Toward Personalized Sexual Medicine (Part 1): Integrating the “Dual Control Model” into Differential Drug Treatments for Hypoactive Sexual Desire Disorder and Female Sexual Arousal Disorder
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In three related manuscripts we describe our drug development program for the treatment of Hypoactive Sexual Desire Disorder (HSDD). In this first theoretical article we will defend the hypothesis that different causal mechanisms are responsible for the emergence of HSDD: low sexual desire in women (with HSDD) could be due to either a relative insensitive brain system for sexual cues or to enhanced activity of sexual inhibitory mechanisms. This distinction in etiological background was taken into account when designing and developing new pharmacotherapies for this disorder. Irrespective of circulating plasma levels of testosterone, administration of sublingual 0.5 mg testosterone increases the sensitivity of the brain to sexual cues. The effects of an increase in sexual sensitivity of the brain depend on the motivational state of an individual. It might activate sexual excitatory mechanisms in low sensitive women, while it could evoke (or strengthen) sexual inhibitory mechanisms in women prone to sexual inhibition. Sexual stimulation in the brain is necessary for phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibitor (PDE5i)-mediated increase in genital sexual response. Accordingly, a single dose of T+PDE5i might enhance sexual responsiveness, especially in women with low sensitivity to sexual cues. In other women sexual stimulation might elicit a prefrontal cortex (PFC)-mediated phasic increase in sexual inhibition, in which activity of 5-hydroxytryptamine (5-HT, serotonin) is involved. We hypothesize that a single dose of 5-hydroxytryptamine receptor agonist (5-HT(1A)ra) will reduce the sexual-stimulation-induced PFC-mediated sexual inhibition during a short period after administration. Consequently, treatment with T+5-HT(1A)ra will be more effective, in particular in women exhibiting sexual inhibition. Based on the results of our efficacy studies described in parts 2 and 3 of the series, we conclude that tailoring on-demand therapeutics to different underlying etiologies might be a useful approach to treat common symptoms in subgroups of women with HSDD.
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) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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".