Men's Health

Seventeen years ago, Philip Segal, a retired accountant from suburban Toronto, Canada, was diagnosed with prostate cancer in a private clinic. After rejecting brachytherapy recommended by an oncologist, he went on active surveillance to watch, but not treat, the Gleason 6 (grade group 1) tumor. As he approaches his 80th birthday later this year, Mr. Segal said he plans to maintain the status quo. “It definitely brings me some peace of mind. I’d rather do that than not follow it and kick myself if there was a serious change,” he said.

Meanwhile, 2 years ago and 200 miles away in suburban Detroit, Bruno Barrey, a robotics engineer, was diagnosed with three cores of Gleason 6 and went on active surveillance.

Six months after the original diagnosis, however, Mr. Barrey, 57, underwent a follow-up biopsy. This time, all 16 cores were positive, with a mix of low-risk Gleason 6 and more advanced Gleason 3 + 4 lesions. His tumor was so large he underwent radiation therapy in 2023, ending his brief stint on the monitoring approach.

The two cases illustrate the complicated truth of active surveillance. For some men, the strategy can prove to be short-lived, perhaps 5 years or less, or a life-long approach lasting until the man dies from another cause.

Which kind of race a man will run depends on a wide range of factors: His comfort level living with a cancer, or at least a tumor that might well evolve into an aggressive malignancy, changes in his prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level and results of a magnetic resonance imaging test, the volume of his cancer, results of genetic testing of the patient himself and his lesion, and his urologist’s philosophy about surveillance. Where a patient lives matters, too, because variations in surveillance levels exist in different geographic areas, domestically and internationally.

“Active surveillance is a strategy of monitoring until it is necessary to be treated. For some people, it is very short, and for others, essentially indefinite,” said Michael Leapman, MD, clinical lead at Yale Cancer Center in New Haven, Connecticut. “While there are differences, I think they are mainly about who is the ideal patient.”

Most studies show that roughly half of men in the United States who go on active surveillance abandon it within 5 years of diagnosis. Rashid Sayyid, MD, a clinical fellow at the University of Toronto, Canada, found in a paper presented to the American Urological Association in 2022 that the number leaving active surveillance increased to nearly two thirds at 10 years.

Peter Carroll, MD, a urologist at the University of California, San Francisco, and a pioneer in the active surveillance in the late 1990s, said the major reason men abandon the strategy is because monitoring reveals the presence of a more aggressive cancer, typically a grade group 2 (Gleason 3 + 4) lesion. But other reasons include anxiety and other emotional distress and upgrades in blood levels of PSA and increases in the rating scale for MRI for the likelihood of the presence of clinically significant prostate cancer.

Laurence Klotz, MD, of the University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, who coined the term active surveillance strategy in 1997 and published the first studies in the early 2000s, said it is important to consider when the data on surveillance were collected.

Since 2013, when MRI began to be adopted as a surveillance modality for men with prostate cancer, the dropout rate began declining. The reason? According to Dr. Klotz, MRIs and targeted biopsies result in greater accuracy in staging the disease, determining which patients need to be biopsied, which helps some men avoid being diagnosed to begin with.

Dr. Klotz cited as an example of the emerging change a 2020 study in the Journal of Urology, which found a 24% dropout rate for surveillance at 5 years, 36% at 10 years, and 42% at 15 years in a series of 2664 grade group 1 patients on active surveillance at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center in New York City from 2000 to 2017.

Dr. Leapman cited a 2023 study in JNCI Cancer Spectrum using the National Cancer Database that found a decline in the percentage of patients who had grade group 1 in biopsies from 45% in 2010 to 25% in 2019.

“There is more judicious use of PSA testing and biopsy in individuals who are more likely to have significant prostate cancer,” Dr. Leapman told this news organization. “And MRI could also play a role by finding more high-grade cancers that would have otherwise been hidden.”

The changing statistics of prostate cancer also may reflect decreases in screening in response to a 2012 statement from the US Preventive Services Task Force advising against PSA testing. The American Cancer Society in January 2023 said that statement could be driving more diagnoses of late-stage disease, which has been surging for the first time in two decades, especially among Black men.

Dr. Sayyid said patients must be selected carefully for active surveillance. And he said urologists should not promise their active surveillance patients that they will avoid treatment. “There are numerous factors at stake that influence the ultimate outcome,” he said.

Progression of Gleason scores is estimated at 1%-2% per year, Dr. Sayyid added. When active surveillance fails in the short to medium term — 5-10 years — the reason usually is that higher-grade cancers with Gleason 3 + 4 or above were initially missed.

Dr. Sayyid said he counsels patients aged 70 years and older differently than those in their 50s, telling younger patients they are more likely to need treatment eventually than the older patients.

Factors that can affect the longevity of active surveillance include the presence or absence of germline mutations and the overall health and life expectancy and comorbidities such as heart disease and diabetes in a given patient, he said.

Urologists hold varying philosophies here, especially involving younger patients and the presence of any level of Gleason 4 cancer.

William Catalona, MD, of Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine in Chicago, Illinois, who developed the concept of mass screening with PSA testing, originally opposed active surveillance. In recent years, he has modified his views but still takes a more conservative approach.

“I consider active surveillance a foolish strategy or, at best, a short-term strategy for young, otherwise healthy men, especially those having any Gleason pattern 4 disease.”

“More than half will ultimately convert to active treatment, some too late, and will require multiple treatments with multiple side effects. Some will develop metastases, and some will die of prostate cancer.”

Dr. Sayyid takes a more liberal approach. “I would counsel an eligible patient considering active surveillance that at the current time, I see no strong reason why you should be subjected to treatment and the associated side effects,” he said. “And as long as your overall disease ‘state’ [the combination of grade, volume, PSA, and imaging tests] remains relatively stable, there should be no reason for us to ‘jump ship’. In my practice, another term for active surveillance is ‘active partnership’ — working together to decide if this is a sprint or a lifelong marathon.”

Dr. Carroll reported research funding from the National Institutes of Health.

A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.

Seventeen years ago, Philip Segal, a retired accountant from suburban Toronto, Canada, was diagnosed with prostate cancer in a private clinic. After rejecting brachytherapy recommended by an oncologist, he went on active surveillance to watch, but not treat, the Gleason 6 (grade group 1) tumor. As he approaches his 80th birthday later this year, Mr. Segal said he plans to maintain the status quo. “It definitely brings me some peace of mind. I’d rather do that than not follow it and kick myself if there was a serious change,” he said.

