Hackett G I
Drug Saf. 2016 Feb;39(2):117-30. doi: 10.1007/s40264-015-0348-y.
While US testosterone prescriptions have tripled in the last decade with lower trends in Europe, debate continues over the risks, benefits and appropriate use of testosterone replacement therapy (TRT). Several authors blame advertising and the availability of more convenient formulations, whilst others have pointed out that the routine testing of men with erectile dysfunction (ED) (a significant marker of cardiovascular risk) and those with diabetes would inevitably increase the diagnosis of hypogonadism and lead to an increase in totally appropriate prescribing. They commented that this was merely an appropriate correction of previous under-diagnosis and under-treatment in line with evidence based guidelines. It is unlikely that persuasive advertising or convenient formulations could grow a market over such a sustained period if the treatment was not effective. Urologists and primary care physicians are the most frequent initiators of TRT usually for ED. Benefits are clearly established for sexual function, increase in lean muscle mass and strength, mood and cognitive function, with a possible reduction in frailty and osteoporosis. There remains no evidence that TRT is associated with increased risk of prostate cancer or symptomatic benign prostatic hyperplasia, yet the decision to initiate and continue therapy is often decided by urologists. The cardiovascular issues associated with TRT have been clarified by recent studies showing that therapy associated with clear increases in serum testosterone levels to the normal range is associated with reduced all-cause mortality. Studies reporting to show increased risk have been subject to flawed designs with inadequate baseline diagnosis and follow-up testing. Effectively, they have compared non-treated patients with under-treated or non-compliant subjects involving a range of different therapy regimes. Recent evidence suggests long-acting injections may be associated with decreased cardiovascular risk, but the transdermal route may be associated with potentially relatively greater risk because of conversion to dihydrotestosterone by the effect of 5-alpha reductase in skin. The multiple effects of TRT may add up to a considerable benefit to the patient that might be underestimated by the physician primarily concerned with his own specialty. In a response to concerns about the possible risks associated with inappropriate prescribing expressed by Public Citizen, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) published a complete refutation of all the concerns, only to issue a subsequent bulletin of concern over inappropriate use, whilst confirming the benefits in treating men with established testosterone deficiency. No additional evidence was provided for this apparent change of opinion, but longer term safety data on testosterone products were strongly suggested. In contrast, the European Medicines Agency (EMA), in November 2014, concluded that “there is no consistent evidence of increased cardiovascular risk with testosterone products”. This paper explores the most recent evidence surrounding the benefits and risks associated with TRT.
在美国,过去十年睾酮处方量增长了两倍,而欧洲的增长趋势较低,关于睾酮替代疗法(TRT)的风险、益处及合理使用的争论仍在继续。一些作者指责广告宣传以及更便捷剂型的出现,而另一些人则指出,对勃起功能障碍(ED,心血管风险的重要指标)患者和糖尿病患者进行常规检测,不可避免地会增加性腺功能减退的诊断,并导致完全合理的处方量增加。他们认为,这只是根据循证指南对先前诊断不足和治疗不足进行的适当纠正。如果这种治疗无效,有说服力的广告或便捷剂型不太可能在如此长的时间内推动市场增长。泌尿科医生和初级保健医生是TRT最常见的开方者,通常是针对ED。TRT对性功能、瘦肌肉量和力量增加、情绪和认知功能的益处已得到明确证实,还可能降低虚弱和骨质疏松风险。目前仍没有证据表明TRT会增加前列腺癌或有症状的良性前列腺增生的风险,然而,开始和继续治疗的决定往往由泌尿科医生做出。近期研究阐明了与TRT相关的心血管问题,这些研究表明,能使血清睾酮水平明显升高至正常范围的疗法与全因死亡率降低相关。报告显示风险增加的研究设计存在缺陷,基线诊断和随访检测不足。实际上,这些研究将未接受治疗的患者与接受治疗不足或不依从的受试者进行了比较,涉及一系列不同的治疗方案。近期证据表明,长效注射可能与心血管风险降低相关,但经皮给药途径可能因皮肤中5-α还原酶的作用转化为双氢睾酮而具有相对较高的潜在风险。TRT的多种作用可能给患者带来相当大的益处,但可能被主要关注自身专业领域的医生低估。针对公众公民组织对不当开方可能带来的风险表示的担忧,美国食品药品监督管理局(FDA)发表了对所有担忧的全面反驳,但随后又发布了一份关于不当使用的关注公告,同时确认了TRT对确诊睾酮缺乏男性的益处。对于这一明显的观点转变未提供额外证据,但强烈建议提供睾酮产品的长期安全性数据。相比之下,欧洲药品管理局(EMA)在2014年11月得出结论称,“没有一致证据表明睾酮产品会增加心血管风险”。本文探讨了围绕TRT益处和风险的最新证据。