Home › Research › Drug development
Testosterone Therapy in Older Men: Present and Future Considerations
Yeap BB, Tran C, Douglass CM, McNeil JJ.. Drugs & aging, 2025-04-27
Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies
Testosterone is the classical male anabolic hormone, involved in sexual development, virilisation and regulation of body composition in adult men. Organic disease involving the hypothalamus, pituitary or testes may interfere with endogenous testosterone production. In such men, testosterone treatment effectively ameliorates symptoms and signs of androgen deficiency. However, non-gonadal factors including age, body mass index and medical comorbidities influence circulating testosterone, and older men have on average lower testosterone concentrations compared with younger men. In these men, testosterone treatment would be a pharmacological intervention requiring stringent justification via high-quality evidence from randomised controlled trials (RCTs). Recent RCTs show benefits of testosterone treatment to improve sexual function, anaemia and bone mineral density in older men, and to prevent or revert type 2 diabetes mellitus in men at high risk. Results from a large cardiovascular safety trial in men with or at risk of cardiovascular disease provide important reassurance as to cardiovascular and prostate safety of testosterone treatment. Key questions remain as to whether testosterone's anabolic and other effects can be used safely to counter reductions in lean mass associated with incretin-based weight loss medications in men with obesity, and whether it might prevent disabilities including frailty, osteoporotic fractures and dementia in older men generally. This last question could be answered by a new testosterone RCT, targeting men in the 65-80 years age bracket, which would necessarily be large and of extended duration. A composite endpoint could be used which integrates potential benefits and risks, such as disability-free survival.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Yeap, B. B., Tran, C., Douglass, C. M., & McNeil, J. J. (2025). Testosterone Therapy in Older Men: Present and Future Considerations. Drugs & aging. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40266-025-01209-1
Vancouver
Yeap BB, Tran C, Douglass CM, McNeil JJ. Testosterone Therapy in Older Men: Present and Future Considerations. Drugs & aging. 2025. doi:10.1007/s40266-025-01209-1. PMID: 40287898.
BibTeX
@article{yeap2025-40287898,
author = {Yeap, B. B. and Tran, C. and Douglass, C. M. and McNeil, J. J.},
title = {{Testosterone Therapy in Older Men: Present and Future Considerations}},
journal = {Drugs \& aging},
year = {2025},
doi = {10.1007/s40266-025-01209-1},
pmid = {40287898},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1007/s40266-025-01209-1}
}
Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. Check the citation against the original before you use it.
Key findings
- However, non-gonadal factors including age, body mass index and medical comorbidities influence circulating testosterone, and older men have on average lower testosterone concentrations compared with younger men.
- Results from a large cardiovascular safety trial in men with or at risk of cardiovascular disease provide important reassurance as to cardiovascular and prostate safety of testosterone treatment.
- Key questions remain as to whether testosterone's anabolic and other effects can be used safely to counter reductions in lean mass associated with incretin-based weight loss medications in men with obesity, and whether it might prevent disabilities including frailty, osteoporotic fractures and dementia in older men generally.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Treatments →
Study details
- Evidence strengthHigh
How this study scored 52/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design, sample size, effect reported, studied in people and randomized / blinded because the record does not state it. We have no data on journal's citation record, times cited, citations per year, impact for its field and year, cited by studies here, still being cited, senior author's track record, institution's track record and multicenter collaboration, so those were left out: it earned 30 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 52 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Drugs & aging) |
| Journal's citation record | — / 4 | No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Study design | 0 / 12 | No study design recorded — scores zero, not guessed (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Strength of evidence | 5 / 5 | Rated “high” in our summary |
| Peer-review validation | 10 / 10 | Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal. |
| How recent | 4 / 5 | 2025 — within 3 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 0 / 4 | Participant count not stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Effect reported | 0 / 3 | No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Studied in people | 0 / 3 | Not stated whether this was studied in people — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Randomized / blinded | 0 / 2 | No randomization or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Times cited | — / 7 | No citation count (not found in OpenAlex) — left out of this score |
| Citations per year | — / 5 | No citation count or no year — left out of this score |
| Impact for its field and year | — / 6 | No field-weighted citation impact (OpenAlex has none yet) — left out of this score |
| Cited by studies here | — / 6 | Not yet checked against this library's citation graph — left out of this score |
| Still being cited | — / 4 | No yearly citation counts — left out of this score |
| Senior author's track record | — / 4 | Senior author's record not available — left out of this score |
| Institution's track record | — / 3 | No institution listed in OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Multicenter collaboration | — / 3 | Institutions not listed — left out of this score |
| Indexed in PubMed | 2 / 2 | Indexed in PubMed (PMID 40287898) |
| Free to read | 2 / 2 | Free to read |
| Points | 30 / 58 | Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 30 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 52 out of 100. |
| Total | 52 / 100 | — |
What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →
Read the original
Free copy unknown: no free-copy check has an answer for this record yet. That does not mean it is paywalled.
Related
Studies in the library that share something with this one. The line above each title says what.