Meanwhile, 2 years ago and 200 miles away in suburban Detroit, Bruno Barrey, a robotics engineer, was diagnosed with three cores of Gleason 6 and went on active surveillance.

Six months after the original diagnosis, however, Mr. Barrey, 57, underwent a follow-up biopsy. This time, all 16 cores were positive, with a mix of low-risk Gleason 6 and more advanced Gleason 3 + 4 lesions. His tumor was so large he underwent radiation therapy in 2023, ending his brief stint on the monitoring approach.

The two cases illustrate the complicated truth of active surveillance. For some men, the strategy can prove to be short-lived, perhaps 5 years or less, or a life-long approach lasting until the man dies from another cause.

Which kind of race a man will run depends on a wide range of factors: His comfort level living with a cancer, or at least a tumor that might well evolve into an aggressive malignancy, changes in his prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level and results of a magnetic resonance imaging test, the volume of his cancer, results of genetic testing of the patient himself and his lesion, and his urologist’s philosophy about surveillance. Where a patient lives matters, too, because variations in surveillance levels exist in different geographic areas, domestically and internationally.

“Active surveillance is a strategy of monitoring until it is necessary to be treated. For some people, it is very short, and for others, essentially indefinite,” said Michael Leapman, MD, clinical lead at Yale Cancer Center in New Haven, Connecticut. “While there are differences, I think they are mainly about who is the ideal patient.”

Most studies show that roughly half of men in the United States who go on active surveillance abandon it within 5 years of diagnosis. Rashid Sayyid, MD, a clinical fellow at the University of Toronto, Canada, found in a paper presented to the American Urological Association in 2022 that the number leaving active surveillance increased to nearly two thirds at 10 years.

Peter Carroll, MD, a urologist at the University of California, San Francisco, and a pioneer in the active surveillance in the late 1990s, said the major reason men abandon the strategy is because monitoring reveals the presence of a more aggressive cancer, typically a grade group 2 (Gleason 3 + 4) lesion. But other reasons include anxiety and other emotional distress and upgrades in blood levels of PSA and increases in the rating scale for MRI for the likelihood of the presence of clinically significant prostate cancer.

Laurence Klotz, MD, of the University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, who coined the term active surveillance strategy in 1997 and published the first studies in the early 2000s, said it is important to consider when the data on surveillance were collected.

Since 2013, when MRI began to be adopted as a surveillance modality for men with prostate cancer, the dropout rate began declining. The reason? According to Dr. Klotz, MRIs and targeted biopsies result in greater accuracy in staging the disease, determining which patients need to be biopsied, which helps some men avoid being diagnosed to begin with.

Dr. Klotz cited as an example of the emerging change a 2020 study in the Journal of Urology, which found a 24% dropout rate for surveillance at 5 years, 36% at 10 years, and 42% at 15 years in a series of 2664 grade group 1 patients on active surveillance at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center in New York City from 2000 to 2017.

Dr. Leapman cited a 2023 study in JNCI Cancer Spectrum using the National Cancer Database that found a decline in the percentage of patients who had grade group 1 in biopsies from 45% in 2010 to 25% in 2019.

“There is more judicious use of PSA testing and biopsy in individuals who are more likely to have significant prostate cancer,” Dr. Leapman told this news organization. “And MRI could also play a role by finding more high-grade cancers that would have otherwise been hidden.”

The changing statistics of prostate cancer also may reflect decreases in screening in response to a 2012 statement from the US Preventive Services Task Force advising against PSA testing. The American Cancer Society in January 2023 said that statement could be driving more diagnoses of late-stage disease, which has been surging for the first time in two decades, especially among Black men.

Dr. Sayyid said patients must be selected carefully for active surveillance. And he said urologists should not promise their active surveillance patients that they will avoid treatment. “There are numerous factors at stake that influence the ultimate outcome,” he said.

Progression of Gleason scores is estimated at 1%-2% per year, Dr. Sayyid added. When active surveillance fails in the short to medium term — 5-10 years — the reason usually is that higher-grade cancers with Gleason 3 + 4 or above were initially missed.

Dr. Sayyid said he counsels patients aged 70 years and older differently than those in their 50s, telling younger patients they are more likely to need treatment eventually than the older patients.

Factors that can affect the longevity of active surveillance include the presence or absence of germline mutations and the overall health and life expectancy and comorbidities such as heart disease and diabetes in a given patient, he said.

Urologists hold varying philosophies here, especially involving younger patients and the presence of any level of Gleason 4 cancer.

William Catalona, MD, of Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine in Chicago, Illinois, who developed the concept of mass screening with PSA testing, originally opposed active surveillance. In recent years, he has modified his views but still takes a more conservative approach.

“I consider active surveillance a foolish strategy or, at best, a short-term strategy for young, otherwise healthy men, especially those having any Gleason pattern 4 disease.”

“More than half will ultimately convert to active treatment, some too late, and will require multiple treatments with multiple side effects. Some will develop metastases, and some will die of prostate cancer.”

Dr. Sayyid takes a more liberal approach. “I would counsel an eligible patient considering active surveillance that at the current time, I see no strong reason why you should be subjected to treatment and the associated side effects,” he said. “And as long as your overall disease ‘state’ [the combination of grade, volume, PSA, and imaging tests] remains relatively stable, there should be no reason for us to ‘jump ship’. In my practice, another term for active surveillance is ‘active partnership’ — working together to decide if this is a sprint or a lifelong marathon.”

Dr. Carroll reported research funding from the National Institutes of Health.

A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.

Seventeen years ago, Philip Segal, a retired accountant from suburban Toronto, Canada, was diagnosed with prostate cancer in a private clinic. After rejecting brachytherapy recommended by an oncologist, he went on active surveillance to watch, but not treat, the Gleason 6 (grade group 1) tumor. As he approaches his 80th birthday later this year, Mr. Segal said he plans to maintain the status quo. “It definitely brings me some peace of mind. I’d rather do that than not follow it and kick myself if there was a serious change,” he said.

Meanwhile, 2 years ago and 200 miles away in suburban Detroit, Bruno Barrey, a robotics engineer, was diagnosed with three cores of Gleason 6 and went on active surveillance.

Six months after the original diagnosis, however, Mr. Barrey, 57, underwent a follow-up biopsy. This time, all 16 cores were positive, with a mix of low-risk Gleason 6 and more advanced Gleason 3 + 4 lesions. His tumor was so large he underwent radiation therapy in 2023, ending his brief stint on the monitoring approach.

