ExcelMale
Menu
Home
What's new
Latest activity
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Videos
Lab Tests
Doctor Finder
Buy Books
About Us
Men’s Health Coaching
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More options
Contact us
Close Menu
Forums
Testosterone Replacement, Low T, HCG, & Beyond
Testosterone Side Effect Management
Dr Saya Presents a Case Study for Possible Upper Limit of Physiologic Estradiol Levels in a Male
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Vince Carter" data-source="post: 39807" data-attributes="member: 2657"><p>Case Study: Observations of Testosterone/Estradiol Levels and HPTA Response in a MTF Transgender Patient Undergoing Hormonal Feminization Therapy</p><p></p><p>Dr Justin Saya, MD Defy Medical May 11, 2016</p><p></p><p></p><p>Case Presentation</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Patient consent was obtained to use laboratory data and case details from patient, however care is taken to maintain patient privacy and limit any potentially identifying information.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Patient is a biological male presenting at an age of 20 &#8211; 25 years old having been referred by his counselor for hormonal treatment to assist MTF transgender transformation. A thorough examination and consult was performed on patient including counseling, lab review, and all appropriate consents were reviewed and signed. Once appropriateness of treatment was determined, MTF transformative hormonal treatment was initiated in the form of estradiol cypionate twice weekly injections. For the purpose of simplicity and a focused discussion, dosages of estradiol cypionate will not be included, but rather the resulting serum estradiol levels (via LC-MS/MS) from gradual estradiol cypionate dosage escalation.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Results/Data</p><p></p><p>Estradiol (pg/mL) and total/free testosterone (ng/dL &#8211; pg/mL) levels were monitored for this patient with the results throughout the first year of treatment documented below in Table 1. Note, as estradiol cypionate dosages were gradually increased over the course of the year (left to right), estradiol lab values via LC-MS/MS increased as expected. There was also an interesting pattern that emerged in the concurrent serum testosterone levels which will be discussed below.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>[ATTACH]2088[/ATTACH]</p><p></p><p>Discussion/Conclusions</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>It is a well-documented physiologic phenomenon that the endocrine system operates under the principle of “negative feedback”, whereby end-product hormones (i.e. testosterone, estradiol, etc) exert suppression via a negative feedback loop to the hypothalamus &#8211; pituitary. This negative feedback loop operates primarily as an evolutionary safety/preventative mechanism to maintain physiologic hormone levels and prevent artificially high or “supra-physiologic” hormone levels (and the resulting health/survival risks attributed to same). Of course, this negative feedback loop can be “over-ridden” through the administration of exogenous hormones (estradiol cypionate, testosterone cypionate, etc), thereby allowing one to achieve supra-physiologic hormone levels without the limitations imposed by negative feedback.</p><p>In other words, being able to increase hormone levels (T, E, etc) above the biological “set point” or “limit point” where negative feedback kicks in to prevent further escalation. I would also argue, as a scientist/physician, that determining where this “set point” or “limit point” is would offer insight into determining where various hormone levels are intended to be by biological design. After all, who could argue against the wisdom of our biological design/blueprint?</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Evaluating this data reveals an interesting pattern. It was observed that as estradiol cypionate treatment was initiated and resultant estradiol serum levels increased, there was initially an increase in testosterone levels above baseline values. This pattern was observed as estradiol levels increased from 12 pg/mL -></p><p>22pg/mL -> 29pg/mL (with corresponding T levels 476/9.8 -> 676/23.4 -> 537/15.8). Clearly there was NO HPTA suppression as estradiol levels increased from 12pg/mL to 29pg/mL, arguably indicating that these estradiol levels are within the design of biological physiologic levels. In fact, as testosterone levels actually INCREASED as estradiol levels increased from 12pg/mL -> 22pg/mL it may be argued that there was HPTA STIMULATION achieved from this increase in estradiol from 12->22 and, consequently, estradiol levels of 22pg/mL are biologically preferred (or “encouraged/supported” by the HPT axis). This would actually fit nicely with most prevailing current data that estradiol levels below 20pg/mL may</p><p>impart certain health risks (interesting isn't it).