scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Author

Glenn R. Cunningham

Bio: Glenn R. Cunningham is an academic researcher from Baylor College of Medicine. The author has contributed to research in topics: Testosterone (patch) & Androgen. The author has an hindex of 44, co-authored 103 publications receiving 11127 citations. Previous affiliations of Glenn R. Cunningham include Veterans Health Administration & Michael E. DeBakey Veterans Affairs Medical Center in Houston.


Papers
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The guidelines for the evaluation and treatment of androgen deficiency syndromes in adult men published previously in 2006 were updated by the Task Force of the Clinical Guidelines Subcommittee of The Endocrine Society.
Abstract: Objective: Our objective was to update the guidelines for the evaluation and treatment of androgen deficiency syndromes in adult men published previously in 2006. Participants: The Task Force was composed of a chair, selected by the Clinical Guidelines Subcommittee of The Endocrine Society, five additional experts, a methodologist, and a medical writer. The Task Force received no corporate funding or remuneration. Conclusions: We recommend making a diagnosis of androgen deficiency only in men with consistent symptoms and signs and unequivocally low serum testosterone levels. We suggest the measurement of morning total testosterone level by a reliable assay as the initial diagnostic test. We recommend confirmation of the diagnosis by repeating the measurement of morning total testosterone and, in some men in whom total testosterone is near the lower limit of normal or in whom SHBG abnormality is suspected by measurement of free or bioavailable testosterone level, using validated assays. We recommend testos...

1,900 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The Task Force recommends testosterone therapy for symptomatic men with androgen deficiency, who have low testosterone levels, to induce and maintain secondary sex characteristics and to improve their sexual function, sense of well-being, muscle mass and strength, and bone mineral density.
Abstract: Objective: The objective was to provide guidelines for the evaluation and treatment of androgen deficiency syndromes in adult men Participants: The Task Force was composed of a chair, selected by the Clinical Guidelines Subcommittee of The Endocrine Society, five additional experts, a methodologist, and a professional writer The Task Force received no corporate funding or remuneration Evidence: The Task Force used systematic reviews of available evidence to inform its key recommendations The Task Force used consistent language and graphical descriptions of both the strength of recommendation and the quality of evidence, using the recommendations of the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation group Consensus Process: Consensus was guided by systematic reviews of evidence and discussions during three group meetings, several conference calls, and e-mail communications The drafts prepared by the panelists with the help of a professional writer were reviewed successively by Th

1,029 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: It is suggested that when clinicians institute T therapy, they aim at achieving T concentrations in the mid-normal range during treatment with any of the approved formulations, taking into consideration patient preference, pharmacokinetics, formulation-specific adverse effects, treatment burden, and cost.
Abstract: Objective To update the "Testosterone Therapy in Men With Androgen Deficiency Syndromes" guideline published in 2010. Participants The participants include an Endocrine Society-appointed task force of 10 medical content experts and a clinical practice guideline methodologist. Evidence This evidence-based guideline was developed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach to describe the strength of recommendations and the quality of evidence. The task force commissioned two systematic reviews and used the best available evidence from other published systematic reviews and individual studies. Consensus process One group meeting, several conference calls, and e-mail communications facilitated consensus development. Endocrine Society committees and members and the cosponsoring organization were invited to review and comment on preliminary drafts of the guideline. Conclusions We recommend making a diagnosis of hypogonadism only in men with symptoms and signs consistent with testosterone (T) deficiency and unequivocally and consistently low serum T concentrations. We recommend measuring fasting morning total T concentrations using an accurate and reliable assay as the initial diagnostic test. We recommend confirming the diagnosis by repeating the measurement of morning fasting total T concentrations. In men whose total T is near the lower limit of normal or who have a condition that alters sex hormone-binding globulin, we recommend obtaining a free T concentration using either equilibrium dialysis or estimating it using an accurate formula. In men determined to have androgen deficiency, we recommend additional diagnostic evaluation to ascertain the cause of androgen deficiency. We recommend T therapy for men with symptomatic T deficiency to induce and maintain secondary sex characteristics and correct symptoms of hypogonadism after discussing the potential benefits and risks of therapy and of monitoring therapy and involving the patient in decision making. We recommend against starting T therapy in patients who are planning fertility in the near term or have any of the following conditions: breast or prostate cancer, a palpable prostate nodule or induration, prostate-specific antigen level > 4 ng/mL, prostate-specific antigen > 3 ng/mL in men at increased risk of prostate cancer (e.g., African Americans and men with a first-degree relative with diagnosed prostate cancer) without further urological evaluation, elevated hematocrit, untreated severe obstructive sleep apnea, severe lower urinary tract symptoms, uncontrolled heart failure, myocardial infarction or stroke within the last 6 months, or thrombophilia. We suggest that when clinicians institute T therapy, they aim at achieving T concentrations in the mid-normal range during treatment with any of the approved formulations, taking into consideration patient preference, pharmacokinetics, formulation-specific adverse effects, treatment burden, and cost. Clinicians should monitor men receiving T therapy using a standardized plan that includes: evaluating symptoms, adverse effects, and compliance; measuring serum T and hematocrit concentrations; and evaluating prostate cancer risk during the first year after initiating T therapy.