The two cases illustrate the complicated truth of active surveillance. For some men, the strategy can prove to be short-lived, perhaps 5 years or less, or a life-long approach lasting until the man dies from another cause.

Which kind of race a man will run depends on a wide range of factors: His comfort level living with a cancer, or at least a tumor that might well evolve into an aggressive malignancy, changes in his prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level and results of a magnetic resonance imaging test, the volume of his cancer, results of genetic testing of the patient himself and his lesion, and his urologist’s philosophy about surveillance. Where a patient lives matters, too, because variations in surveillance levels exist in different geographic areas, domestically and internationally.

“Active surveillance is a strategy of monitoring until it is necessary to be treated. For some people, it is very short, and for others, essentially indefinite,” said Michael Leapman, MD, clinical lead at Yale Cancer Center in New Haven, Connecticut. “While there are differences, I think they are mainly about who is the ideal patient.”

Most studies show that roughly half of men in the United States who go on active surveillance abandon it within 5 years of diagnosis. Rashid Sayyid, MD, a clinical fellow at the University of Toronto, Canada, found in a paper presented to the American Urological Association in 2022 that the number leaving active surveillance increased to nearly two thirds at 10 years.

Peter Carroll, MD, a urologist at the University of California, San Francisco, and a pioneer in the active surveillance in the late 1990s, said the major reason men abandon the strategy is because monitoring reveals the presence of a more aggressive cancer, typically a grade group 2 (Gleason 3 + 4) lesion. But other reasons include anxiety and other emotional distress and upgrades in blood levels of PSA and increases in the rating scale for MRI for the likelihood of the presence of clinically significant prostate cancer.

Laurence Klotz, MD, of the University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, who coined the term active surveillance strategy in 1997 and published the first studies in the early 2000s, said it is important to consider when the data on surveillance were collected.

Since 2013, when MRI began to be adopted as a surveillance modality for men with prostate cancer, the dropout rate began declining. The reason? According to Dr. Klotz, MRIs and targeted biopsies result in greater accuracy in staging the disease, determining which patients need to be biopsied, which helps some men avoid being diagnosed to begin with.

Dr. Klotz cited as an example of the emerging change a 2020 study in the Journal of Urology, which found a 24% dropout rate for surveillance at 5 years, 36% at 10 years, and 42% at 15 years in a series of 2664 grade group 1 patients on active surveillance at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center in New York City from 2000 to 2017.

Dr. Leapman cited a 2023 study in JNCI Cancer Spectrum using the National Cancer Database that found a decline in the percentage of patients who had grade group 1 in biopsies from 45% in 2010 to 25% in 2019.

“There is more judicious use of PSA testing and biopsy in individuals who are more likely to have significant prostate cancer,” Dr. Leapman told this news organization. “And MRI could also play a role by finding more high-grade cancers that would have otherwise been hidden.”

The changing statistics of prostate cancer also may reflect decreases in screening in response to a 2012 statement from the US Preventive Services Task Force advising against PSA testing. The American Cancer Society in January 2023 said that statement could be driving more diagnoses of late-stage disease, which has been surging for the first time in two decades, especially among Black men.

Dr. Sayyid said patients must be selected carefully for active surveillance. And he said urologists should not promise their active surveillance patients that they will avoid treatment. “There are numerous factors at stake that influence the ultimate outcome,” he said.

Progression of Gleason scores is estimated at 1%-2% per year, Dr. Sayyid added. When active surveillance fails in the short to medium term — 5-10 years — the reason usually is that higher-grade cancers with Gleason 3 + 4 or above were initially missed.

Dr. Sayyid said he counsels patients aged 70 years and older differently than those in their 50s, telling younger patients they are more likely to need treatment eventually than the older patients.

Factors that can affect the longevity of active surveillance include the presence or absence of germline mutations and the overall health and life expectancy and comorbidities such as heart disease and diabetes in a given patient, he said.

Urologists hold varying philosophies here, especially involving younger patients and the presence of any level of Gleason 4 cancer.

William Catalona, MD, of Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine in Chicago, Illinois, who developed the concept of mass screening with PSA testing, originally opposed active surveillance. In recent years, he has modified his views but still takes a more conservative approach.

“I consider active surveillance a foolish strategy or, at best, a short-term strategy for young, otherwise healthy men, especially those having any Gleason pattern 4 disease.”

“More than half will ultimately convert to active treatment, some too late, and will require multiple treatments with multiple side effects. Some will develop metastases, and some will die of prostate cancer.”

Dr. Sayyid takes a more liberal approach. “I would counsel an eligible patient considering active surveillance that at the current time, I see no strong reason why you should be subjected to treatment and the associated side effects,” he said. “And as long as your overall disease ‘state’ [the combination of grade, volume, PSA, and imaging tests] remains relatively stable, there should be no reason for us to ‘jump ship’. In my practice, another term for active surveillance is ‘active partnership’ — working together to decide if this is a sprint or a lifelong marathon.”

Dr. Carroll reported research funding from the National Institutes of Health.

A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.

A power outage, like the 1977 blackout in New York City, can lead to an increase in violent crime. However, complete darkness can also have an upside, as it can encourage intimacy and subsequently boost birth rates. The Christmas season, sometimes called the festival of love, appears to stimulate human interactions. Yet this, also, has its downsides, as recently reported by Dr. Nikolaos Pyrgidis and other urologists at Ludwig Maximilian University of Munich in Germany. The less cheerful aspect of the holiday season is penile fractures.

The team found that the Christmas period, in particular, is that bit more risky for this injury after they evaluated data from about 3400 men (average age 42) treated for penile fractures between 2005 and 2021. The data was provided by Germany’s Federal Bureau of Statistics.

Out of the 3400 penile fractures that were reported during this period, 40 (1.2%) occurred over 51 Christmas days (from 24th to 26th December each year). The daily incidence rate of penile fractures during the Christmas period was 0.78, with an incidence rate ratio (IRR) of 1.43. The authors note that, if every day were like Christmas, there would have been a 43% increase in penile fractures in Germany since 2005. Interestingly, only 28 (0.82%) penile fractures were reported during the New Year (from 31 December to 2 January in the period between 2005 and 2021), with an IRR of 0.98.

More generally, most patients with penile fractures were admitted to the hospital over the weekend (n=1322; IRR 1.58). Notably, Sunday saw the most admissions due to this injury, followed by Saturday. This suggests that men engaging in sexual activities on Saturday night bear the highest risk of penile fractures, followed by those active on Friday nights.