</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Equally as interesting was the pattern that emerged as estradiol levels continued to climb. From the data it appears HPTA suppression began to exert its impact as estradiol levels climbed to 43pg/mL. Note, although LH/FSH levels were not measured in this case as a measurement of HPTA suppression, the decline in T levels as E levels increase (only attributable to HPTA suppression from exogenous E treatment) is used as an indicator for PRESUMPTIVE HPTA suppression. As estradiol levels reached</p><p>43pg/mL it appears the HPTA suppression was beginning as this was the first time that testosterone levels were suppressed to below initial baseline levels (476/9.8 baseline vs 412/7.4). Upon further analysis of the data, it is also clear that as estradiol levels continued to climb from 43->62 ->81, there was a profound and powerful HPTA suppression (via negative feedback from increasing estradiol levels) that kicked in to drastically suppress testosterone levels 412/7.4 -> 16/1.4 -> 8/0.9. Thus, in summary, it appears that for this particular biologically male patient, mild HPTA suppression was beginning to exert negative feedback effects as estradiol levels rose to 43pg/mL and this HPTA suppression via negative feedback accelerated rapidly to almost complete suppression by the time estradiol levels had increased to</p><p>62pg/mL.</p><p> </p><p></p><p></p><p>So what does this mean? Perhaps nothing, or perhaps this may point to a "biological set point" or "biological upper limit/ceiling" for estradiol levels in genetic males, after which profound HPTA suppression kicks in as a preventative/protective measure to prevent further increase. If this is the case, it would appear this “ceiling” or biological upper set-point for estradiol (when exposed to normal physiologic endocrine feedback mechanisms) would lie somewhere in the range of 43pg/mL &#8211; 62 pg/mL. However, with the HPTA suppression appearing to begin with estradiol levels in the 40's and the drastic/profound suppression evident with estradiol levels of 62 pg/mL, I would argue that the “set- point” or “biological ceiling” would seem to be somewhere between these two extremes, with an educated assumption based on these data and my own clinical experience of 50-55pg/mL. Further, it would be a sound argument to state that any estradiol levels that fall outside (above) the biological set point (wherever that may be) for HPTA suppression (which once again is ingrained into our endocrine system as a self-limiting protective mechanism) would classify as supra-physiologic (i.e. above the levels for which normal HPTA suppression in a male would PREVENT levels from rising).</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>There are limitations to this study including small sample size, not monitoring LH/FSH but instead relying on observed testosterone suppression as a surrogate measure of HPTA suppression, and lack of more precise measurement of estradiol levels, particularly during the interval of apparent HPTA suppression of 43pg/mL &#8211; 62pg/mL. Nonetheless, I feel that this data represents a unique and novel insight into what one might consider &#8216;physiologic” estradiol levels as measured by the endocrine system's own measuring stick &#8211; HPTA suppression via the evolutionary negative feedback mechanism.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Vince Carter, post: 39807, member: 2657"] Case Study: Observations of Testosterone/Estradiol Levels and HPTA Response in a MTF Transgender Patient Undergoing Hormonal Feminization Therapy Dr Justin Saya, MD Defy Medical May 11, 2016 Case Presentation Patient consent was obtained to use laboratory data and case details from patient, however care is taken to maintain patient privacy and limit any potentially identifying information. Patient is a biological male presenting at an age of 20 – 25 years old having been referred by his counselor for hormonal treatment to assist MTF transgender transformation. A thorough examination and consult was performed on patient including counseling, lab review, and all appropriate consents were reviewed and signed. Once appropriateness of treatment was determined, MTF transformative hormonal treatment was initiated in the form of estradiol cypionate twice weekly injections. For the purpose of simplicity and a focused discussion, dosages of estradiol cypionate will not be included, but rather the resulting serum estradiol levels (via LC-MS/MS) from gradual estradiol cypionate dosage escalation. Results/Data Estradiol (pg/mL) and total/free testosterone (ng/dL – pg/mL) levels were monitored for this patient with the results throughout the first year of treatment documented below in Table 1. Note, as estradiol cypionate dosages were gradually increased over the course of the year (left to right), estradiol lab values via LC-MS/MS increased as expected. There was also an interesting pattern that emerged in the concurrent serum testosterone levels which will be discussed below. [ATTACH=CONFIG]2088[/ATTACH] Discussion/Conclusions It is a well-documented physiologic phenomenon that the endocrine system operates under the principle of “negative feedback”, whereby end-product hormones (i.e. testosterone, estradiol, etc) exert suppression via a negative feedback loop to the hypothalamus – pituitary. This negative feedback loop operates primarily as an evolutionary safety/preventative mechanism to maintain physiologic hormone levels and prevent artificially high or “supra-physiologic” hormone levels (and the resulting health/survival risks attributed to same). Of course, this negative feedback loop can be “over-ridden” through the