907 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: It is concluded that T gel replacement improved sexual function and mood, increased lean mass and muscle strength (principally in the legs), and decreased fat mass in hypogonadal men with less skin irritation and discontinuation compared with the recommended dose of the permeation-enhanced T patch.
Abstract: Testosterone (T) therapy for hypogonadal men should correct the clinical abnormalities of T deficiency, including improvement of sexual function, increase in muscle mass and strength, and decrease in fat mass, with minimal adverse effects. We have shown that administration of a new transdermal T gel formulation to hypogonadal men provided dose proportional increases in serum T levels to the normal adult male range. We now report the effects of 180 days of treatment with this 1% T gel preparation (50 or 100 mg/day, contained in 5 or 10 g gel, respectively) compared to those of a permeation-enhanced T patch (5 mg/day) on defined efficacy parameters in 227 hypogonadal men. In the T gel groups, the T dose was adjusted up or down to 75 mg/day (contained in 7.5 g gel) on day 90 if serum T concentrations were below or above the normal male range. No dose adjustment was made with the T patch group. Sexual function and mood changes were monitored by questionnaire, body composition was determined by dual energy x-ray absorptiometry, and muscle strength was measured by the one repetitive maximum technique on bench and leg press exercises. Sexual function and mood improved maximally on day 30 of treatment, without differences across groups, and showed no further improvement with continuation of treatment. Mean muscle strength in the leg press exercise increased by 11 to 13 kg in all treatment groups by 90 days and did not improve further at 180 days of treatment. Moderate increases were also observed in arm/chest muscle strength. At 90 days of treatment, lean body mass increased more in the 100 mg/day T gel group (2.74 6 0.28 kg; P 5 0.0002) than in the 50 mg/day T gel (1.28 6 0.32 kg) and T patch groups (1.20 6 0.26 kg). Fat mass and percent fat were not significantly decreased in the T patch group, but showed decreases in the T gel groups (50 mg/day, 20.90 6 0.32 kg; 100 mg/day, 21.05 6 0.22 kg). The increase in lean mass and the decrease in fat mass were correlated with the changes in average serum T levels attained after transdermal T replacement. These beneficial effects of T replacement were accompanied by the anticipated increases in hematocrit and hemoglobin but without significant changes in the lipid profile. The increase in mean serum prostate-specific antigen levels (within the normal range) was correlated with serum levels of T. The greatest increases were noted in the 100 mg/day T gel group. Skin irritation was reported in 5.5% of subjects treated with T gel and in 66% of subjects in the permeationenhanced T patch group. We conclude that T gel replacement improved sexual function and mood, increased lean mass and muscle strength (principally in the legs), and decreased fat mass in hypogonadal men with less skin irritation and discontinuation compared with the recommended dose of the permeation-enhanced T patch. (J Clin Endocrinol Metab 85: 2839 ‐2853, 2000)