Penile fractures also increased in the summer months (n=929; IRR 1.11). But the COVID-19 pandemic (n=385; IRR 1.06) and the lockdowns (n=93; IRR 1.95%) did not impact the frequency of this injury.

Rare, Painful, and an Emergency

Penile fractures are a rare urological emergency. The tunica albuginea of one or both corpora cavernosa must tear to be considered problematic, as another team of authors reported in a recent publication. Involvement of the urethra and corpus spongiosum is also possible.

Injuries often occur during an erection because it makes the tunica albuginea stiffer and thinner than when the penis is flaccid. Patients report hearing a snap when the penis is forced into an angle during sexual activity. This was reportedly the case with German singer-song writer Dieter Bohlen, whose ex-girlfriend Nadja Abd El Farrag is said to have written in her book “Ungelogen”, or “Honestly”, that there was a sudden snap during an intimate moment one December night (Christmas?), after which she called the fire brigade in her distress.

Multiple Causes Possible

Other factors contributing to penile fractures include rolling over in bed onto an erect penis, forced bending to achieve detumescence, and blunt external traumas like kicks.

Some penile fractures can be caused by patients “kneading and ripping” their erect penis to quickly reduce swelling. In an Iranian study, 269 out of 352 patients (76%) who underwent this process, known as “ taqaandan” in Iran, suffered a penile fracture.

Penile fractures can also occur in children, as evidenced by the case history of a 7-year-old boy described a few years ago in the journal Urology where the cause was a fall onto the penis.

Immediate Action Required

The treatment of choice for a fresh penile fracture is surgical repair of the tunica albuginea defect and, if necessary, the urethra. Timely surgical intervention yields significantly better long-term outcomes than conservative therapy regarding late complications such as erectile dysfunction and penile curvature. It also reduces the rate of early complications, such as severe corporal infections. Conservative therapy should be reserved for patients who explicitly refuse surgical intervention after thorough consultation.

This article was translated from Univadis Germany using ChatGPT followed by human editing.

A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.

A power outage, like the 1977 blackout in New York City, can lead to an increase in violent crime. However, complete darkness can also have an upside, as it can encourage intimacy and subsequently boost birth rates. The Christmas season, sometimes called the festival of love, appears to stimulate human interactions. Yet this, also, has its downsides, as recently reported by Dr. Nikolaos Pyrgidis and other urologists at Ludwig Maximilian University of Munich in Germany. The less cheerful aspect of the holiday season is penile fractures.

The team found that the Christmas period, in particular, is that bit more risky for this injury after they evaluated data from about 3400 men (average age 42) treated for penile fractures between 2005 and 2021. The data was provided by Germany’s Federal Bureau of Statistics.

Out of the 3400 penile fractures that were reported during this period, 40 (1.2%) occurred over 51 Christmas days (from 24th to 26th December each year). The daily incidence rate of penile fractures during the Christmas period was 0.78, with an incidence rate ratio (IRR) of 1.43. The authors note that, if every day were like Christmas, there would have been a 43% increase in penile fractures in Germany since 2005. Interestingly, only 28 (0.82%) penile fractures were reported during the New Year (from 31 December to 2 January in the period between 2005 and 2021), with an IRR of 0.98.

More generally, most patients with penile fractures were admitted to the hospital over the weekend (n=1322; IRR 1.58). Notably, Sunday saw the most admissions due to this injury, followed by Saturday. This suggests that men engaging in sexual activities on Saturday night bear the highest risk of penile fractures, followed by those active on Friday nights.

Penile fractures also increased in the summer months (n=929; IRR 1.11). But the COVID-19 pandemic (n=385; IRR 1.06) and the lockdowns (n=93; IRR 1.95%) did not impact the frequency of this injury.

Rare, Painful, and an Emergency

Penile fractures are a rare urological emergency. The tunica albuginea of one or both corpora cavernosa must tear to be considered problematic, as another team of authors reported in a recent publication. Involvement of the urethra and corpus spongiosum is also possible.

Injuries often occur during an erection because it makes the tunica albuginea stiffer and thinner than when the penis is flaccid. Patients report hearing a snap when the penis is forced into an angle during sexual activity. This was reportedly the case with German singer-song writer Dieter Bohlen, whose ex-girlfriend Nadja Abd El Farrag is said to have written in her book “Ungelogen”, or “Honestly”, that there was a sudden snap during an intimate moment one December night (Christmas?), after which she called the fire brigade in her distress.

Multiple Causes Possible

Other factors contributing to penile fractures include rolling over in bed onto an erect penis, forced bending to achieve detumescence, and blunt external traumas like kicks.

Some penile fractures can be caused by patients “kneading and ripping” their erect penis to quickly reduce swelling. In an Iranian study, 269 out of 352 patients (76%) who underwent this process, known as “ taqaandan” in Iran, suffered a penile fracture.

Penile fractures can also occur in children, as evidenced by the case history of a 7-year-old boy described a few years ago in the journal Urology where the cause was a fall onto the penis.

Immediate Action Required

The treatment of choice for a fresh penile fracture is surgical repair of the tunica albuginea defect and, if necessary, the urethra. Timely surgical intervention yields significantly better long-term outcomes than conservative therapy regarding late complications such as erectile dysfunction and penile curvature. It also reduces the rate of early complications, such as severe corporal infections. Conservative therapy should be reserved for patients who explicitly refuse surgical intervention after thorough consultation.

This article was translated from Univadis Germany using ChatGPT followed by human editing.

A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.

A power outage, like the 1977 blackout in New York City, can lead to an increase in violent crime. However, complete darkness can also have an upside, as it can encourage intimacy and subsequently boost birth rates. The Christmas season, sometimes called the festival of love, appears to stimulate human interactions. Yet this, also, has its downsides, as recently reported by Dr. Nikolaos Pyrgidis and other urologists at Ludwig Maximilian University of Munich in Germany. The less cheerful aspect of the holiday season is penile fractures.

The team found that the Christmas period, in particular, is that bit more risky for this injury after they evaluated data from about 3400 men (average age 42) treated for penile fractures between 2005 and 2021. The data was provided by Germany’s Federal Bureau of Statistics.

