Log me on automatically each visit
It is currently Fri Dec 01, 2023 2:57 pm
Post a new topic Post a reply  [ 2 posts ]   
Author Message
 Post subject: Lab testing
PostPosted: Fri May 29, 2015 11:30 pm 
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Wed May 27, 2015 10:20 am
Posts: 511
From: ... -programs/

The alphabet soup of testing

One of the most important differences in testing between states is the methodology used to analyze post-race samples. There are three primary types of testing mentioned in most contracts: thin-layer chromatography (TLC), enzyme-linked immunoassays (ELISA kits), and liquid or gas chromatography/mass spectronomy (LCMS/GCMS).

TLC was the testing method of choice in the 1970s and 1980s because of its speed and cost efficiency. It remains a quick means of testing a sample, but is relatively insensitive, and may only detect substances given to a horse within a few days.

ELISA test kits came to prominence in the 1990s as a more expensive but more sensitive option. One test kit, which costs between $50 and $100, can test between 80 and 86 samples at once. Each kit can test for only one, or perhaps two or three closely-related drugs, making it expensive to test for a range of possible drugs using ELISA kits alone. An even larger downside is the limitations of ELISA tests—there aren’t kits available for all known substances that could be found in racehorses.

LCMS/GCMS is a more recent development in drug testing and has the advantage of being both highly sensitive and efficient, analyzing a sample against a library of known drugs in a single test. It also happens to be the most expensive option for laboratories to develop and for customers to use. LCMS/GCMS (also called instrumentation testing) is best at keeping up with an evolving carousel of performance-enhancing drugs, many of which are easily mutated to evade regulators.

Since there is no law obligating states to pony up for the most advanced post-race testing methods available, they often make decisions based on costs, which means that commissions and labs often find their hands tied by budget constraints. Some states raise the extra cash from commissions, horsemen, or racetracks to use the best testing they can. Those that can’t may give preference (or in some cases, even require) laboratories to use older methods or reduce the scope of their testing to comply with cost restrictions.

“It’s unfortunate that most of the labs we have begun accrediting have that high level of technology, it’s just that they’re not always permitted to use it based on the contract that they have with the commission,” said Dr. Dionne Benson, executive director for the Racing Medication and Testing Consortium.

Benson said low standards could result from a combination of poor funding or shaky education on the part of racing commissions to understand what different testing methods entail and why they are priced the way they are.

Different standards in practice
The most recent request for proposals (RFP) for post-race testing in Indiana requires samples to be subjected to both “instrumentation methods of analysis” (which includes GCMS and LCMS) and “a complimentary panel of [ELISA] tests.” It also requires the lab to meet a basic international standard for testing laboratories. Further, it states that the Indiana Horse Racing Commission must hold $10,000 in reserve to help develop tests for new drugs in the future. The contract was ultimately awarded to HFL, where Sams said the lab’s instrumentation testing screens all samples for around 1,500 substances.

Other states are not so specific, or so thorough.

Florida conducts its post-race testing via the Florida Racing Laboratory at the University of Florida, Gainesville. The state’s 11-page contract with the lab has just one paragraph outlining the technical specifications of the testing itself, and nowhere does it specifically outline what type of test must be used. Instead, it reads: “Testing shall be sufficient to cover acidic, basic, and neutral drugs both conjugated and non-conjugated.”

All three of the common available testing methods, including the older TLC testing, will identify acidic, basic, and neutral drugs—because all drugs are either acidic, basic, or neutral.

Arkansas’ request for contract proposals divides its samples randomly into thirds. One third may have TLC, ELISA, or the most advanced method, instrumentation testing, used on them; one third are tested with 15 or more ELISA kits, and the final third are screened with instrumentation testing. For those falling into the middle third, samples could legally be tested for as few as 15 substances. Total price for post-race testing (both equine and canine) annually in Arkansas: $166,560.

When New Jersey asked for proposals from labs to conduct its post-race testing, instrumentation testing was not recognized as a legal form of testing per the racing commission’s rules. As a result, labs contracted to New Jersey can’t implement the most advanced form of testing.

Louisiana’s contract with the Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College leaves the door open as to the types of testing that can be used. The contract states that either TLC or instrumentation testing may be used for blood samples, and either ELISA or instrumentation for urine samples.

