Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25962056›Full record

ArticleJAMA internal medicine2015

Comparative Safety of Testosterone Dosage Forms.

J Bradley Layton, Christoph R Meier, Julie L Sharpless, Til Stürmer, Susan S Jick, M Alan Brookhart

Erratum issuedOpen access · greenAbstract readComparative StudyMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA internal medicine, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 32 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
32citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
11.4field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

32 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 94 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Testosterone replacement therapy and cardiovascular disease.International journal of impotence research · 2022
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Male Contraception.The Yale journal of biology and medicine · 2020
    Review
  19. Observational
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

J Bradley LaytonDepartment of Epidemiology, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.
Christoph R MeierDepartment of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Basel University, Basel, Switzerland.
Julie L SharplessDepartment of Medicine, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.
Til StürmerDepartment of Epidemiology, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.
Susan S JickDepartment of Epidemiology, Boston University School of Public Health, Lexington, Massachusetts.
M Alan BrookhartDepartment of Epidemiology, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill · USBoston University · US

Funding

UNC CLINICAL AND TRANSLATIONAL SCIENCE AWARD: BPCAUL1RR025747 · NCRR · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI RUNGE, MARSCHALL S. · 2008 to 2011
$44.6M
Propensity Scores and Preventive Drug Use in the ElderlyR01AG023178 · NIA · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI STURMER, TIL · 2005 to 2014
$2.7M
PROMIS Validation in Prospective Population-based Prostate Cancer Research StudyR01CA174453 · NCI · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI CHEN, RONALD, REEVE, BRYCE B · 2012 to 2016
$1.4M
A retrospective cohort study of the safety of testosterone therapy in older menR01AG042845 · NIA · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI BROOKHART, MAURICE ALAN · 2012 to 2013
$476k
Patterns of use, comparative effectiveness, and safety of rotavirus vaccinesR21HD080214 · NICHD · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI BROOKHART, MAURICE ALAN · 2014 to 2015
$413k
NCI NIH HHS R01 CA174453NCRR NIH HHS 1 ULI RR025747NCRR NIH HHS UL1 RR025747NIA NIH HHS 5 R01 AG04284502NIA NIH HHS R01 AG023178NIA NIH HHS R01 AG042845NICHD NIH HHS R21 HD080214
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

importanceIncreases in testosterone use and mixed reports of adverse events have raised concerns about the cardiovascular safety of testosterone. Testosterone is available in several delivery mechanisms with varying pharmacokinetics; injections cause spikes in testosterone levels, and transdermal patches and gels cause more subtle but sustained increases. The comparative cardiovascular safety of gels, injections, and patches has not been studied.

objectiveTo determine the comparative cardiovascular safety of testosterone injections, patches, and gels. DESIGN, SETTING, AND

participantsA retrospective cohort study was conducted using administrative claims from a commercially insured (January 1, 2000, to December 31, 2012) and Medicare (January 1, 2007, to December 31, 2010) population in the United States and general practitioner records from the United Kingdom (January 1, 2000, to June 30, 2012). Participants included men (aged ≥18 years) who initiated use of testosterone patches, gels, or injections following 180 days with no testosterone use. Our analysis was conducted from December 11, 2013, to November 12, 2014. EXPOSURES: New initiation of a testosterone dosage form, with use monitored for up to 1 year. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Inpatient or outpatient medical records, diagnoses, or claims for cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events including myocardial infarction (MI), unstable angina, stroke, and composite acute event (MI, unstable angina, or stroke); venous thromboembolism (VTE); mortality; and all-cause hospitalization.

resultsWe identified 544,115 testosterone initiators between the 3 data sets: 37.4% injection, 6.9% patch, and 55.8% gel. The majority of men in the Medicare cohort were injection initiators (51.2%), most in the US commercially insured population were gel initiators (56.5%), and the UK database included equal proportions of injections and gel users (approximately 41%). With analysis conducted using hazard ratios and 95% CIs, compared with men using gels, injection initiators had higher hazards of cardiovascular events (ie, MI, unstable angina, and stroke) (1.26; 1.18-1.35), hospitalization (1.16; 1.13-1.19), and death (1.34; 1.15-1.56) but not VTE (0.92; 0.76-1.11). Compared with gels, patches did not confer increased hazards of cardiovascular events (1.10; 0.94-1.29), hospitalization (1.04; 1.00-1.08), death (1.02; 0.77-1.33), or VTE (1.08; 0.79-1.47). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Testosterone injections were associated with a greater risk of cardiovascular events, hospitalizations, and deaths compared with gels. Patches and gels had similar risk profiles. However, this study did not assess whether patients met criteria for use of testosterone and did not assess the safety of testosterone among users compared with nonusers of the drug.

Indexed as

Administration, CutaneousAdultAgedAndrogensCardiovascular DiseasesGelsHumansInjectionsMaleMiddle AgedRetrospective StudiesTestosteroneTransdermal PatchAndrogensGelsTestosterone

Identifiers

PMID25962056
PMCPMC4494981
OpenAlexW1868118389

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.