Out of the 3400 penile fractures that were reported during this period, 40 (1.2%) occurred over 51 Christmas days (from 24th to 26th December each year). The daily incidence rate of penile fractures during the Christmas period was 0.78, with an incidence rate ratio (IRR) of 1.43. The authors note that, if every day were like Christmas, there would have been a 43% increase in penile fractures in Germany since 2005. Interestingly, only 28 (0.82%) penile fractures were reported during the New Year (from 31 December to 2 January in the period between 2005 and 2021), with an IRR of 0.98.

More generally, most patients with penile fractures were admitted to the hospital over the weekend (n=1322; IRR 1.58). Notably, Sunday saw the most admissions due to this injury, followed by Saturday. This suggests that men engaging in sexual activities on Saturday night bear the highest risk of penile fractures, followed by those active on Friday nights.

Penile fractures also increased in the summer months (n=929; IRR 1.11). But the COVID-19 pandemic (n=385; IRR 1.06) and the lockdowns (n=93; IRR 1.95%) did not impact the frequency of this injury.

Rare, Painful, and an Emergency

Penile fractures are a rare urological emergency. The tunica albuginea of one or both corpora cavernosa must tear to be considered problematic, as another team of authors reported in a recent publication. Involvement of the urethra and corpus spongiosum is also possible.

Injuries often occur during an erection because it makes the tunica albuginea stiffer and thinner than when the penis is flaccid. Patients report hearing a snap when the penis is forced into an angle during sexual activity. This was reportedly the case with German singer-song writer Dieter Bohlen, whose ex-girlfriend Nadja Abd El Farrag is said to have written in her book “Ungelogen”, or “Honestly”, that there was a sudden snap during an intimate moment one December night (Christmas?), after which she called the fire brigade in her distress.

Multiple Causes Possible

Other factors contributing to penile fractures include rolling over in bed onto an erect penis, forced bending to achieve detumescence, and blunt external traumas like kicks.

Some penile fractures can be caused by patients “kneading and ripping” their erect penis to quickly reduce swelling. In an Iranian study, 269 out of 352 patients (76%) who underwent this process, known as “ taqaandan” in Iran, suffered a penile fracture.

Penile fractures can also occur in children, as evidenced by the case history of a 7-year-old boy described a few years ago in the journal Urology where the cause was a fall onto the penis.

Immediate Action Required

The treatment of choice for a fresh penile fracture is surgical repair of the tunica albuginea defect and, if necessary, the urethra. Timely surgical intervention yields significantly better long-term outcomes than conservative therapy regarding late complications such as erectile dysfunction and penile curvature. It also reduces the rate of early complications, such as severe corporal infections. Conservative therapy should be reserved for patients who explicitly refuse surgical intervention after thorough consultation.

This article was translated from Univadis Germany using ChatGPT followed by human editing.

A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.

This transcript has been edited for clarity.

I’m Dr Rachel Rubin. I am a urologist with fellowship training in sexual medicine. Today I’m going to explain why I may recommend that your patients put a needle directly into their penises for help with erectile dysfunction (ED).

I know that sounds crazy, but in a recent video when I talked about erection hardness, I acknowledged that it may not be easy to talk with patients about their penises, but it’s important.

ED can be a marker for cardiovascular disease, with 50% of our 50-year-old patients having ED. As physicians, we must do a better job of talking to our patients about ED and letting them know that it’s a marker for overall health.

How do we treat ED? Primary care doctors can do a great deal for patients with ED, and there are other things that urologists can do when you run out of options in your own toolbox.

What’s important for a healthy erection? You need three things: healthy muscle, healthy nerves, and healthy arteries. If anything goes wrong with muscles, nerves, or arteries, this is what leads to ED. Think through the algorithm of your patient’s medical history: Do they have diabetes, which can affect their nerves? Do they have high blood pressure, which can affect their arteries? Do they have problems with testosterone, which can affect the smooth muscles of the penis? Understanding your patient’s history can be really helpful when you figure out what is the best treatment strategy for your patient.

For the penis to work, those smooth muscles have to relax; therefore, your brain has to be relaxed, along with your pelvic floor muscles. The smooth muscle of the penis has to be relaxed so it can fill with blood, increase in girth and size, and hold that erection in place.

To treat ED, we have a biopsychosocial toolbox. Biology refers to the muscles, arteries, and nerves. The psychosocial component is stress: If your brain is stressed, you have a lot of adrenaline around that can tighten those smooth muscles and cause you to lose an erection.

So, what are these treatments? I’ll start with lifestyle. A healthy heart means a healthy penis, so, all of the things you already recommend for lifestyle changes can really help with ED. Sleep is important. Does your patient need a sleep study? Do they have sleep apnea? Are they exercising? Recent data show that exercise may be just as effective, if not more effective, than Viagra. How about a good diet? The Mediterranean diet seems to be the most helpful. So, encourage your patients to make dietary, exercise, sleep, and other lifestyle changes if they want to improve erectile function.

What about sex education? Most physicians didn’t get great education about sex in medical school, but it’s very important to our patients who likewise have had inadequate sex education. Ask questions, talk to them, explain what is normal.

I can’t stress enough how important mental health is to a great sex life. Everyone would benefit from sex therapy and becoming better at sex. We need to get better at communicating and educating patients and their partners to maximize their quality of life. If you need to refer to a specialist, we recommend going to psychologytoday.com or aasect.org to find a local sex therapist. Call them and use them in your referral networks.

In the “bio” component of the biopsychosocial approach, we can do a lot to treat ED with medications and hormones. Testosterone has been shown to help with low libido and erectile function. Checking the patient’s testosterone level can be very helpful. Pills — we are familiar with Viagra, Cialis, Levitra, and Stendra. The oral PDE-5 inhibitors have been around since the late 1990s and they work quite well for many people with ED. Viagra and Cialis are generic now and patients can get them fairly inexpensively with discount coupons from GoodRx or Cost Plus Drugs. They may not even have to worry about insurance coverage.

Pills relax the smooth muscle of the penis so that it fills with blood and becomes erect, but they don’t work for everybody. If pills stop working, we often talk about synergistic treatments — combining pills and devices. Devices for ED should be discussed more often, and clinicians should consider prescribing them. We commonly discuss eyeglasses and wheelchairs, but we don’t talk about the sexual health devices that could help patients have more success and fun in the bedroom.

What are the various types of devices for ED? One common device is a vacuum pump, which can be very effective. This is how they work: The penis is lubricated and placed into the pump. A button on the pump creates suction that brings blood into the penis. The patient then applies a constriction band around the base of the penis to hold that erection in place.

