ArticleHormones (Athens, Greece)2026
Hormonal target validation based on biochemical shifts in gender-affirming hormone therapy.
Article in Hormones (Athens, Greece), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundHormonal targets for gender-affirming hormone therapy (GAHT) remain largely unvalidated in gender-diverse individuals, with no clinical markers to assess dosing adequacy. We hypothesize that a biochemical shift towards the hormonal profile of the identified sex correlates with appropriate dosing.
methodsA data-subset from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES), comprising 5,433 assumed-cisgender individuals (47.2% male) aged < 52 years, was used to train and validate a random forest model to predict sex-registered-at-birth, incorporating platelet count, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol percentage, sex hormone-binding globulin (SHBG), creatinine, and hematocrit. The model was subsequently run in 174 transgender men (TM) and 135 transgender women (TW) from the European Network for the Investigation of Gender Incongruence (ENIGI) Ghent cohort. Blood samples were collected at 0, 3, 12, 18, 24, and 36 months after GAHT-initiation. Hormonal profiles were compared based on predicted sex-registered-at-birth.
resultsThe model achieved 91% accuracy in NHANES, with baseline accuracy of 81.5% in ENIGI, declining to 10.7% at 36 months. Median estradiol (E2) concentrations in TW-predicted males-assigned-at-birth (59.0 ng/L, interquartile range, IQR: 45.3-73.3) were significantly lower (p < 0.0001) than in TW-predicted females-assigned-at-birth with a fully feminized biochemical signature (78.5 ng/L, IQR: 53.1-107.4). Difference in testosterone concentrations in TM-classified female-assigned-at-birth and predicted male-assigned-at-birth did not reach significance. Classification according to sex-at-birth seemed less likely to occur at higher E2 concentrations in TW.
conclusionThe innate sexual dimorphism of biochemical parameters might provide a framework for GAHT target validation. Significantly different hormonal profiles can be seen in people depending on the biochemical shift experienced during GAHT.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42747752What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.