Age-specific changes in the regulation of LH-dependent testosterone secretion: assessing responsiveness to varying endogenous gonadotropin output in normal men
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Pulsatile and thus total testosterone (Te) secretion declines in older men, albeit for unknown reasons. Analytical models forecast that aging may reduce the capability of endogenous luteinizing hormone (LH) pulses to stimulate Leydig cell steroidogenesis. This notion has been difficult to test experimentally. The present study used graded doses of a selective gonadotropin releasing hormone (GnRH)-receptor antagonist to yield four distinct strata of pulsatile LH release in each of 18 healthy men ages 23-72 yr. Deconvolution analysis was applied to frequently sampled LH and Te concentration time series to quantitate pulsatile Te secretion over a 16-h interval. Log-linear regression was used to relate pulsatile LH secretion to attendant pulsatile Te secretion (LH-Te drive) across the four stepwise interventions in each subject. Linear regression of the 18 individual estimates of LH-Te feedforward dose-response slopes on age disclosed a strongly negative relationship (r = -0.721, P < 0.001). Accordingly, the present data support the thesis that aging in healthy men attenuates amplitude-dependent LH drive of burst-like Te secretion. The experimental strategy of graded suppression of neuroglandular outflow may have utility in estimating dose-response adaptations in other endocrine systems.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".