DNA Typing: An Accessory Evidence in Doping Control

• NCJ Number: 209748
• Journal: Journal of Forensic Sciences Volume: 50 Issue: 3 Dated: May 2005 Pages: 587-592
• Author(s): Marlice Aparecida Sipoli Marques Ph.D.; Lucia Meneses Pinto Damasceno Ph.D.; Henrique Marcelo Gualberto Pereira Ph.D.; Concy Maya Caldeira M.D.; Bianca Faria Pereira Dias B.Sc.; Daniela de Giacomo Vargens M.Sc.; Nivea Dias Amoedo B.Sc.; Rosana Oliveira Volkweis B.Sc.; Rosane Oliveira Volkweis Viana B.Sc.; Franklin David Rumjanek Ph.D.; Francisco Radler Aquino Neto Ph.D.
• Date Published: May 2005
• Length: 6 pages
• Publication Format: Article
• Publication Type: Case Study
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America

Annotation

This article describes a case study in which DNA sequencing was requested to refute results of a doping control procedure.

Abstract

Positive results for the use of anabolic steroids in a urine sample provided by an athlete were challenged by allegations of urine tampering during the doping control procedures. The chain of custody in this case was reviewed and no flaws were discovered. The athlete demanded DNA testing to prove that the steroid-tainted urine was not obtained from her. DNA sequencing subsequently indicated that the steroid-tainted urine could not be matched to the DNA obtained from the athlete’s blood. However, the urine sample contained mitochondrial DNA with nucleotide sequences spanning the hyper variable regions HV1 and HV2 that were identical to those found in the athlete’s blood. In this case, it was not possible to exclude the possibility that a sibling or a maternal relative of the athlete could have provided the urine obtained for doping control and DNA analysis. The case indicated possible tampering by the athlete, particularly since there was no proof of a chain of custody flaw that would allow for urine substitution after collection.