Testosterone Supplementation in Hypogonadal Men on 5‐ARI Therapy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Hypogonadism and benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) often coexist in the aging man. Treatment of these conditions would seem to be inconsistent as BPH is treated often with 5-alpha reductase inhibitors (5-ARIs) that have impact on the active form of testosterone dihydrotestosterone (DHT), while the treatment of hypogonadism is aimed at raising testosterone to alleviate the symptoms of hypogonadism. Few studies, however, have addressed the combined use of these 5-ARI medications with exogenous testosterone supplementation. AIM: This review will examine available literature for testosterone supplementation in men taking 5-ARIs. METHODS: This review examines the data available to study this combination. RESULTS: Current data appear to support the safety and efficacy of combined treatment. CONCLUSIONS: The combination for testosterone and 5-ARIs appears to be safe and efficacious, but the paucity of large long-term studies are needed to further clarify the concomitant use of testosterone and 5-ARIs in the aging male. Nickel JC and Carson CC. Testosterone supplementation in hypogonadal men on 5- ARI therapy. Sex Med Rev 2014;2:75-78.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".