Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26482385›Full record

ReviewDrug safety2016

Testosterone Replacement Therapy and Mortality in Older Men.

G I Hackett

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Drug safety, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 12% 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 31 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Current use of testosterone therapy in LGBTQ populations.International journal of impotence research · 2022
    Review
  6. The Roles of Androgens in Humans: Biology, Metabolic Regulation and Health.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022
    Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Type 2 Diabetes and Testosterone Therapy.The world journal of men's health · 2019
    Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

G I Hackett
Heartlands Hospital · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

While US testosterone prescriptions have tripled in the last decade with lower trends in Europe, debate continues over the risks, benefits and appropriate use of testosterone replacement therapy (TRT). Several authors blame advertising and the availability of more convenient formulations, whilst others have pointed out that the routine testing of men with erectile dysfunction (ED) (a significant marker of cardiovascular risk) and those with diabetes would inevitably increase the diagnosis of hypogonadism and lead to an increase in totally appropriate prescribing. They commented that this was merely an appropriate correction of previous under-diagnosis and under-treatment in line with evidence based guidelines. It is unlikely that persuasive advertising or convenient formulations could grow a market over such a sustained period if the treatment was not effective. Urologists and primary care physicians are the most frequent initiators of TRT usually for ED. Benefits are clearly established for sexual function, increase in lean muscle mass and strength, mood and cognitive function, with a possible reduction in frailty and osteoporosis. There remains no evidence that TRT is associated with increased risk of prostate cancer or symptomatic benign prostatic hyperplasia, yet the decision to initiate and continue therapy is often decided by urologists. The cardiovascular issues associated with TRT have been clarified by recent studies showing that therapy associated with clear increases in serum testosterone levels to the normal range is associated with reduced all-cause mortality. Studies reporting to show increased risk have been subject to flawed designs with inadequate baseline diagnosis and follow-up testing. Effectively, they have compared non-treated patients with under-treated or non-compliant subjects involving a range of different therapy regimes. Recent evidence suggests long-acting injections may be associated with decreased cardiovascular risk, but the transdermal route may be associated with potentially relatively greater risk because of conversion to dihydrotestosterone by the effect of 5-alpha reductase in skin. The multiple effects of TRT may add up to a considerable benefit to the patient that might be underestimated by the physician primarily concerned with his own specialty. In a response to concerns about the possible risks associated with inappropriate prescribing expressed by Public Citizen, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) published a complete refutation of all the concerns, only to issue a subsequent bulletin of concern over inappropriate use, whilst confirming the benefits in treating men with established testosterone deficiency. No additional evidence was provided for this apparent change of opinion, but longer term safety data on testosterone products were strongly suggested. In contrast, the European Medicines Agency (EMA), in November 2014, concluded that “there is no consistent evidence of increased cardiovascular risk with testosterone products”. This paper explores the most recent evidence surrounding the benefits and risks associated with TRT.

Indexed as

AgedCardiovascular DiseasesHormone Replacement TherapyHumansMaleMortalityRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicRiskTestosteroneTestosterone

Identifiers

PMID26482385
OpenAlexW1773733510

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.