Cognitive effects of aromatase inhibitor therapy in peripubertal boys
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Aromatase inhibitors, blockers of oestrogen biosynthesis, have emerged as a new potential treatment modality for boys with short stature. The cognitive effects of such therapy are unknown. In this study, we explored the effects of aromatase inhibition on cognitive performance in peripubertal boys. DESIGN: Prospective, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled clinical study. METHODS: Twenty-eight boys, aged 9.0-14.5 years, with idiopathic short stature were treated with the aromatase inhibitor letrozole (2.5 mg/day) or placebo, for 2 years. During the treatment, the progression of physical signs of puberty and the concentrations of sex hormones were followed up. A selection of cognitive tests, focusing on memory function, was administered to the participants at entry, at 12 months and at 24 months after the start of the treatment. RESULTS: Letrozole effectively inhibited the conversion of androgen to oestrogen, as indicated by high serum testosterone and low serum oestradiol concentrations in letrozole-treated boys who progressed into puberty. In both the groups, there was a gain in performance during the follow-up period in tests of verbal performance, in most of the tests of visuospatial performance and in some tests of verbal memory. No significant differences between the letrozole- and placebo-treated boys in development of cognitive performance were found in any of the tests during the follow-up period. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that blockade of oestrogen biosynthesis with an aromatase inhibitor does not influence cognitive performance in peripubertal males.
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) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".