Detection of human growth hormone doping in urine: out of competition tests are necessary.

The misuse of human growth hormone (hGH) in sport is deemed to be unethical and dangerous because of various adverse effects. Thus, it has been added to the International Olympic Committee list of banned substances. Until now, the very low concentration of hGH in the urine made its measurement difficult using classical methodology. Indeed, for routine diagnosis, only plasma measurements were available. However, unlike blood samples, urine is generally provided in abundant quantities and is, at present, the only body fluid allowed to be analysed in sport doping controls. A recently developed enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (Norditest) makes it now possible, without any extraction, to measure urinary hGH (u-hGH) in a dynamic range of 2-50 ng hGH/l. In our protocol, untreated and treated non-athlete volunteers were followed. Some of them received therapeutical doses of recombinant hGH (Norditropin) for one week either intramuscularly (three increasing doses) or subcutaneously (12 i.u. every day). The u-hGH excretion after treatment showed dramatic increases of 50-100 times the basal values and returned to almost the mean normal level after 24 h. u-hGH was also measured in samples provided by the anti-doping controls at major and minor competitions. Depending on the type of efforts made during the competition, the hGH concentration in urine was dramatically increased. Insulin-like growth factor binding proteins and beta 2-microglobulins in urine and/or in blood could be necessary for the correct investigation of any hGH doping test procedure.

In-vitro cell exposure studies for the assessment of nanoparticle toxicity in the lung: a dialog between aerosol science and biology

The introduction of engineered nanostructured materials into a rapidly increasing number of industrial and consumer products will result in enhanced exposure to engineered nanoparticles. Workplace exposure has been identified as the most likely source of uncontrolled inhalation of engineered aerosolized nanoparticles, but release of engineered nanoparticles may occur at any stage of the lifecycle of (consumer) products. The dynamic development of nanomaterials with possibly unknown toxicological effects poses a challenge for the assessment of nanoparticle induced toxicity and safety.In this consensus document from a workshop on in-vitro cell systems for nanoparticle toxicity testing11Workshop on 'In-Vitro Exposure Studies for Toxicity Testing of Engineered Nanoparticles' sponsored by the Association for Aerosol Research (GAeF), 5-6 September 2009, Karlsruhe, Germany. an overview is given of the main issues concerning exposure to airborne nanoparticles, lung physiology, biological mechanisms of (adverse) action, in-vitro cell exposure systems, realistic tissue doses, risk assessment and social aspects of nanotechnology. The workshop participants recognized the large potential of in-vitro cell exposure systems for reliable, high-throughput screening of nanoparticle toxicity. For the investigation of lung toxicity, a strong preference was expressed for air-liquid interface (ALI) cell exposure systems (rather than submerged cell exposure systems) as they more closely resemble in-vivo conditions in the lungs and they allow for unaltered and dosimetrically accurate delivery of aerosolized nanoparticles to the cells. An important aspect, which is frequently overlooked, is the comparison of typically used in-vitro dose levels with realistic in-vivo nanoparticle doses in the lung. If we consider average ambient urban exposure and occupational exposure at 5mg/m3 (maximum level allowed by Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA)) as the boundaries of human exposure, the corresponding upper-limit range of nanoparticle flux delivered to the lung tissue is 3×10-5-5×10-3μg/h/cm2 of lung tissue and 2-300particles/h/(epithelial) cell. This range can be easily matched and even exceeded by almost all currently available cell exposure systems.The consensus statement includes a set of recommendations for conducting in-vitro cell exposure studies with pulmonary cell systems and identifies urgent needs for future development. As these issues are crucial for the introduction of safe nanomaterials into the marketplace and the living environment, they deserve more attention and more interaction between biologists and aerosol scientists. The members of the workshop believe that further advances in in-vitro cell exposure studies would be greatly facilitated by a more active role of the aerosol scientists. The technical know-how for developing and running ALI in-vitro exposure systems is available in the aerosol community and at the same time biologists/toxicologists are required for proper assessment of the biological impact of nanoparticles.

Homology modeling and metabolism prediction of human carboxylesterase-2 using docking analyses by GriDock: a parallelized tool based on AutoDock 4.0.

Metabolic problems lead to numerous failures during clinical trials, and much effort is now devoted to developing in silico models predicting metabolic stability and metabolites. Such models are well known for cytochromes P450 and some transferases, whereas less has been done to predict the activity of human hydrolases. The present study was undertaken to develop a computational approach able to predict the hydrolysis of novel esters by human carboxylesterase hCES2. The study involved first a homology modeling of the hCES2 protein based on the model of hCES1 since the two proteins share a high degree of homology (congruent with 73%). A set of 40 known substrates of hCES2 was taken from the literature; the ligands were docked in both their neutral and ionized forms using GriDock, a parallel tool based on the AutoDock4.0 engine which can perform efficient and easy virtual screening analyses of large molecular databases exploiting multi-core architectures. Useful statistical models (e.g., r (2) = 0.91 for substrates in their unprotonated state) were calculated by correlating experimental pK(m) values with distance between the carbon atom of the substrate's ester group and the hydroxy function of Ser228. Additional parameters in the equations accounted for hydrophobic and electrostatic interactions between substrates and contributing residues. The negatively charged residues in the hCES2 cavity explained the preference of the enzyme for neutral substrates and, more generally, suggested that ligands which interact too strongly by ionic bonds (e.g., ACE inhibitors) cannot be good CES2 substrates because they are trapped in the cavity in unproductive modes and behave as inhibitors. The effects of protonation on substrate recognition and the contrasting behavior of substrates and products were finally investigated by MD simulations of some CES2 complexes.