Not all states require the labs they use to be accredited by international or RMTC standards. Some don’t address accreditation at all, and others only suggest that the lab do internal quality checks. Many states also don’t outline which drugs must stay in the testing rotation.

Filling up the pool
To save money, some laboratories will mix two or three, even five or ten urine samples and run one test on the pooled result rather than paying for ten separate tests. As more samples are added together, the concentration of whatever substances they contain is reduced.

Some states (like Indiana, for example) specifically forbid sample pooling, while others allow an express number of samples to be pooled. Still others, like Florida, are silent on the matter—meaning a lab could pool to its budgetary content without violating contract.

Could sample pooling reduce the concentration of a substance to the point that it’s undetectable?

“It really depends on each individual drug. With some drugs, the limit of detection is such that you could pool and still detect the drug at meaningful concentrations, and others that would be really difficult,” said Rick Sams.

“You can’t assume that the limit of detection is the same for all substances.”

The price of positives
Regardless of testing method, most jurisdictions call for confirmation after a positive test is discovered. Florida’s contract requires instrumentation testing as a follow-up to a positive test. The financial part of the agreement, however, deals with one lump sum paid from the state to the lab, with no written provisions for the additional expense of such follow-up tests.

“Finding positives is expensive,” said Benson. “It’s interesting to determine whether the laboratories have that as part of their contract, or if it’s an additional part. If they don’t get extra [for test confirmations], there’s kind of an unwritten encouragement not to find things.”

What does it all mean?
The Thoroughbred Owners and Breeders’ Association requires a high level of testing and a sizable list of drug tests for graded stakes races regardless of the state hosting them. On an average card, though, Benson said it’s hypothetically possible that horses could be running on illegal substances with impunity—because samples are not being tested for them.

“To me, if your labs aren’t, at a minimum, testing the TOBA graded stakes list [for every race] and the RMTC thresholds, I don’t know why you would bother to do it,” said Benson. “If those are the things we’re truly concerned about in our best horses, why aren’t we concerned about it in our lesser horses?”

Currently, Benson said the RMTC is focused on accrediting labs with top-notch methods (like instrumentation testing) if they can demonstrate consistent and accurate results on proficiency samples. The accreditation program has certified three labs since 2013, with five others working through the process.

“We actually had an individual come over from Europe to do a site inspection,” said Benson, referring to a required inspection for the RMTC accreditation process. “He actually said they were doing as good a job, if not better than they do in Europe. So, for those laboratories, I have no doubt that they’re doing a good job on every sample and I think that as we get through the accreditation process, we know that the labs that we are accrediting have the ability to do that same work—it’s whether they have the ability to do it on every sample per their contract.

“It seems a very big shame to not utilize our labs to their fullest.”

Benson said one of her long-term goals is to begin educating commissions on the basics of the various testing methods, and writing a strong RFP.

In the meantime, it appears there are certain racing jurisdictions in which it may be easier to get away with cheating than others. Benson and Sams fear that horsemen have already figured out which are which.

OfflineProfileReply with quote
 Post subject: Re: Lab testing
PostPosted: Fri May 29, 2015 11:33 pm 
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Wed May 27, 2015 10:20 am
Posts: 511
New Bolton Lecture:

The Dope on New Drug Research and Testing

June 2013 - By Lawrence R. Soma, VMD, DACVA

University of Pennsylvania School of Veterinary Medicine
New Bolton Center, Kennett Square, PA
For more than 30 years, the Equine Pharmacology & Forensic Research Program, a collaboration between Penn Vet’s New Bolton Center and the Pennsylvania Equine Toxicology & Research Center in West Chester, has been working to develop drug detection tests for banned substances in race horses at both Thoroughbred and Standardbred race tracks. This work is vital to the health and well being of equine athletes in both racing disciplines. According to the Racing Medication and Testing Consortium (RMTC), testing in horse racing is superior to that in human athletics as equine testing laboratories analyze samples for a far wider variety of drugs and many more samples are tested. Every winner of each race in the U.S. has a post-race sample collected (either blood or urine – often both), and race stewards are empowered to send additional horses to the test barn following a race. Annually, the industry spends approximately $30 million overall for drug testing.

