Abstract
Hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ, 6-chloro-3,4-dihydro-2H-1,2,4-benzothiadiazine-7-sulfonamide-1,1-dioxide) belongs to the class of diuretic agents that represent one of today’s cornerstones of the treatment of hypertensive patients. In addition to its clinical relevance, HCTZ is prohibited in sports according to the regulations of the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) at all times and has frequently been detected in sports drug testing urine samples worldwide since its ban was introduced in 1988. Despite these facts, the adverse analytical finding concerning HCTZ in an in-competition routine doping control sample collected in December 2014 was further investigated, particularly motivated by the comparably low urinary concentration of the drug accounting for approximately 5ng/mL.The athlete in question did not declare the use of any nutritional supplement or medication other than the ingestion of a non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) prior to competition. Hence, the drug (formulated as coated tablet) provided by the athlete as well as the corresponding retention sample of the manufacturer were analyzed. Noteworthy, both samples confirmed the presence of about 2μg of HCTZ per tablet.In order to further probe for the plausibility of the observed urinary HCTZ concentrations with the scenario of drug ingestion and subsequent doping control sample collection, administration studies with produced HCTZ-spiked placebo-tablets (2.5μg of HCTZ/tablet) were conducted. Urine specimens were collected prior to and after ingestion of the drug and subjected to routine doping control analytical procedures employing liquid chromatography/tandem mass spectrometry. While blank urine samples returned negative test results, post-administration specimens were found to contain HCTZ at concentrations of approximately 1–16ng/mL, which supported the athlete’s inadvertent intake of HCTZ via contaminated NSAID tablets.Due to the substantial sensitivity of test methods employed today by doping control laboratories, even drug contaminations ranging within the good manufacturing practice (GMP) limit of 10ppm overall carry-over can evidently lead to adverse analytical findings. This calls into question whether selected (classes of) substances such as diuretics should be reported only when exceeding a defined reporting level and/or whether adverse analytical findings of non-threshold substances should be reported with an estimated semi-quantitative concentration of the identified substance to facilitate the result management by anti-doping organizations.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.