English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

A cohort of 141 males (18–80 yo, 42.9 ± 12.9) strongly suspected of being Insulin Resistant (IR) was prospectively studied by determining their insulin sensitivity (Pancreatic Suppression Test, PST) and testicular function (total testosterone and SHBG). The subjects were labeled as IR when the Steady State Plasma Glucose (SSPG) was ≥150 mg/dL and Non-Insulin Resistant (NIR) when SSPG was <150 mg/dl; similarly, the subjects were labeled as Hypogonadal (HYPOG) when total testosterone was ≤3.0 ng/mL and Eugonadal (EUG) when total testosterone was >3.0 ng/mL. Two out of three subjects turned out to be IR, while around one in four subjects were HYPOG. Contingency analysis indicated a significant interdependence between insulin resistance and hypogonadism (chi-square was 4.69,  p  = 0.0303). Age (>43 yo) predicted hypogonadism (AUROC 0.606,  p  = 0.0308). Twice as many HYPOG subjects were IR as compared with EUG subjects. Also, HYPOG subjects exhibited higher SSPG values as compared with EUG subjects. Statistically, neither Weight nor BMI predicted hypogonadism, while Waist Circumference (>110 cm) was only a mediocre predictor (AUROC 0.640,  p  = 0.009). SSPG (>224 mg/dL) on the other hand, was the best predictor of hypogonadism (AUROC 0.709,  p  = 0.002), outperforming Waist Circumference (half of the subjects with an SSPG >224 mg/dL were HYPOG). Age did not predict insulin resistance, while Weight (>99 kg), BMI (>29), and especially, Waist Circumference (>99 cm, AUROC 0.812,  p  < 0.0001) were all predictors of insulin resistance. Almost 90% of the subjects with a waist circumference >99 cm was IR. As a logical consequence of the selection criteria (various clues suggesting insulin resistance), most subjects with normal weight in this cohort were IR (53.3%) while 20% were HYPOG. On the other hand, 13.6% of the obese subjects were NIR, and 2 out of 3 of them were both NIR and EUG. In conclusion, Waist Circumference predicted both insulin resistance (>99 cm) and hypogonadism (>110 cm), suggesting that the first hit of abdominal obesity is insulin resistance and the second hit is male hypogonadism. Normal weight did not protect from IR, while a relevant proportion of obese subjects were NIR (with 2/3 being also EUG).

Insulin Sensitivity and Testicular Function in a Cohort of Adult Males Suspected of Being Insulin-Resistant