869 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: It is concluded that continued application of AndroGel resulted in beneficial effects similar to those with injectables and other transdermal preparations and monitoring for prostatic disease and assessment for erythrocytosis are strongly advised to reduce the risk of adverse events with T treatment of hypogonadal men.
Abstract: Transdermal testosterone (T) delivery represents an effective alternative to injectable androgens. We studied 163 hypogonadal men who applied 5, 7.5, or 10 g AndroGel (T gel) 1% CIII per day for up to 42 months. Efficacy data were presented in 123 subjects considered evaluable. Continuous AndroGel treatment normalized mean serum T and free T levels. Mean serum 5alpha-dihydrotestosterone concentrations and 5alpha-dihydrotestosterone/T ratio slightly increased, mean serum estradiol/T ratio doubled, and mean serum FSH and LH levels were suppressed by T replacement. Sexual function and mood parameters improved rapidly and were maintained throughout T treatment. Lean body mass increased (P = 0.0001) and fat mass decreased (P = 0.0001), and these changes were maintained with treatment but were not accompanied by significant increases in muscle strength. Increases in serum bone markers suggestive of increased bone formation were followed by gradual and progressive increases in bone mineral density more in the spine (P = 0.0001) than the hip (P = 0.0004). Mild local skin irritation occurred in 12 subjects, resulting in discontinuation in only one subject. Except for the anticipated increase in hematocrit and hemoglobin, there were no clinically significant changes in blood counts or biochemistry. In three subjects with elevated serum prostate-specific antigen, prostate biopsies showed cancer. We conclude that continued application of AndroGel resulted in beneficial effects similar to those with injectables and other transdermal preparations. This study was neither placebo controlled nor powered to determine the effects of T treatment on prostate cancer risk. Thus, monitoring for prostatic disease and assessment for erythrocytosis are strongly advised to reduce the risk of adverse events with T treatment of hypogonadal men.

604 citations


Cited by
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: These standards of care are intended to provide clinicians, patients, researchers, payers, and other interested individuals with the components of diabetes care, general treatment goals, and tools to evaluate the quality of care.
Abstract: D iabetes mellitus is a chronic illness that requires continuing medical care and ongoing patient self-management education and support to prevent acute complications and to reduce the risk of long-term complications. Diabetes care is complex and requires that many issues, beyond glycemic control, be addressed. A large body of evidence exists that supports a range of interventions to improve diabetes outcomes. These standards of care are intended to provide clinicians, patients, researchers, payers, and other interested individuals with the components of diabetes care, general treatment goals, and tools to evaluate the quality of care. While individual preferences, comorbidities, and other patient factors may require modification of goals, targets that are desirable for most patients with diabetes are provided. Specifically titled sections of the standards address children with diabetes, pregnant women, and people with prediabetes. These standards are not intended to preclude clinical judgment or more extensive evaluation and management of the patient by other specialists as needed. For more detailed information about management of diabetes, refer to references 1–3. The recommendations included are screening, diagnostic, and therapeutic actions that are known or believed to favorably affect health outcomes of patients with diabetes. A large number of these interventions have been shown to be cost-effective (4). A grading system (Table 1), developed by the American Diabetes Association (ADA) andmodeled after existingmethods, was utilized to clarify and codify the evidence that forms the basis for the recommendations. The level of evidence that supports each recommendation is listed after each recommendation using the letters A, B, C, or E. These standards of care are revised annually by the ADA’s multidisciplinary Professional Practice Committee, incorporating new evidence. For the current revision, committee members systematically searched Medline for human studies related to each subsection and published since 1 January 2010. Recommendations (bulleted at the beginning of each subsection and also listed in the “Executive Summary: Standards of Medical Care in Diabetesd2012”) were revised based on new evidence or, in some cases, to clarify the prior recommendation or match the strength of the wording to the strength of the evidence. A table linking the changes in recommendations to new evidence can be reviewed at http:// professional.diabetes.org/CPR_Search. aspx. Subsequently, as is the case for all Position Statements, the standards of care were reviewed and approved by the ExecutiveCommittee of ADA’s Board ofDirectors, which includes health care professionals, scientists, and lay people. Feedback from the larger clinical community was valuable for the 2012 revision of the standards. Readers who wish to comment on the “Standards of Medical Care in Diabetesd2012” are invited to do so at http://professional.diabetes.org/ CPR_Search.aspx. Members of the Professional Practice Committee disclose all potential financial conflicts of interest with industry. These disclosures were discussed at the onset of the standards revisionmeeting. Members of the committee, their employer, and their disclosed conflicts of interest are listed in the “Professional PracticeCommitteeMembers” table (see pg. S109). The AmericanDiabetes Association funds development of the standards and all its position statements out of its general revenues and does not utilize industry support for these purposes.

4,266 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The recommendations included are screening, diagnostic, and therapeutic actions that are known or believed to favorably affect health outcomes of patients with diabetes that have been shown to be costeffective.

