Kenneth D. Fitch

Asthma and the elite athlete: Summary of the International Olympic Committee's Consensus Conference, Lausanne, Switzerland, january 22-24, 2008

Respiratory symptoms cannot be relied on to make a diagnosis of asthma and/or airways hyperresponsiveness (AHR) in elite athletes. For this reason, the diagnosis should be confirmed with bronchial provocation tests. Asthma management in elite athletes should follow established treatment guidelines (eg, Global Initiative for Asthma) and should include education, an individually tailored treatment plan, minimization of aggravating environmental factors, and appropriate drug therapy that must meet the requirements of the World Anti-Doping Agency. Asthma control can usually be achieved with inhaled corticosteroids and inhaled beta(2)-agonists to minimize exercise-induced bronchoconstriction and to treat intermittent symptoms. The rapid development of tachyphylaxis to beta(2)-agonists after regular daily use poses a dilemma for athletes. Long-term intense endurance training, particularly in unfavorable environmental conditions, appears to be associated with an increased risk of developing asthma and AHR in elite athletes. Globally, the prevalence of asthma, exercise-induced bronchoconstriction, and AHR in Olympic athletes reflects the known prevalence of asthma symptoms in each country. The policy of requiring Olympic athletes to demonstrate the presence of asthma, exercise-induced bronchoconstriction, or AHR to be approved to inhale beta(2)-agonists will continue.

An overview of asthma and airway hyper-responsiveness in Olympic athletes

Data from the past five Olympic Games obtained from athletes seeking to inhale β2 adrenoceptor agonists (IBA) have identified those athletes with documented asthma and airway hyper-responsiveness (AHR). With a prevalence of about 8%, asthma/AHR is the commonest chronic medical condition experienced by Olympic athletes. In Summer and Winter athletes, there is a marked preponderance of asthma/AHR in endurance-trained athletes. The relatively late onset of asthma/AHR in many older athletes is suggestive that years of endurance training may be a contributory cause. Inspiring polluted or cold air is considered a significant aetiological factor in some but not all sports. During the last five Olympic Games, there has been improved management of athletes with asthma/AHR with a much higher proportion of athletes combining inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) with IBA and few using long-acting IBA as monotherapy. Athletes with asthma/AHR have consistently outperformed their peers, which research suggests is not due to their treatment enhancing sports performance. Research is necessary to determine how many athletes will continue to experience asthma/AHR in the years after they cease intensive endurance training.

Laboratory protocol for exercise asthma to evaluate salbutamol given by two devices.

PURPOSE As new delivery devices and formulations are being introduced for drugs given by inhalation, there is a need to evaluate their equivalence with old preparations. One way to do this is to investigate their equivalence in protecting from exercise-induced asthma (EIA). METHODS We used a protocol for EIA to compare the protective effect of salbutamol delivered by the pressurised metered dose inhaler (pMDI) and the new Diskus dry powder device. Twenty-seven asthmatic subjects with moderately severe EIA completed an exercise test on four separate days at two study centers. Exercise was performed by cycling for 8 min while inhaling dry air (0% RH, 20-24 degrees C). The target workload in W was predicted as (53.76 x predicted FEV1) - 11.07 and 95% of this target was achieved at 4 min of exercise. This target was chosen in order to achieve ventilation between 50 and 60% of predicted maximum in the last 4 min. RESULTS There was no significant difference in the workload, ventilation, or heart rate achieved on the study days. The severity of EIA was measured as the % fall in FEV1. EIA severity was similar on the placebo and control day and the coefficient of variation was 19.4%. The mean +/- SD % fall on the control, placebo, salbutamol by Diskus, and pMDI were 42.0% +/- 15, 39.4% +/-17.6, 13.4% +/- 13.2, and 8.5% +/- 13.8, respectively. Salbutamol significantly inhibited the % fall in FEV1 after exercise, and there was no difference between the preparations. CONCLUSION The protocol described here is suitable for evaluating equivalence of salbutamol preparations in protecting against EIA and could be used to evaluate the protective effect of other medications.

Medicine and science in the fight against doping in sport.

The fight against doping in sports commenced as a result of the death of a Danish cyclist during the Rome Olympic Games in 1960. The International Olympic Committee (IOC) established a Medical Commission (IOC‐MC) which had the task of designing a strategy to combat the misuse of drugs in Olympic Sport. Some International Sport Federations (IF) and National Sports Federations followed suit, but progress was modest until the world’s best male sprinter was found doped with anabolic steroids at the Olympic Games in Seoul in 1988. Further progress was made following the cessation of the cold war in 1989 and in 1999 public authorities around the world joined the Olympic Movement in a unique partnership by creating WADA – the ‘World Anti‐Doping Agency’. The troubled history of the anti‐doping fight from the 1960s until today is reviewed. In particular, the development of detection methods for an ever increasing number of drugs that can be used to dope is described, as are the measures that have been taken to protect the health of the athletes, including those who may need banned substances for medical reasons.

Respiratory health of elite athletes – preventing airway injury: a critical review

Elite athletes, particularly those engaged in endurance sports and those exposed chronically to airborne pollutants/irritants or allergens, are at increased risk for upper and lower airway dysfunction. Airway epithelial injury may be caused by dehydration and physical stress applied to the airways during severe exercise hyperpnoea and/or by inhalation of noxious agents. This is thought to initiate an inflammatory cascade/repair process that, ultimately, could lead to airway hyperresponsiveness (AHR) and asthma in susceptible athletes. The authors review the evidence relating to prevention or reduction of the risk of AHR/asthma development. Appropriate measures should be implemented when athletes exercise strenuously in an attempt to attenuate the dehydration stress and reduce the exposure to noxious airborne agents. Environmental interventions are the most important. Non-pharmacological strategies can assist, but currently, pharmacological measures have not been demonstrated to be effective. Whether early prevention of airway injury in elite athletes can prevent or reduce progression to AHR/asthma remains to be established.

Management of allergic Olympic athletes

Twenty percent of the recent Australian Olympic athletes have had an allergic disorder. Because of the ban on all sympathomimetic drugs except some beta 2-agonists. Olympic team physicians have a major responsibility to ensure that no competitor is disqualified for infringing on the antidoping rules of the Medical Commission of the International Olympic Committee. Inadvertent contravention of these regulations may occur because numerous banned sympathomimetics are available to athletes and their coaches without medical prescription and are frequently contained in combination preparations. The unbroken 24 yr in which asthmatics have won Olympic medals have been both before and after the introduction of drug tests. Currently a comprehensive range of preventive and therapeutic medications are available for asthmatics to compete with minimal respiratory disadvantage. It was, however, during a period of unnecessary restriction that an American swimmer forfeited his gold medal because of prerace ingestion of a banned sympathomimetic agent. Should adverse air quality be encountered during the Los Angeles Olympics, allergic competitors will be among the most inconvenienced . Athletes with allergic rhinitis and sinusitis will be the most disadvantaged because sympathomimetic vasoconstrictors remain banned. It is strongly recommended that the Medical Commission of the International Olympic Committee meet with an appropriate body of experts (i.e., the American Academy of Allergy and Immunology) to review this ban on vasoconstrictor agents.

β2-agonists at the olympic games

The different approaches that the International Olympic Committee (IOC) had adopted to β2-agonists and the implications for athletes are reviewed by a former Olympic team physician who later became a member of the Medical Commission of the IOC (IOC-MC). Steadily increasing knowledge of the effects of inhaled β2-agonists on health, is concerned with the fact that oral β2-agonists may be anabolic, and rapid increased use of inhaled β2-agonists by elite athletes has contributed to the changes to the IOC rules. Since 2001, the necessity for athletes to meet IOC criteria (i.e., that they have asthma and/or exercise-induced asthma [EIA]) has resulted in imporved management of athletes. The prevalence of β2-agonist use by athletes mirrors the known prevalence of asthma symptoms in each country, although athletes in endurance events have the highest prevalence. The age-of-onset of asthma/EIA in elite winter athletes may be atypical. Of the 193 athletes at the 2006 Winter Olympics who met th IOCs criteria, only 32.1% had childhood asthma and 48.7% of athletes reported onset at age 20 yr or older. These findings lead to speculation that years of intense endurance training may be a causative factor in bronchial hyperreactivity. The distinction between oral (prohibited in sports) and inhaled salbutamol is possible, but athletes must be warned that excessive use of inhaled salbutamol can lead to urinary concentrations similar to those observed after oral administration. This article provides justification that athletes should provide evidence of asthma or EIA before being permitted to use inhaled β2-agonists.

Is salmeterol ergogenic

ObjectiveTo assess the effects of 50 μg of inhaled salmeterol on pulmonary function, selected physical capacities, and fine motor control in 16 nonasthmatic male cyclists and triathletes, mean age of 23.2 (SD = 3.5) years. DesignRandomized double-blind placebo-controlled crossover trial. SettingHuman Physical Performance Laboratory, the University of Western Australia. SubjectsSixteen healthy male high-performance nonasthmatic athletes with a mean age of 23.2 years participated in the study. InterventionSubjects attended three experimental testing sessions at which salmeterol (50 μg), a placebo, or “no treatment” was administered in random order in a double-blind fashion, on separate occasions, prior to exercise. Main outcome measuresDuring each testing, session lung function was measured before and 10 min after the treatment. Tests of reaction time and hand steadiness and then two anaerobic cycle tests followed. The first, a 10-s all-out sprint was followed, after a 3-min rest, by a 30-s all-out sprint performed on a front access bicycle ergometer. After 10 min recovery, leg flexion-extension peak torque was measured on a Biodex isokinetic dynamometer at speeds of 120 and 180° s−1. Main resultsLung function variables, reaction time, movement time, alactic anaerobic power, lactacid anaerobic power, and leg-flexion and leg-extension muscular strength were similar among the three treatment groups. ConclusionsThe preexercise administration of 50 μg of inhaled salmeterol has no performance-enhancing effects in nonasthmatic athletes. We believe that athletes with asthma should be permitted to use salmeterol before competition.

Distinction of inhaled and oral salbutamol by urine analysis using conventional screening procedures for doping control.

Salbutamol administration in athletes is permitted only by inhalation, for the management of asthma. The authors discuss different criteria for suspecting oral use of salbutamol, taking into account the data obtained by application of two conventional screening procedures for doping control: gas chromatography/mass spectrometry (GC/MS) and enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). Urine samples obtained after administration of oral and inhaled salbutamol to asthmatic and nonasthmatic swimmers were analyzed using both analytical approaches. As expected, concentrations obtained by the ELISA test (detection of total salbutamol) were higher than those obtained using the GC/MS procedure (detection of nonsulfated salbutamol). After oral administration, the ELISA test detected significantly higher salbutamol concentrations than those detected after inhalation, reflecting the greater doses administered orally. Urine samples with total salbutamol greater than 1400 ng/mL were obtained after oral doses, but no sample reached this value after inhaled doses. Higher concentrations of nonsulfated salbutamol have also been detected after oral intake, although there is an overlap between the distributions of concentrations after oral and inhaled doses. A cut-off concentration of 500 ng/mL can be used for nonsulfated salbutamol to select suspicious samples, giving 11.8% false negative results and 4.3% false positive results. An additional criterion evaluated was the androsterone-salbutamol peak height ratio, which was lower after oral doses because of the higher concentrations of salbutamol in urine. This ratio was lower than 2 for all the samples collected after oral administration, although 6.8% false positive samples resulted because of low concentrations of androsterone in female urine. Several possibilities for detecting suspicious samples from athletes who have taken prohibited oral salbutamol are available with conventional screening procedures in doping control.

Androgenic-anabolic steroids and the Olympic Games

Androgenic-anabolic steroids (AAS) have been misused by athletes at the Olympic Games, both before and after they were prohibited in sport in 1974. Systematic doping with AAS occurred in the German Democratic Republic (GDR) from 1965 to 1989 which assisted that country to win many medals at Olympic Games, especially in female events. Currently, AAS are the most frequent category of prohibited substances detected in the urine of athletes both globally and at the last two Summer Olympic Games. Scientific confirmation that AAS are effective in enhancing sports performance was difficult because ethical approval was difficult for research involving male subjects taking massive doses of androgens as some athletes and bodybuilders did. Methods to detect AAS have evolved gradually over the past three decades and currently, despite an impressive array of sophisticated analytical equipment and methods, anti-doping authorities and analytical scientists continue to face challenges as have occurred from the use by athletes of designer AAS during the past few years. The future development and use of selective androgen receptor modulators (SARMs) can be anticipated to pose problems in the years ahead. Endocrinologists should be aware that on occasions, replacement testosterone (T) therapy may be authorized in sport as a therapeutic use exemption (TUE) and these circumstances are discussed.