Dr. Lawrence Soma, with Dr. Cornelius Uboh, has led the work of the PETR Laboratory and has been instrumental in developing drug tests that are infinitely more accurate and reliable than anything in the past. The Pennsylvania Equine Toxicology and Research Laboratory (PETRL) is one of 18 laboratories nationwide handling the entire volume of drug testing for horse racing. Only six of these laboratories are accredited, and PETRL is one of those six. Dr. Soma presented an overview of this work in a “First Tuesday” lecture at New Bolton Center on April 2, 2013. A summary of Dr. Soma’s presentation follows:

What Do Tests Consist Of? The primary mediums used for drug testing are blood (plasma) and urine. Saliva is rarely used. Following the death of a horse at a PA racing facility, a post-mortem examination is conducted and tissues are submitted to the laboratory for drug testing. The order of drug testing procedures is (1) screening for drugs in plasma and urine to determine if a drug is present, (2) identifying the presence of a suspect drug in the sample, (3) identification and confirmation of the illegal substance, and (4) determining the concentration (quantification) of the drug in the sample.

What Methods Are Used to Screen Samples?
Two methods are used for the initial screening – enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) and instrumental screening using mass-spectrometry.

ELISA is an antibody-based screening method that has been in use for over 40 years. It is primarily used for the screening of drugs in urine. This is a biological-based system in that antibodies are produced in an animal against the drug, and the antibodies produced are then used to detect the drug. The production of antibodies is similar to vaccination. An animal is vaccinated using a protein-drug complex, the body produces antibodies against this complex, and following a number of booster injections, blood is collected and antibodies are harvested. The animal now has a rich source of antibodies against a drug or specific group of drugs. The advantage is that the method is simple to use and will detect drugs in the same group. For example, antibodies produced against morphine will detect other drugs related to morphine. The disadvantages are that it is not specific and is subject to false-positives. In addition, the drug has to be confirmed by other methods, the sensitivity of the test can vary, and if a new drug comes along, it takes an average of a year to develop a test using antibodies.

Over the last ten years, the development of liquid chromatography mass-spectrometry has revolutionized drug detection and the use of instruments for screening a large number of drugs at the same time. Sensitivity, speed, and versatility have led to the development of screening methods for hundreds of drugs in a plasma or urine sample in less than five minutes. Currently, Pennsylvania screens every post-race sample submitted to the laboratory for many drugs. For example, methods have been developed for simultaneous screening and identification of 60 anabolic and androgenic steroids in equine plasma. In the past, only specific groups of drugs were targeted on a rotational basis due to the limitations of instrumentation and sensitivity.

How Are Illegal Substances Identified or Confirmed?
Drug confirmation establishes the “fingerprint” of the specific drug in question. Each drug, when subjected to high energy within the mass-spectrometer, will disintegrate or break into specific ions or pieces based on its chemical structure. Further energy will produce secondary ions or pieces. This “fingerprint,” when matched to a known certified authentic standard of that drug, will confirm the unknown drug. Confirmation of a drug is a rigorous, well-documented process in which a number of criteria must be met before a positive is reported to the Horse or Harness Racing Commissions. The rigorous nature of the procedure is such that it resembles the human fingerprint and will withstand challenges in court.

How Are the Amounts of Drugs in a Specimen Quantified?
Quantification of the drug is the last step in the process and determines the quantity of the drug in plasma, urine, or tissue. Using a calibration curve, the identified drug in the test sample is compared to a verified, authentic standard of that drug. The concentrations are measured in duplicate or triplicate, and the slight variability around the average concentration is multiplied by two. This number is known as the “degree of uncertainty in the measurement.”

Accuracy of drug quantifications is very important when studies are done to determine how drugs are removed from the body of horses. Pharmacokinetic is the science of the effect of the horse on the drug and pharmacodynamic determines the effect of the drug on the horse. These studies are conducted to determine how rapidly the drug is eliminated from the horse and its effect on the horse. These are important in determining when therapeutic medications have cleared from the horse’s body, allowing the horse to compete drug-free in an official race sanctioned by the PA Racing Commission.

