Clinical practice experience with testosterone treatment in men with testosterone deficiency syndrome
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To report on a clinical practice series of testosterone-replacement therapy (TRT) in men with testosterone deficiency syndrome (TDS), examining clinical efficacy, biochemical parameters and effects on prostate health over a 2-year period. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A retrospective review of 85 patients with symptoms of TDS and at least a 3-month trial of TRT was performed in this single-centre, clinical practice setting. Three domains of symptomatology were evaluated: libido, erectile function and energy levels. Symptoms were assessed by a combination of patient reporting, physician's assessment and validated symptom assessment scores. Total testosterone (TT), calculated bio-available testosterone (BT) and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels were continuously measured and effects on prostate health were examined. RESULTS: Only 38 (45%) patients in this cohort remained on TRT for >2 years. The most common reason for discontinuing treatment was lack of clinical response but those remaining on TRT had continued improvement in libido, erectile function and energy levels. During treatment, the average TT and calculated BT values significantly increased compared with the baseline values at most of the evaluated time points, with no significant change in average PSA values. In all, 15% of this cohort had some degree of progression of lower urinary tract symptoms. Seven patients had eight 'for-cause' prostate biopsies either during supplementation or at any date after completion, with an only three positive for cancer. CONCLUSIONS: Only 45% of men on TRT remained on treatment for >2 years in this clinical practice experience of men with TDS. Those remaining showed persistent improvement in their symptoms. The average TT and BT values increased significantly with no significant change in PSA levels.
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 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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".