Serum estradiol levels decrease after oophorectomy in transmasculine individuals on testosterone therapy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Transmasculine individuals, considering whether to undergo total hysterectomy with bilateral salpingectomy, have the option to have a concomitant oophorectomy. While studies have evaluated hormone changes following testosterone therapy initiation, most of those patients have not undergone oophorectomy. Data are currently limited to support health outcomes regarding the decision to retain or remove the ovaries. We performed a retrospective chart review of transmasculine patients maintained on high-dose testosterone therapy at a single endocrine clinic in Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada. Twelve transmasculine individuals who underwent bilateral oophorectomy and had presurgical and postsurgical serum data were included. We identified 12 transmasculine subjects as controls, who were on testosterone therapy and did not undergo oophorectomy, but additionally matched to the first group by age, testosterone dosing regimen, and body mass index. There was a statistically significant decrease in the estradiol levels of case subjects postoophorectomy, when compared to presurgical estradiol levels (P = 0.02). There was no significant difference between baseline estradiol levels between control and case subjects; however, the difference in estradiol levels at follow-up measurements was significant (P = 0.03). Total testosterone levels did not differ between control and case subjects at baseline and follow-up (both P > 0.05). Our results demonstrate that oophorectomy further attenuates estradiol levels below what is achieved by high-dose exogenous testosterone alone. Correlated clinical outcomes, such as impacts on bone health, were not available. The clinical implications of oophorectomy versus ovarian retention on endocrinological and overall health outcomes are currently limited.
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) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".