Assessing safety in hormonal male contraception: a critical appraisal of adverse events reported in a male contraceptive trial

Testosterone replacement therapy and vascular thromboembolic events: a systematic review and meta-analysis

ABSTRACT

To evaluate the relationship between testosterone replacement therapy (TRT) and arterial and/or venous thrombosis in patients with pre-treatment total testosterone (TT) <12 nmol l-1, we performed a meta-analysis following the Population Intervention Comparison Outcome model. Population: men with TT <12 nmol l-1 or clear mention of hypogonadism in the inclusion criteria of patients; intervention: TRT; comparison: placebo or no therapy; outcomes: arterial thrombotic events (stroke, myocardial infarction [MI], upper limbs, and lower limbs), VTE (deep vein thrombosis [DVT], portal vein thrombosis, splenic thrombosis, and pulmonary embolism), and mortality. A total of 2423 abstracts were assessed for eligibility. Twenty-four studies, including 14 randomized controlled trials (RCTs), were finally included, with a total of 4027 and 310 288 hypotestosteronemic male patients, from RCTs and from observational studies, respectively. Based on RCT-derived data, TRT did not influence the risk of arterial thrombosis (odds ratio [OR] = 1.27, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.47-3.43, P = 0.64), stroke (OR = 1.34, 95% CI: 0.09-18.97, P = 0.83), MI (OR = 0.51, 95% CI: 0.11-2.31, P = 0.39), VTE (OR = 1.42, 95% CI: 0.22-9.03, P = 0.71), pulmonary embolism (OR = 1.38, 95% CI: 0.27-7.04, P = 0.70), and mortality (OR = 0.70, 95% CI: 0.20-2.38, P = 0.56). Meanwhile, when only observational studies are considered, a significant reduction in the risk of developing arterial thrombotic events, MI, venous thromboembolism, and mortality was observed. The risk for DVT remains uncertain, due to the paucity of RCT-based data. TRT in men with TT <12 nmol l-1 is safe from the risk of adverse cardiovascular events. Further studies specifically assessing the risk of DVT in men on TRT are needed.

Epistemic risk and nonepistemic values in end-of-life care

Some have questioned the extent of medical intervention at the end of people's lives, arguing that we often intervene in the dying process in ways which are harmful, inappropriate, or undignified. In this paper, I argue that over-treatment of dying is a function of the way in which clinicians manage epistemic risk-the risk of being wrong. When making any scientific decision-whether making inferences from empirical data, or determining a plan for medical treatment-there is always a degree of uncertainty: in other words, there is always a possibility we make the wrong decision. As philosophers of science such as Justin Biddle have argued, there is no way to resolve epistemic risk without weighing up the consequences of being wrong. This requires us to draw upon other, non-epistemic considerations, like social and ideological values; as such, questions of epistemic risk cannot be answered solely with reference to epistemic considerations such as evidence. In this paper, I explore how epistemic risk arises in end-of-life care, highlighting how clinicians face epistemic risk when diagnosing patients as dying and when determining whether a particular treatment is futile. I argue that there is no clear cut-off between reversible and irreversible illness, nor between useful and futile treatment. Clinicians who diagnose a patient as dying thus risk failing to provide treatment which could be beneficial; conversely, clinicians who determine that a patient has a potentially reversible illness risk subjecting them to futile treatment that may be painful or distressing. Having outlined where and how epistemic risk arises in end-of-life care, I turn my attention to the values and norms which shape clinicians' management of epistemic risk. I highlight how societal attitudes towards death, the medicalisation of dying, and the practice of defensive medicine all contribute to clinicians erring on one side of epistemic caution, minimising the risk that they miss or fail to treat illness. By applying the concept of epistemic risk to end-of-life care, I offer a novel lens through which to view medical decision-making in dying patients.

Emerging approaches to male contraception

Despite significant interests in contraception by men, effective methods of male contraception are limited to vasectomy and condoms. Recently, there have been several promising advances in male contraceptive research. This review will update readers on recent research in both hormonal and nonhormonal approaches to male contraception. Hormonal approaches to male contraception have been stymied by adverse effects, formulations requiring injections or implants, a 5% to10% nonresponse rate, as well as poor understanding of user acceptability. In the last several years, research has focused on novel, orally bioavailable androgens such as dimethandrolone undecanoate and 11β-methyl-19-nor-testosterone. Additionally, combinations of a topical testosterone gel combined with a gel containing segesterone acetate, a potent progestin, have shown promise in clinical trials recently. Simultaneously, significant preclinical progress has been made in several approaches to nonhormonal male contraceptives, including compounds that inhibit sperm motility such as eppin, compounds that inhibit retinoic acid binding or biosynthesis, and reversible approaches to obstruction of the vas deferens. It is imperative for these areas of research to continue making strides so that there is a gamut of contraceptive options for couples to choose from. Some of these approaches will hopefully reach clinical utility soon, greatly improving contraceptive choice for couples.