Physical, psychological and biochemical recovery from anabolic steroid-induced hypogonadism: a scoping review.

Hypogonadism can result following anabolic steroid abuse. The duration and degree of recovery from anabolic steroid-induced hypogonadism (ASIH) is immensely variable, and there is a paucity of prospective controlled data characterising the trajectory of natural recovery following cessation. This poses difficulties for users trying to stop androgen abuse, and clinicians wanting to assist them. The objective of this paper was to synthesise evidence on the physical, psychological and biochemical patterns of ASIH recovery. We present the pathophysiology of ASIH through a literature review of hypothalamic-pituitary-testosterone axis recovery in supraphysiological testosterone exposure. This is followed by a scoping review of relevant observational and interventional studies published on PubMed and finally, a conclusion that is an easy reference for clinicians helping patients that are recovering from AAS abuse. Results indicate that ASIH recovery depends on age and degree of androgen abuse, with physical changes like testicular atrophy expected to have near full recovery over months to years; spermatogenesis expected to achieve full recovery over months to years; libido returning to baseline over several months (typically less potent than during AAS use); and recovery from gynaecomastia being unlikely. For psychological recovery, data are insufficient and conflicting, indicating a transient withdrawal period which may be followed by persisting longer-term milder symptoms. For biochemical recovery, near complete recovery of testosterone is seen over months, and complete gonadotropin recovery is expected over 3-6 months. Further prospective studies are indicated to more closely describe patterns of recovery.

Gender-Affirming Hormone Therapy for the Trans, Gender Diverse, and Nonbinary Community: Coordinating World Professional Association for Transgender Health and Informed Consent Models of Care.

Purpose: Before commencing gender-affirming hormone therapy, people undergo assessments through the World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH) model (typically with a mental health clinician), or an informed consent (IC) model (without a formal mental health assessment). Despite growing demand, these remain poorly coordinated in Australia. We aimed to compare clients attending WPATH and IC services; compare binary and nonbinary clients; and characterize clients with psychiatric diagnoses or longer assessments. Methods: Cross-sectional audit of clients approved for gender-affirming treatment (March 2017-2019) at a specialist clinic (WPATH model, n=212) or a primary care clinic (IC model, n=265). Sociodemographic, mental health, and clinical data were collected from electronic records, and analyzed with pairwise comparisons and multivariable regression. Results: WPATH model clients had more psychiatric diagnoses (mean 1.4 vs. 1.1, p<0.001) and longer assessments for hormones (median 5 vs. 2 sessions, p<0.001) than IC model clients. More IC model clients than WPATH model clients were nonbinary (27% vs. 15%, p=0.016). Nonbinary clients had more psychiatric diagnoses (mean 1.7 vs. 1.1, p<0.001) and longer IC assessments (median 3 vs. 2 sessions, p<0.001) than binary clients. Total psychiatric diagnoses were associated with nonbinary identities (ß 0.7, p=0.001) and health care cards (ß 0.4, p=0.017); depression diagnoses were associated with regional/remote residence (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 2.2, p=0.011); and anxiety disorders were associated with nonbinary identities (aOR 2.8, p=0.012) and inversely associated with employment (aOR 0.5, p=0.016). Conclusion: WPATH model clients are more likely to have binary identities, mental health diagnoses, and longer assessments than IC model clients. Better coordination is needed to ensure timely gender-affirming care.

Risky business: a single-centre cross-sectional analysis of calculated cardiovascular risk in patients with primary aldosteronism and essential hypertension.

OBJECTIVES: Primary aldosteronism (PA), the most common endocrine cause of hypertension, is associated with a higher risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) than blood pressure (BP)-matched essential hypertension (EH). We aimed to compare the calculated risks of CVD in patients who had hypertension with PA or EH using CVD risk calculators, hypothesising that they will fail to recognise the increased CVD risk in PA. DESIGN: Cross-sectional analysis. SETTING: An endocrine hypertension service in Victoria, Australia. PARTICIPANTS: Patients who had hypertension without CVD referred for the investigation of hypertension. OUTCOME MEASURES: Calculated 5-year or 10-year CVD risk as predicted by the National Vascular Disease Prevention Alliance (NVDPA) algorithm, Framingham Risk Score, Pooled Cohort Equations and QRISK3. RESULTS: Those with PA (n=128) and EH (n=133), did not differ significantly in their calculated CVD risks with the NVDPA algorithm (moderate-to-high 5-year risk 36/100 vs 45/99, p=0.17); the Framingham Risk Score (median 10-year risk 7.72% (4.43%-12.95%) vs 6.84% (3.85%-10.50%), p=0.14); the Pooled Cohort Equations (median 10-year risk 9.45% (4.36%-15.37%) vs 7.90% (2.09%-14.73%), p=0.07); and QRISK3 (median 10-year risk 11.31% (7.22%-20.29%) vs 12.47% (5.10%-19.93%), p=0.51). Similarities persisted on regression analyses accounting for systolic BP. CONCLUSIONS: CVD risk algorithms do not reflect the increased risk of CVD in patients with PA, and likely underestimate the true risk of CVD among those with PA. Screening for PA, in addition to using the CVD risk algorithm in patients who had hypertension, may facilitate the targeted treatment of PA and minimisation of cardiovascular risk in affected individuals.

Age- and sex-specific reference ranges are needed for the aldosterone/renin ratio.

OBJECTIVE: Current Endocrine Society Clinical Practice Guidelines use a specific aldosterone/renin ratio (ARR) threshold to screen for primary aldosteronism (a treatable disease causing up to 15% of hypertension in primary care) in all patients. We sought to characterize demographic variations in the ARR, hypothesizing a need for age- and sex-specific reference ranges to improve the accuracy of the test. DESIGN: Retrospective cross-sectional analysis of ARR measurements at a single tertiary hospital from December 2016 to June 2018. PATIENTS: A total of 442 patients with clinically indicated ARR were included, after excluding those who were on spironolactone or the oral contraceptive pill, were pregnant or had an existing adrenal condition. MEASUREMENTS: Aldosterone, renin and the ARR. RESULTS: Among those aged 20-39 years (n = 74), females had significantly higher median aldosterone (369 vs 244 pmol/L, P = .028), lower median renin (17.0 vs 27.6 mIU/L, P = .034) and higher median ARR (20.7 vs 10.3 (pmol/L)/(mIU/L), P = .001) than males, despite having lower systolic (135 vs 145 mmHg, P = .021) and diastolic (89 vs 96.5 mmHg, P = .007) blood pressure. The ≥ 60-year age group (n = 157) also had significant sex differences in the ARR. With increasing age (20-39 vs ≥ 60 years), there was a significant fall in plasma aldosterone in females (369 pmol/L vs 264 pmol/L, P = .005), with no change observed in males. CONCLUSIONS: For those 20-39 years old, aldosterone and the ARR are significantly higher in females despite a lower systolic and diastolic BP, highlighting the potential for false-positive results. Our findings indicate the need for prospective studies with a control population to define age- and sex-specific ARR reference ranges.