Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41410087›Full record

ArticleJournal of separation science2025

Overcoming the Challenge of Confident Identification Among Two Related Groups of 17-Methyl Steroids by GC-MS.

Jakob Steff, Xavier de la Torre, Francesco Botrè, Maria Kristina Parr

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of separation science, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Jakob SteffInstitute of Pharmacy, Freie Universität Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Xavier de la TorreLaboratorio Antidoping FMSI, Largo Giulio Onesti 1, Rome, Italy.
Francesco BotrèLaboratorio Antidoping FMSI, Largo Giulio Onesti 1, Rome, Italy.
Maria Kristina ParrInstitute of Pharmacy, Freie Universität Berlin, Berlin, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Tetrahydromethyltestosterone (THMT) and 20-hydroxymethyl-18-nortetrahydromethyltestosterone (20OHnorTHMT) are metabolites of the anabolic androgenic steroids methyltestosterone and metandienone. Both molecular structures are used as markers in anti-doping analysis. There are eight reasonable diastereomeric structures of each group relevant for metabolic purposes. Highly sophisticated mass spectrometers fail to confidently differentiate these closely related, yet non-isomeric and non-isobaric groups of molecules. Due to the low abundance of the molecular ion, high-resolution mass spectrometry provides shared fragment ions that challenge identification by extracted ion chromatograms out of full scan mode acquisitions. Further on, tandem mass spectrometry uses partly the same ion transitions for both groups of targeted analytes. Thus, a reliable chromatographic separation is absolutely necessary. Therefore, a gas chromatographic method using a DB-5 ms capillary column (30 m, 0.25 mm, and 0.25 µm) was developed. Hence, discrimination between the two groups was enabled, and a confident structural assignment among the eight diastereomers was achieved. This case study contributes to a higher quality of anti-doping analysis, but even further raises awareness of the importance of chromatographic separation in cases of insufficient mass spectrometric discrimination.

Indexed as

MethyltestosteroneAnabolic AgentsDoping in SportsGas Chromatography-Mass SpectrometryMolecular StructureStereoisomerismAnabolic AgentsMethyltestosteroneanabolic androgenic steroidsanti‐doping analysischromatographic separationmass spectrometrymethod development

Identifiers

PMID41410087
PMCPMC12712887

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.