What Are Peptides, Polypeptides and Proteins?
Proteins are the body’s functional machinery and are made according to the DNA blueprints that carry out many cell functions in the human and animal body. All naturally occurring proteins are made from 20 amino acids found in all higher mammals. Peptides comprise a fewer number of amino acids assembled from the body’s amino acids. Insulin is a larger polypeptide (multiple amino acids linked together) and recombinant erythropoietin (EPO) is a much larger protein-based drug. Peptides or protein-based drugs are substitutes for a specific group of proteins produced by the body. Peptides and recombinant drugs are replicates of naturally occurring proteins and can be made to behave like “the real thing” and stimulate body functions.

Recombinant EPO can be used to stimulate the production of red blood cells, thereby increasing transport of oxygen to the tissues and hence improving performance. Polypeptides and protein-based drugs are considered large molecules and are therefore more difficult to detect and recover from blood and urine. Polypeptides have to be broken or cut into smaller pieces before they can be confirmed by mass-spectrometry. At Penn Vet, we have had great success developing methods to detect and confirm these drugs.

Future Testing Methods – What’s Next?
If a drug is identified in a sample collected from a horse after the conclusion of a race, the positive drug finding is reported to the PA Horse Racing Commission. But what happens if the drug rapidly disappears from plasma or urine yet still has the ability to affect performance? Studies are underway to establish alternative ways of identifying the effects of drug administration or manipulation of the horse.

One form of “manipulation” is Extracorporeal Shock-Wave Therapy (ESWT). Shockwaves are high-energy sound waves that have therapeutic value when transmitted to injured sections of the body. They can be used to enhance the repair of tendons, ligaments, stress fractures, and non-union fractures. ESWT offers pain relief to the treated area for up to four days. Pennsylvania Racing Commission Regulations state that no ESWT should be used within seven days of racing, but there is no way of enforcing this regulation. Unlike drug administration, where there is a method for detection, there is no method for detecting ESWT. Many protein-based drugs cannot be detected in blood or urine hours or days following their administrations, but they still have an effect on the horse’s performance.

Biomarker Discovery Using Equine DNA
The description of the equine genome has led to the development and the production of an equine chip containing 20,000 equine genes. This has opened the door for the determination of changes in DNA, up regulation or down regulation, as a possible marker for describing alterations in the genome produced by diseases, chronic disorders, or extracorporeal shock-wave therapy. Currently, there is no method to determine if ESWT has been administered prior to racing. Using noted DNA changes in the horse as a means to identify the use of illegal substances or treatments is one of our current approaches. RNA is isolated from white blood cells before and after the administration of shock wave therapy. The main job of RNA is to transfer the genetic code from the DNA needed for the creation of proteins. Proteins are the workhorses of the cell, carrying out a variety of functions. Following ESWT, changes in candidate biomarkers (RNA) have been seen across a 72-hour time frame. These changes are now being validated so that we can use them as “tellers” or “pointers” for the use of ESWT in horses.

Biomarker Discovery Using Serum Proteome Analysis
Plasma contains thousands of proteins, of which only a small percentage carries out body functions. The field of protein study (proteomics) is rapidly growing, attempting to identify and quantify many of the proteins produced by living organisms. The primary focus of proteome analysis in humans is to define changes produced by diseases, chronic disorders, and for cancer diagnosis. It is essential for these methods to be developed and applied to biomarker discovery in the horse. Our current focus is on how biomarker discovery can benefit the drug testing community.

Biomarker Discovery Using Serum Cytokine Analysis
Cytokines are proteins that are released by tissue cells in response to trauma, disease, pain, and various stimuli. Shock wave therapy produces inflammation and an increase in regional blood flow. This speeds up the healing process. Many cytokines remain at the local level within the tissues and some are released into the blood stream. We are seeking those that are released into plasma and can be identified. We have developed enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) for nine equine cytokine proteins, which are both inflammatory and anti-inflammatory proteins. We have found significant changes in three of the nine cytokines we have examined following ESWT.

The studies underway are the work of a number of talented researchers who each have special expertise in analytic chemistry, protein chemistry, molecular biology, pharmacology, equine pharmacology, and veterinary medicine. The work is funded by the Pennsylvania Harness and Horse Racing Commissions, through the Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture, with additional support from Standardbred and Thoroughbred horsemen’s organizations in Pennsylvania.

OfflineProfileReply with quote
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post a new topic Post a reply  [ 2 posts ] 

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum
Search for:
Jump to: