Explore the vast range of titles available.

Caffeine use is widespread in sport, with a strong evidence base demonstrating its ergogenic effect. Based on existing research, current guidelines recommend ingestion of 3–9 mg/kg approximately 60 min prior to exercise. However, the magnitude of performance enhancement following caffeine ingestion differs substantially between individuals, with the spectrum of responses ranging between highly ergogenic to ergolytic. These extensive inter-individual response distinctions are mediated by variation in individual genotype, environmental factors, and the legacy of prior experiences partially mediated via epigenetic mechanisms. Here, we briefly review the drivers of this inter-individual variation in caffeine response, focusing on the impact of common polymorphisms within two genes, CYP1A2 and ADORA2A. Contemporary evidence suggests current standardised guidelines are optimal for only a sub-set of the athlete population. Clearer understanding of the factors underpinning inter-individual variation potentially facilitates a more nuanced, and individually and context-specific customisation of caffeine ingestion guidelines, specific to an individual’s biology, history, and competitive situation. Finally, we identify current knowledge deficits in this area, along with future associated research questions.

Elite athlete status is a partially heritable trait, as are many of the underpinning physiological, anthropometrical, and psychological traits that contribute to elite performance. In recent years, our understanding of the specific genetic variants that contribute to these traits has grown, such that there is considerable interest in attempting to utilise genetic information as a tool to predict future elite athlete status. In this review, we explore the extent of the genetic influence on the making of a sporting champion and we describe issues which, at present, hamper the utility of genetic testing in identifying future elite performers. We build on this by exploring what further knowledge is required to enhance this process, including a reflection on the potential learnings from the use of genetics as a disease prediction tool. Finally, we discuss ways in which genetic information may hold utility within elite sport in the future, including guiding nutritional and training recommendations, and assisting in the prevention of injury. Whilst genetic testing has the potential to assist in the identification of future talented performers, genetic tests should be combined with other tools to obtain an accurate identification of those athletes predisposed to succeed in sport. The use of total genotype scores, composed of a high number of performance-enhancing polymorphisms, will likely be one of the best strategies in the utilisation of genetic information to identify talent in sport.

Caffeine is a widely utilized performance-enhancing supplement used by athletes and non-athletes alike. In recent years, a number of meta-analyses have demonstrated that caffeine’s ergogenic effects on exercise performance are well-established and well-replicated, appearing consistent across a broad range of exercise modalities. As such, it is clear that caffeine is an ergogenic aid—but can we further explore the context of this ergogenic aid in order to better inform practice? We propose that future research should aim to better understand the nuances of caffeine use within sport and exercise. Here, we propose a number of areas for exploration within future caffeine research. These include an understanding of the effects of training status, habitual caffeine use, time of day, age, and sex on caffeine ergogenicity, as well as further insight into the modifying effects of genotype. We also propose that a better understanding of the wider, non-direct effects of caffeine on exercise, such as how it modifies sleep, anxiety, and post-exercise recovery, will ensure athletes can maximize the performance benefits of caffeine supplementation during both training and competition. Whilst not exhaustive, we hope that the questions provided within this manuscript will prompt researchers to explore areas with the potential to have a large impact on caffeine use in the future.

It is well established that exercise is an important component in the maintenance of good health, and yet recent studies have demonstrated that a sub-section of individuals experience no significant improvements following an exercise training intervention. Such individuals are commonly termed “non-responders”. However, recently a number of researchers have taken a skeptical view as to whether exercise non-response either exists, or is clinically relevant. Here, we explore the research underpinning exercise response, to determine whether non-response to exercise actually exists. We discuss the impact of measurement error and assessment type on the identification of “non-responders”, and whether such non-response is global- or modality-specific. Additionally, we discuss whether, if non-response to an exercise intervention is meaningful and relevant, certain additional interventions—in the form of increasing exercise intensity, volume, or duration—could be made in order to enhance training adaptations. Consequently, based on our interpretations of the available evidence, we suggest that it is unlikely that global non-responders to exercise exist. Furthermore, we suggest this realization effectively counters the perception that some individuals will not positively respond to exercise, and that in turn, this insight serves to encourage health professionals to create more nuanced, efficacious, and individually-focused exercise prescriptions designed to circumvent and overcome apparent non-responsiveness. Adopting a more individually-adaptive approach to exercise prescription could, subsequently, prove a powerful tool in promoting population health.

Caffeine is a well-established ergogenic aid, demonstrated to enhance performance across a wide range of capacities through a variety of mechanisms. As such, it is frequently used by both athletes and non-athletes alike. As a result, caffeine ingestion is ubiquitous in modern society, with athletes typically being exposed to regular non-supplemental caffeine through a variety of sources. Previously, it has been suggested that regular caffeine use may lead to habituation and subsequently a reduction in the expected ergogenic effects, thereby blunting caffeine’s performance-enhancing impact during critical training and performance events. In order to mitigate this expected performance loss, some practitioners recommended a pre-competition withdrawal period to restore the optimal performance benefits of caffeine supplementation. However, at present the evidence base exploring both caffeine habituation and withdrawal strategies in athletes is surprisingly small. Accordingly, despite the prevalence of caffeine use within athletic populations, formulating evidence-led guidelines is difficult. Here, we review the available research regarding habitual caffeine use in athletes and seek to derive rational interpretations of what is currently known—and what else we need to know—regarding habitual caffeine use in athletes, and how athletes and performance staff may pragmatically approach these important, complex, and yet under-explored phenomena.

Background It has been suggested that polymorphisms within CYP1A2 impact inter-individual variation in the response to caffeine. The purpose of this study was to explore the acute effects of caffeine on resistance exercise, jumping, and sprinting performance in a sample of resistance-trained men, and to examine the influence of genetic variation of CYP1A2 (rs762551) on the individual variation in responses to caffeine ingestion. Methods Twenty-two men were included as participants (AA homozygotes n  = 13; C-allele carriers n  = 9) and were tested after the ingestion of caffeine (3 mg/kg of body mass) and a placebo. Exercise performance was assessed with the following outcomes: (a) movement velocity and power output in the bench press exercise with loads of 25, 50, 75, and 90% of one-repetition maximum (1RM); (b) quality and quantity of performed repetitions in the bench press exercise performed to muscular failure with 85% 1RM; (c) vertical jump height in a countermovement jump test; and (d) power output in a Wingate test. Results Compared to placebo, caffeine ingestion enhanced: (a) movement velocity and power output across all loads (effect size [ES]: 0.20–0.61; p  <  0.05 for all); (b) the quality and quantity of performed repetitions with 85% of 1RM (ES: 0.27–0.85; p  <  0.001 for all); (c) vertical jump height (ES: 0.15; p  = 0.017); and (d) power output in the Wingate test (ES: 0.33–0.44; p  <  0.05 for all). We did not find a significant genotype × caffeine interaction effect ( p -values ranged from 0.094 to 0.994) in any of the analyzed performance outcomes. Conclusions Resistance-trained men may experience acute improvements in resistance exercise, jumping, and sprinting performance following the ingestion of caffeine. The comparisons of the effects of caffeine on exercise performance between individuals with the AA genotype and AC/CC genotypes found no significant differences. Trial registration Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry. ID: ACTRN12619000885190 .

The aims of this paper are threefold: (1) to summarize the research examining the effects of caffeine on isokinetic strength, (2) pool the effects using a meta-analysis, and (3) to explore if there is a muscle group or a velocity specific response to caffeine ingestion. Meta-analysis. PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, and SPORTDiscus were searched using relevant terms. The PEDro checklist was used for the assessment of study quality. A random-effects meta-analysis of standardized mean differences (SMDs) was done. Ten studies of good and excellent methodological quality were included. The SMD for the effects of caffeine on strength was 0.16 (95% CI=0.06, 0.26; p=0.003; +5.3%). The subgroup analysis for knee extensor isokinetic strength showed a significant difference (p=0.004) between the caffeine and placebo conditions with SMD value of 0.19 (95% CI=0.06, 0.32; +6.1%). The subgroup analysis for the effects of caffeine on isokinetic strength of other, smaller muscle groups indicated no significant difference (p=0.092) between the caffeine and placebo conditions. The subgroup analysis for knee extensor isokinetic strength at angular velocities of 60°s−1 and 180°s−1 showed a significant difference between the caffeine and placebo conditions; however, no significant effect (p=0.193) was found at an angular velocity of 30°s−1. This meta-analysis demonstrates that acute caffeine ingestion caffeine may significantly increase isokinetic strength. Additionally, this meta-analysis reports that the effects of caffeine on isokinetic muscular strength are predominantly manifested in knee extensor muscles and at greater angular velocities.

Association studies have identified dozens of genetic variants linked to training responses and sport-related traits. However, no intervention studies utilizing the idea of personalised training based on athlete's genetic profile have been conducted. Here we propose an algorithm that allows achieving greater results in response to high- or low-intensity resistance training programs by predicting athlete's potential for the development of power and endurance qualities with the panel of 15 performance-associated gene polymorphisms. To develop and validate such an algorithm we performed two studies in independent cohorts of male athletes (study 1: athletes from different sports (n = 28); study 2: soccer players (n = 39)). In both studies athletes completed an eight-week high- or low-intensity resistance training program, which either matched or mismatched their individual genotype. Two variables of explosive power and aerobic fitness, as measured by the countermovement jump (CMJ) and aerobic 3-min cycle test (Aero3) were assessed pre and post 8 weeks of resistance training. In study 1, the athletes from the matched groups (i.e. high-intensity trained with power genotype or low-intensity trained with endurance genotype) significantly increased results in CMJ (P = 0.0005) and Aero3 (P = 0.0004). Whereas, athletes from the mismatched group (i.e. high-intensity trained with endurance genotype or low-intensity trained with power genotype) demonstrated non-significant improvements in CMJ (P = 0.175) and less prominent results in Aero3 (P = 0.0134). In study 2, soccer players from the matched group also demonstrated significantly greater (P < 0.0001) performance changes in both tests compared to the mismatched group. Among non- or low responders of both studies, 82% of athletes (both for CMJ and Aero3) were from the mismatched group (P < 0.0001). Our results indicate that matching the individual's genotype with the appropriate training modality leads to more effective resistance training. The developed algorithm may be used to guide individualised resistance-training interventions.