Phase 1 pharmacokinetics and phase 3 efficacy of testosterone nasal gel in subjects with seasonal allergies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: testosterone nasal gel (TNG) is a liquid gel that is applied in the nose for the treatment of male hypogonadism. There is a reasonable concern that administration of TNG to patients with active rhinitis could modify absorption. Results from two clinical studies are reported wherein subjects with allergic rhinitis (AR) subjects are treated with TNG. METHODS: The 24-hour pharmacokinetics (PK) and relative bioavailability of serum total testosterone (sTT) from TNG (11 mg tid ) were determined using a phase 1 Latin-square design with 18 eugonadal AR subjects crossed over between asymptomatic, symptomatic-untreated, and symptomatic-treated (oxymetazoline) conditions. Allergy symptoms, assessed using Total Nasal Symptom Score (TNSS), were induced using grass pollen in an allergy challenge chamber (ACC) prior to administration of TNG. The data are discussed in relation to results from a phase 3 study in 306 hypogonadal patients which compare clinical outcomes of AR and non-AR patients treated with TNG. RESULTS: ], area under the curve [AUC]) of sTT showed no difference in the rate or extent of absorption of exogenous testosterone from TNG as a function of allergy symptoms. The relative bioavailability also showed all three conditions to be equivalent. However, pre-dose mean sTT in AR patients was 21-25% lower when symptomatic vs. asymptomatic, which is attributed to the allergic reaction. A large phase 3 study, based predominantly on PK measures of sTT, showed that clinical outcomes for AR and non-AR patients treated with TNG were identical, including the percentage of patients in the eugonadal range, hormone profiles, and adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: AR does not affect absorption of TNG. Patient outcomes for long-term treatment with TNG for up to one year are not dependent on AR history.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".