Synergetic effect of testosterone and phophodiesterase-5 inhibitors in hypogonadal men with erectile dysfunction: A systematic review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Testosterone deficiency seems to impair the clinical response to phophodiesterase-5 (PDE-5) inhibitors in patients with erectile dysfunction (ED). In hypogonadal men, testosterone repletion was associated with enhanced sexual function in patients who failed initial treatment with sildenafil or tadalafil. We conducted a systematic review of studies that evaluated combination therapy of testosterone and PDE-5 inhibitors in patients with ED and low, low-normal testosterone levels who failed monotherapy. The studies we examine are heterogeneous with several methodological drawbacks and that, overall, the addition of testosterone to PDE-5 inhibitors might benefit patients with ED associated with testosterone <300 ng/dL (10.4 nmol/L) who failed monotherapy. Further studies, with a randomized placebo-controlled and double blind design, are needed to describe the appropriate target patient group, testosterone cut-off and to define the optimal dose and duration of combination therapy.
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 | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".