Natesto <sup>™</sup> , a novel testosterone nasal gel, normalizes androgen levels in hypogonadal men
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Advantages of testosterone nasal gel include ease of administration, low dose, and no risk of secondary transference. The efficacy and safety of testosterone nasal gel was evaluated in hypogonadal males. The ninety-day, randomized, open-label, dose-ranging study, included potential dose titration and sequential safety extensions to 1 year. At 39 US outpatient sites, 306 men (mean age 54.4 years) with two fasting morning total serum testosterone levels <300 ng/dL were randomized (n = 228, b.i.d. dosing; n = 78, t.i.d. dosing). Natesto(™) Testosterone Nasal Gel was self-administered, using a multiple-dose dispenser, as two or three daily doses (5.5 mg per nostril, 11.0 mg single dose). Total daily doses were 22 mg or 33 mg. The primary endpoint was the Percentage of patients with Day-90 serum total testosterone average concentration (C(avg)) value within the eugonadal range (≥300 ng/dL, ≤1050 ng/dL). At Day 90, 200/273 subjects (73%; 95% CI 68, 79) in the intent-to-treat (ITT) population and 180/237 subjects (76%; 71, 81) in the per-protocol (PP) population were in the normal range. Also, in the normal range were 68% (61, 74) of ITT subjects and 70% (63, 77) of PP subjects in the titration arm, as well as, 90% (83, 97) of ITT subjects and 91% (84, 98) of PP subjects in the fixed-dose arm. Natesto(™) 11 mg b.i.d. or 11 mg t.i.d. restores normal serum total testosterone levels in most hypogonadal men. Erectile function, mood, body composition, and bone mineral density improved from baseline. Treatment was well tolerated; adverse event rates were low. Adverse event discontinuation rates were 2.1% (b.i.d.) and 3.7% (t.i.d.). This study lacked a placebo or an active comparator control which limited the ability to adequately assess some measures.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".