2,862 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
02 Jun 1999-JAMA
TL;DR: The proportion of patients who maintained target glycemic levels declined markedly over 9 years of follow-up, and the progressive deterioration of diabetes control was such that after 3 years approximately 50% of patients could attain this goal with monotherapy, and by 9 years this declined to approximately 25%.
Abstract: ContextTreatment with diet alone, insulin, sulfonylurea, or metformin is known to improve glycemia in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus, but which treatment most frequently attains target fasting plasma glucose (FPG) concentration of less than 7.8 mmol/L (140 mg/dL) or glycosylated hemoglobin A1c(HbA1c) below 7% is unknown.ObjectiveTo assess how often each therapy can achieve the glycemic control target levels set by the American Diabetes Association.DesignRandomized controlled trial conducted between 1977 and 1997. Patients were recruited between 1977 and 1991 and were followed up every 3 months for 3, 6, and 9 years after enrollment.SettingOutpatient diabetes clinics in 15 UK hospitals.PatientsA total of 4075 patients newly diagnosed as having type 2 diabetes ranged in age between 25 and 65 years and had a median (interquartile range) FPG concentration of 11.5 (9.0-14.4) mmol/L [207 (162-259) mg/dL], HbA1c levels of 9.1% (7.5%-10.7%), and a mean (SD) body mass index of 29 (6) kg/m2.InterventionsAfter 3 months on a low-fat, high-carbohydrate, high-fiber diet, patients were randomized to therapy with diet alone, insulin, sulfonylurea, or metformin.Main Outcome MeasuresFasting plasma glucose and HbA1c levels, and the proportion of patients who achieved target levels below 7% HbA1c or less than 7.8 mmol/L (140 mg/dL) FPG at 3, 6, or 9 years following diagnosis.ResultsThe proportion of patients who maintained target glycemic levels declined markedly over 9 years of follow-up. After 9 years of monotherapy with diet, insulin, or sulfonylurea, 8%, 42%, and 24%, respectively, achieved FPG levels of less than 7.8 mmol/L (140 mg/dL) and 9%, 28%, and 24% achieved HbA1c levels below 7%. In obese patients randomized to metformin, 18% attained FPG levels of less than 7.8 mmol/L (140 mg/dL) and 13% attained HbA1c levels below 7%. Patients less likely to achieve target levels were younger, more obese, or more hyperglycemic than other patients.ConclusionsEach therapeutic agent, as monotherapy, increased 2- to 3-fold the proportion of patients who attained HbA1c below 7% compared with diet alone. However, the progressive deterioration of diabetes control was such that after 3 years approximately 50% of patients could attain this goal with monotherapy, and by 9 years this declined to approximately 25%. The majority of patients need multiple therapies to attain these glycemic target levels in the longer term.

2,464 citations

Journal Article
01 Jan 2004-Nature
TL;DR: The authors showed that post-prandial elevation of PYY3-36 may act through the arcuate nucleus Y2R to inhibit feeding in a gut-hypothalamic pathway.
Abstract: Food intake is regulated by the hypothalamus, including the melanocortin and neuropeptide Y (NPY) systems in the arcuate nucleus. The NPY Y2 receptor (Y2R), a putative inhibitory presynaptic receptor, is highly expressed on NPY neurons in the arcuate nucleus, which is accessible to peripheral hormones. Peptide YY3-36 (PYY3-36), a Y2R agonist, is released from the gastrointestinal tract postprandially in proportion to the calorie content of a meal. Here we show that peripheral injection of PYY3-36 in rats inhibits food intake and reduces weight gain. PYY3-36 also inhibits food intake in mice but not in Y2r-null mice, which suggests that the anorectic effect requires the Y2R. Peripheral administration of PYY3-36 increases c-Fos immunoreactivity in the arcuate nucleus and decreases hypothalamic Npy messenger RNA. Intra-arcuate injection of PYY3-36 inhibits food intake. PYY3-36 also inhibits electrical activity of NPY nerve terminals, thus activating adjacent pro-opiomelanocortin (POMC) neurons. In humans, infusion of normal postprandial concentrations of PYY3-36 significantly decreases appetite and reduces food intake by 33% over 24 h. Thus, postprandial elevation of PYY3-36 may act through the arcuate nucleus Y2R to inhibit feeding in a gut–hypothalamic pathway.

1,960 citations