“Sex tech” has really expanded to help patients with ED with devices that vibrate and hold the erection in place. Vibrating devices allow for a better orgasm. We even have devices that monitor erectile fitness (like a Fitbit for the penis), gathering data to help patients understand the firmness of their erections.

Devices are helpful adjuncts, but they don’t always do enough to achieve an erect penis that’s hard enough for penetration. In those cases, we can recommend injections that increase smooth muscle relaxation of the penis. I know it sounds crazy. If the muscles, arteries, and nerves of the penis aren’t functioning well, additional smooth muscle relaxation can be achieved by injecting alprostadil (prostaglandin E1) directly into the penis. It’s a tiny needle. It doesn’t hurt. These injections can be quite helpful for our patients, and we often recommend them.

But what happens when your patient doesn’t even respond to injections or any of the synergistic treatments? They’ve tried everything. Urologists may suggest a surgical option, the penile implant. Penile implants contain a pump inside the scrotum that fills with fluid, allowing a rigid erection. Penile implants are wonderful for patients who can no longer get erections. Talking to a urologist about the pros and the cons and the risks and benefits of surgically placed implants is very important.

Finally, ED is a marker for cardiovascular disease. These patients may need a cardiology workup. They need to improve their general health. We have to ask our patients about their goals and what they care about, and find a toolbox that makes sense for each patient and couple to maximize their sexual health and quality of life. Don’t give up. If you have questions, let us know.

Rachel S. Rubin, MD, is Assistant Clinical Professor, Department of Urology, Georgetown University, Washington, DC; Private practice, Rachel Rubin MD PLLC, North Bethesda, Maryland. She disclosed ties with Sprout, Maternal Medical, Absorption Pharmaceuticals, GSK, and Endo.

A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.

This transcript has been edited for clarity.

I’m Dr Rachel Rubin. I am a urologist with fellowship training in sexual medicine. Today I’m going to explain why I may recommend that your patients put a needle directly into their penises for help with erectile dysfunction (ED).

I know that sounds crazy, but in a recent video when I talked about erection hardness, I acknowledged that it may not be easy to talk with patients about their penises, but it’s important.

ED can be a marker for cardiovascular disease, with 50% of our 50-year-old patients having ED. As physicians, we must do a better job of talking to our patients about ED and letting them know that it’s a marker for overall health.

How do we treat ED? Primary care doctors can do a great deal for patients with ED, and there are other things that urologists can do when you run out of options in your own toolbox.

What’s important for a healthy erection? You need three things: healthy muscle, healthy nerves, and healthy arteries. If anything goes wrong with muscles, nerves, or arteries, this is what leads to ED. Think through the algorithm of your patient’s medical history: Do they have diabetes, which can affect their nerves? Do they have high blood pressure, which can affect their arteries? Do they have problems with testosterone, which can affect the smooth muscles of the penis? Understanding your patient’s history can be really helpful when you figure out what is the best treatment strategy for your patient.

For the penis to work, those smooth muscles have to relax; therefore, your brain has to be relaxed, along with your pelvic floor muscles. The smooth muscle of the penis has to be relaxed so it can fill with blood, increase in girth and size, and hold that erection in place.

To treat ED, we have a biopsychosocial toolbox. Biology refers to the muscles, arteries, and nerves. The psychosocial component is stress: If your brain is stressed, you have a lot of adrenaline around that can tighten those smooth muscles and cause you to lose an erection.

So, what are these treatments? I’ll start with lifestyle. A healthy heart means a healthy penis, so, all of the things you already recommend for lifestyle changes can really help with ED. Sleep is important. Does your patient need a sleep study? Do they have sleep apnea? Are they exercising? Recent data show that exercise may be just as effective, if not more effective, than Viagra. How about a good diet? The Mediterranean diet seems to be the most helpful. So, encourage your patients to make dietary, exercise, sleep, and other lifestyle changes if they want to improve erectile function.

What about sex education? Most physicians didn’t get great education about sex in medical school, but it’s very important to our patients who likewise have had inadequate sex education. Ask questions, talk to them, explain what is normal.

I can’t stress enough how important mental health is to a great sex life. Everyone would benefit from sex therapy and becoming better at sex. We need to get better at communicating and educating patients and their partners to maximize their quality of life. If you need to refer to a specialist, we recommend going to psychologytoday.com or aasect.org to find a local sex therapist. Call them and use them in your referral networks.

In the “bio” component of the biopsychosocial approach, we can do a lot to treat ED with medications and hormones. Testosterone has been shown to help with low libido and erectile function. Checking the patient’s testosterone level can be very helpful. Pills — we are familiar with Viagra, Cialis, Levitra, and Stendra. The oral PDE-5 inhibitors have been around since the late 1990s and they work quite well for many people with ED. Viagra and Cialis are generic now and patients can get them fairly inexpensively with discount coupons from GoodRx or Cost Plus Drugs. They may not even have to worry about insurance coverage.

Pills relax the smooth muscle of the penis so that it fills with blood and becomes erect, but they don’t work for everybody. If pills stop working, we often talk about synergistic treatments — combining pills and devices. Devices for ED should be discussed more often, and clinicians should consider prescribing them. We commonly discuss eyeglasses and wheelchairs, but we don’t talk about the sexual health devices that could help patients have more success and fun in the bedroom.

What are the various types of devices for ED? One common device is a vacuum pump, which can be very effective. This is how they work: The penis is lubricated and placed into the pump. A button on the pump creates suction that brings blood into the penis. The patient then applies a constriction band around the base of the penis to hold that erection in place.

“Sex tech” has really expanded to help patients with ED with devices that vibrate and hold the erection in place. Vibrating devices allow for a better orgasm. We even have devices that monitor erectile fitness (like a Fitbit for the penis), gathering data to help patients understand the firmness of their erections.

Devices are helpful adjuncts, but they don’t always do enough to achieve an erect penis that’s hard enough for penetration. In those cases, we can recommend injections that increase smooth muscle relaxation of the penis. I know it sounds crazy. If the muscles, arteries, and nerves of the penis aren’t functioning well, additional smooth muscle relaxation can be achieved by injecting alprostadil (prostaglandin E1) directly into the penis. It’s a tiny needle. It doesn’t hurt. These injections can be quite helpful for our patients, and we often recommend them.

But what happens when your patient doesn’t even respond to injections or any of the synergistic treatments? They’ve tried everything. Urologists may suggest a surgical option, the penile implant. Penile implants contain a pump inside the scrotum that fills with fluid, allowing a rigid erection. Penile implants are wonderful for patients who can no longer get erections. Talking to a urologist about the pros and the cons and the risks and benefits of surgically placed implants is very important.