administration of exogenous hormones (estradiol cypionate, testosterone cypionate, etc), thereby allowing one to achieve supra-physiologic hormone levels without the limitations imposed by negative feedback. In other words, being able to increase hormone levels (T, E, etc) above the biological “set point” or “limit point” where negative feedback kicks in to prevent further escalation. I would also argue, as a scientist/physician, that determining where this “set point” or “limit point” is would offer insight into determining where various hormone levels are intended to be by biological design. After all, who could argue against the wisdom of our biological design/blueprint? Evaluating this data reveals an interesting pattern. It was observed that as estradiol cypionate treatment was initiated and resultant estradiol serum levels increased, there was initially an increase in testosterone levels above baseline values. This pattern was observed as estradiol levels increased from 12 pg/mL -> 22pg/mL -> 29pg/mL (with corresponding T levels 476/9.8 -> 676/23.4 -> 537/15.8). Clearly there was NO HPTA suppression as estradiol levels increased from 12pg/mL to 29pg/mL, arguably indicating that these estradiol levels are within the design of biological physiologic levels. In fact, as testosterone levels actually INCREASED as estradiol levels increased from 12pg/mL -> 22pg/mL it may be argued that there was HPTA STIMULATION achieved from this increase in estradiol from 12->22 and, consequently, estradiol levels of 22pg/mL are biologically preferred (or “encouraged/supported” by the HPT axis). This would actually fit nicely with most prevailing current data that estradiol levels below 20pg/mL may impart certain health risks (interesting isn't it). Equally as interesting was the pattern that emerged as estradiol levels continued to climb. From the data it appears HPTA suppression began to exert its impact as estradiol levels climbed to 43pg/mL. Note, although LH/FSH levels were not measured in this case as a measurement of HPTA suppression, the decline in T levels as E levels increase (only attributable to HPTA suppression from exogenous E treatment) is used as an indicator for PRESUMPTIVE HPTA suppression. As estradiol levels reached 43pg/mL it appears the HPTA suppression was beginning as this was the first time that testosterone levels were suppressed to below initial baseline levels (476/9.8 baseline vs 412/7.4). Upon further analysis of the data, it is also clear that as estradiol levels continued to climb from 43->62 ->81, there was a profound and powerful HPTA suppression (via negative feedback from increasing estradiol levels) that kicked in to drastically suppress testosterone levels 412/7.4 -> 16/1.4 -> 8/0.9. Thus, in summary, it appears that for this particular biologically male patient, mild HPTA suppression was beginning to exert negative feedback effects as estradiol levels rose to 43pg/mL and this HPTA suppression via negative feedback accelerated rapidly to almost complete suppression by the time estradiol levels had increased to 62pg/mL. So what does this mean? Perhaps nothing, or perhaps this may point to a "biological set point" or "biological upper limit/ceiling" for estradiol levels in genetic males, after which profound HPTA suppression kicks in as a preventative/protective measure to prevent further increase. If this is the case, it would appear this “ceiling” or biological upper set-point for estradiol (when exposed to normal physiologic endocrine feedback mechanisms) would lie somewhere in the range of 43pg/mL – 62 pg/mL. However, with the HPTA suppression appearing to begin with estradiol levels in the 40's and the drastic/profound suppression evident with estradiol levels of 62 pg/mL, I would argue that the “set- point” or “biological ceiling” would seem to be somewhere between these two extremes, with an educated assumption based on these data and my own clinical experience of 50-55pg/mL. Further, it would be a sound argument to state that any estradiol levels that fall outside (above) the biological set point (wherever that may be) for HPTA suppression (which once again is ingrained into our endocrine system as a self-limiting protective mechanism) would classify as supra-physiologic (i.e. above the levels for which normal HPTA suppression in a male would PREVENT levels from rising). There are limitations to this study including small sample size, not monitoring LH/FSH but instead relying on observed testosterone suppression as a surrogate measure of HPTA suppression, and lack of more precise measurement of estradiol levels, particularly during the interval of apparent HPTA suppression of 43pg/mL – 62pg/mL. Nonetheless, I feel that this data represents a unique and novel insight into what one might consider ‘physiologic” estradiol levels as measured by the endocrine system's own measuring stick – HPTA suppression via the evolutionary negative feedback mechanism. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Share this page
Facebook
Twitter
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Sponsors
Forums
Testosterone Replacement, Low T, HCG, & Beyond
Testosterone Side Effect Management
Dr Saya Presents a Case Study for Possible Upper Limit of Physiologic Estradiol Levels in a Male
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top