Gynecomastia in a Transgender Boy: A Case Report
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To describe the case of a 17-year-old transgender boy who experienced breast development while on testosterone, having been suppressed with a gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonist prior to testosterone therapy. CASE REPORT: A 17-year-old transgender boy presented with breast development after having been on a GnRH agonist and then testosterone since the age of 11 years, having never experienced breast development before, which was consistent with pubertal gynecomastia. A small decrease in the testosterone dose resulted in a significant reduction of gynecomastia. Despite the improvement, he went on to undergo chest surgery with the removal of the breast tissue. DISCUSSION: Pubertal gynecomastia is a common phenomenon in the cisgender male population. However, it has not been previously described in transgender boys. The potential mechanisms for its occurrence were discussed. CONCLUSION: Transgender boys who undergo GnRH agonist treatment for puberty suppression and subsequently receive testosterone therapy for puberty induction may develop gynecomastia. Judicious adjustment of the testosterone therapy may lead to an improvement.
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 | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".