Finally, ED is a marker for cardiovascular disease. These patients may need a cardiology workup. They need to improve their general health. We have to ask our patients about their goals and what they care about, and find a toolbox that makes sense for each patient and couple to maximize their sexual health and quality of life. Don’t give up. If you have questions, let us know.

Rachel S. Rubin, MD, is Assistant Clinical Professor, Department of Urology, Georgetown University, Washington, DC; Private practice, Rachel Rubin MD PLLC, North Bethesda, Maryland. She disclosed ties with Sprout, Maternal Medical, Absorption Pharmaceuticals, GSK, and Endo.

A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.

This transcript has been edited for clarity.

I’m Dr Rachel Rubin. I am a urologist with fellowship training in sexual medicine. Today I’m going to explain why I may recommend that your patients put a needle directly into their penises for help with erectile dysfunction (ED).

I know that sounds crazy, but in a recent video when I talked about erection hardness, I acknowledged that it may not be easy to talk with patients about their penises, but it’s important.

ED can be a marker for cardiovascular disease, with 50% of our 50-year-old patients having ED. As physicians, we must do a better job of talking to our patients about ED and letting them know that it’s a marker for overall health.

How do we treat ED? Primary care doctors can do a great deal for patients with ED, and there are other things that urologists can do when you run out of options in your own toolbox.

What’s important for a healthy erection? You need three things: healthy muscle, healthy nerves, and healthy arteries. If anything goes wrong with muscles, nerves, or arteries, this is what leads to ED. Think through the algorithm of your patient’s medical history: Do they have diabetes, which can affect their nerves? Do they have high blood pressure, which can affect their arteries? Do they have problems with testosterone, which can affect the smooth muscles of the penis? Understanding your patient’s history can be really helpful when you figure out what is the best treatment strategy for your patient.

For the penis to work, those smooth muscles have to relax; therefore, your brain has to be relaxed, along with your pelvic floor muscles. The smooth muscle of the penis has to be relaxed so it can fill with blood, increase in girth and size, and hold that erection in place.

To treat ED, we have a biopsychosocial toolbox. Biology refers to the muscles, arteries, and nerves. The psychosocial component is stress: If your brain is stressed, you have a lot of adrenaline around that can tighten those smooth muscles and cause you to lose an erection.

So, what are these treatments? I’ll start with lifestyle. A healthy heart means a healthy penis, so, all of the things you already recommend for lifestyle changes can really help with ED. Sleep is important. Does your patient need a sleep study? Do they have sleep apnea? Are they exercising? Recent data show that exercise may be just as effective, if not more effective, than Viagra. How about a good diet? The Mediterranean diet seems to be the most helpful. So, encourage your patients to make dietary, exercise, sleep, and other lifestyle changes if they want to improve erectile function.

What about sex education? Most physicians didn’t get great education about sex in medical school, but it’s very important to our patients who likewise have had inadequate sex education. Ask questions, talk to them, explain what is normal.

I can’t stress enough how important mental health is to a great sex life. Everyone would benefit from sex therapy and becoming better at sex. We need to get better at communicating and educating patients and their partners to maximize their quality of life. If you need to refer to a specialist, we recommend going to psychologytoday.com or aasect.org to find a local sex therapist. Call them and use them in your referral networks.

In the “bio” component of the biopsychosocial approach, we can do a lot to treat ED with medications and hormones. Testosterone has been shown to help with low libido and erectile function. Checking the patient’s testosterone level can be very helpful. Pills — we are familiar with Viagra, Cialis, Levitra, and Stendra. The oral PDE-5 inhibitors have been around since the late 1990s and they work quite well for many people with ED. Viagra and Cialis are generic now and patients can get them fairly inexpensively with discount coupons from GoodRx or Cost Plus Drugs. They may not even have to worry about insurance coverage.

Pills relax the smooth muscle of the penis so that it fills with blood and becomes erect, but they don’t work for everybody. If pills stop working, we often talk about synergistic treatments — combining pills and devices. Devices for ED should be discussed more often, and clinicians should consider prescribing them. We commonly discuss eyeglasses and wheelchairs, but we don’t talk about the sexual health devices that could help patients have more success and fun in the bedroom.

What are the various types of devices for ED? One common device is a vacuum pump, which can be very effective. This is how they work: The penis is lubricated and placed into the pump. A button on the pump creates suction that brings blood into the penis. The patient then applies a constriction band around the base of the penis to hold that erection in place.

“Sex tech” has really expanded to help patients with ED with devices that vibrate and hold the erection in place. Vibrating devices allow for a better orgasm. We even have devices that monitor erectile fitness (like a Fitbit for the penis), gathering data to help patients understand the firmness of their erections.

Devices are helpful adjuncts, but they don’t always do enough to achieve an erect penis that’s hard enough for penetration. In those cases, we can recommend injections that increase smooth muscle relaxation of the penis. I know it sounds crazy. If the muscles, arteries, and nerves of the penis aren’t functioning well, additional smooth muscle relaxation can be achieved by injecting alprostadil (prostaglandin E1) directly into the penis. It’s a tiny needle. It doesn’t hurt. These injections can be quite helpful for our patients, and we often recommend them.

But what happens when your patient doesn’t even respond to injections or any of the synergistic treatments? They’ve tried everything. Urologists may suggest a surgical option, the penile implant. Penile implants contain a pump inside the scrotum that fills with fluid, allowing a rigid erection. Penile implants are wonderful for patients who can no longer get erections. Talking to a urologist about the pros and the cons and the risks and benefits of surgically placed implants is very important.

Finally, ED is a marker for cardiovascular disease. These patients may need a cardiology workup. They need to improve their general health. We have to ask our patients about their goals and what they care about, and find a toolbox that makes sense for each patient and couple to maximize their sexual health and quality of life. Don’t give up. If you have questions, let us know.

Rachel S. Rubin, MD, is Assistant Clinical Professor, Department of Urology, Georgetown University, Washington, DC; Private practice, Rachel Rubin MD PLLC, North Bethesda, Maryland. She disclosed ties with Sprout, Maternal Medical, Absorption Pharmaceuticals, GSK, and Endo.

A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.

Infertility affects approximately one in six couples worldwide. More than half the time, it is the man’s low sperm quality that is to blame. Over the last three decades, sperm quality seems to have declined for no clearly identifiable reason. Theories are running rampant without anyone having the proof to back them up. 
 

