DBSs) as a matrix for doping control. However, specifications regarding the analysis of the class of prohibited substances called erythropoietin (EPO) receptor agonists (ERAs) from DBSs are not yet described. The aim of this study was to find optimal conditions (sample volume and storage) to sensitively detect endogenous erythropoietin (hEPO) and prohibited ERAs from DBSs and compare detection limits to WADA-stipulated minimum required performance levels (MRPLs) for ERAs in serum/plasma samples. Venous whole blood was spotted onto Whatman 903 DBS cards with primarily 60 μl of blood, but various volumes from 20 to75 μl were tested. All samples were immunopurified with MAIIA EPO Purification Gel kit (EPGK) and analysed with sodium N-lauroylsarcosinate polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis (SAR-PAGE) and Western blot. Sixty-microliter DBSs allowed the detection of the four main ERAs (BRP, NESP, CERA and EPO-Fc) at concentrations close to WADA's MRPLs described for 500 μl of serum/plasma. Different storage temperatures, from -20°C to 37°C, were evaluated and did not affect ERA detection. A comparison of the detection of endogenous EPO from the different anti-doping matrices (urine, serum and DBSs produced from upper arm capillary blood) from five participants for 6 weeks was performed. Endogenous EPO extracted from DBSs showed intra-individual variations in male and female subjects, but less than in urine. Doping controls would benefit from the stability of ERAs on DBSs: It can be a complementary matrix for ERA analysis, particularly in the absence of EPO signals in urine.
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.