TIAFT Young Scientists "Workshop 2001"

Elimination kinetics of oral nandrolone in urine and saliva

V. Cirimele, P. Kintz B. Ludes

Institut de Médecine Légale, Laboratoire de Toxicologie, 11 rue Humann, 67085 Strasbourg Cedex (France)

Athletes use exogenous anabolic steroids such as nandrolone because it has been claimed that they increase lean body mass, strength, aggressiveness and lead to a shorter recovery time between workouts. To document nandrolone exposure, the target analytes are the glucoronoconjugated metabolites norandrosterone (NA) and noretiocholanolone (NE) in urine.

In the recent years, remarkable advances in sensitive analytical techniques have enabled the analysis of drugs in unconventional biological specimens such as saliva. Saliva has been increasingly used as an analytical tool in pharmacokinetic studies, therapeutic drug monitoring and for the detection of illicit drugs. To the best of our knowledge, no data seems available for the detection of any anabolic in human saliva. In order to study the elimination kinetics of nandrolone in human, nandrolone sulfate (22 mg) was administered orally to a 28-year-old male. Urine and saliva specimens were collected during 48 hours and extracted according to our previously published procedure (1).

Briefly, urine (2.5 ml) and saliva (1 ml) samples, spiked with 25 ng of the deuterated analog of NE, were extracted using Isolute C18 columns. After elution with methanol (3 x 0.5 ml), the extract was dried, hydrolysed with beta-glucuronidase at pH 7.0 (1h at 50°C) and purified with pentane. The derivatized (MSTFA/NH4I/2-mercaptoethanol) steroids were detected by GC/MS in the SIM mode of acquisition.

In urine, nandrolone was detected 1 hour after administration and for 10 hours. NA and NE were detectable for 48 hours. In saliva, nandrolone was detected only 1 hour after administration (13 ng/ml). NA was never detected and NE tested positive for 9 hours with concentrations ranging from 0.7 to 2.6 ng/ml.

The concentrations observed in saliva are largely lower than those detected in urine, with a different kinetic profile for the metabolites elimination (NA>NE in urine, NA never detected in saliva) and a smaller detection window (more than 48 hours in urine against 10 hours in saliva).

The advantages of this sample, over traditional media like urine or blood, is almost a non invasive and easy collection procedure with low risks of adulteration or substitution. Nevertheless, the low elimination rate of nandrolone from saliva lets presume that this medium is not suitable to detect nandrolone.

In conclusion, saliva does not constitute a suitable specimen for doping control of anabolics.

References

  1. P. Kintz, V. Cirimele, H. Sachs, T. Jeanneau and B. Ludes, Forensic Sci. Int., 101 (1999) 209.

ABSTRACTS