Potential Causes 

The environment, lifestyle, excess weight or obesity, smoking, alcohol consumption, and psychological stress have all been alternately offered up as potential causes, following low-quality epidemiological studies. Cellphones are not exempt from this list, due to their emission of high-frequency (800-2200 MHz) electromagnetic waves that can be absorbed by the body. 

Clinical trials conducted in rats or mice suggest that these waves can affect sperm quality and lead to histological changes to the testicles, bearing in mind that the conditions met in these trials are very far from our day-to-day exposure to electromagnetic waves, mostly via our cellphones. 

The same observation can be made about experiments conducted on human sperm in vitro, but changes to the latter caused by electromagnetic waves leave doubts. Observational studies are rare, carried out in small cohorts, and marred by largely conflicting results. Publication bias plays a major role, just as much as the abundance of potential confounding factors does. 
 

Swiss Observational Study 

An observational study carried out in Switzerland had the benefit of involving a large cohort of 2886 young men who were representative of the general population. The participants completed an online questionnaire describing their relationship with their cellphone in detail and in qualitative and quantitative terms. 

The study was launched in 2005, before cellphone use became so widespread, and this timeline was considered when looking for a link between cellphone exposure and sperm quality. In addition, multiple adjustments were made in the multivariate analyses to account for as many potential confounding factors as possible. 

The participants, aged between 18 and 22 years, were recruited during a 3-day period to assess their suitability for military service. Each year, this cohort makes up 97% of the male population in Switzerland in this age range, with the remaining 3% being excluded from the selection process due to disability or chronic illness. 

Regardless of the review board’s decision, subjects wishing to take part in the study were given a detailed description of what it involved, a consent form, and two questionnaires. The first focused on the individual directly, asking questions about his health and lifestyle. The second, intended for his parents, dealt with the period before conception. 

This recruitment, which took place between September 2005 and November 2018, involved the researchers contacting 106,924 men. Ultimately, only 5.3% of subjects contacted returned the completed documentation. In the end, the study involved 2886 participants (3.1%) who provided all the necessary information, especially the laboratory testing (including a sperm analysis) needed to meet the study objectives. The number of hours spent on a smartphone and how it was used were routinely considered, as was sperm quality (volume, concentration, and total sperm count, as well as sperm mobility and morphology). 
 

Significant Associations 

A data analysis using an adjusted linear model revealed a significant association between frequent phone use (> 20 times per day) and lower sperm concentration (in mL) (adjusted β: -0.152, 95% CI -0.316 to 0.011). The same was found for their total concentration in ejaculate (adjusted β: -0.271, 95% CI -0.515 to -0.027). 

An adjusted logistic regression analysis estimated that the risk for subnormal male fertility levels, as determined by the World Health Organization (WHO), was increased by at most 30%, when referring to the concentration of sperm per mL (21% in terms of total concentration). This inverse link was shown to be more pronounced during the first phase of the study (2005-2007), compared with the other two phases (2008-2011 and 2012-2018). Yet no links involving sperm mobility or morphology were found, and carrying a cellphone in a trouser pocket had no impact on the results. 

This study certainly involves a large cohort of nearly 3000 young men. It is, nonetheless, retrospective, and its methodology, despite being better than that of previous studies, is still open to criticism. Its results can only fuel hypotheses, nothing more. Only prospective cohort studies will allow conclusions to be drawn and, in the meantime, no causal link can be found between exposure to the high-frequency electromagnetic waves emitted by cellphones and the risk of infertility. 
 

This article was translated from JIM, which is part of the Medscape professional network. A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.

Infertility affects approximately one in six couples worldwide. More than half the time, it is the man’s low sperm quality that is to blame. Over the last three decades, sperm quality seems to have declined for no clearly identifiable reason. Theories are running rampant without anyone having the proof to back them up. 
 

Potential Causes 

The environment, lifestyle, excess weight or obesity, smoking, alcohol consumption, and psychological stress have all been alternately offered up as potential causes, following low-quality epidemiological studies. Cellphones are not exempt from this list, due to their emission of high-frequency (800-2200 MHz) electromagnetic waves that can be absorbed by the body. 

Clinical trials conducted in rats or mice suggest that these waves can affect sperm quality and lead to histological changes to the testicles, bearing in mind that the conditions met in these trials are very far from our day-to-day exposure to electromagnetic waves, mostly via our cellphones. 

The same observation can be made about experiments conducted on human sperm in vitro, but changes to the latter caused by electromagnetic waves leave doubts. Observational studies are rare, carried out in small cohorts, and marred by largely conflicting results. Publication bias plays a major role, just as much as the abundance of potential confounding factors does. 
 

Swiss Observational Study 

An observational study carried out in Switzerland had the benefit of involving a large cohort of 2886 young men who were representative of the general population. The participants completed an online questionnaire describing their relationship with their cellphone in detail and in qualitative and quantitative terms. 

The study was launched in 2005, before cellphone use became so widespread, and this timeline was considered when looking for a link between cellphone exposure and sperm quality. In addition, multiple adjustments were made in the multivariate analyses to account for as many potential confounding factors as possible. 

The participants, aged between 18 and 22 years, were recruited during a 3-day period to assess their suitability for military service. Each year, this cohort makes up 97% of the male population in Switzerland in this age range, with the remaining 3% being excluded from the selection process due to disability or chronic illness. 

Regardless of the review board’s decision, subjects wishing to take part in the study were given a detailed description of what it involved, a consent form, and two questionnaires. The first focused on the individual directly, asking questions about his health and lifestyle. The second, intended for his parents, dealt with the period before conception. 

This recruitment, which took place between September 2005 and November 2018, involved the researchers contacting 106,924 men. Ultimately, only 5.3% of subjects contacted returned the completed documentation. In the end, the study involved 2886 participants (3.1%) who provided all the necessary information, especially the laboratory testing (including a sperm analysis) needed to meet the study objectives. The number of hours spent on a smartphone and how it was used were routinely considered, as was sperm quality (volume, concentration, and total sperm count, as well as sperm mobility and morphology). 
 

Significant Associations 

A data analysis using an adjusted linear model revealed a significant association between frequent phone use (> 20 times per day) and lower sperm concentration (in mL) (adjusted β: -0.152, 95% CI -0.316 to 0.011). The same was found for their total concentration in ejaculate (adjusted β: -0.271, 95% CI -0.515 to -0.027). 

An adjusted logistic regression analysis estimated that the risk for subnormal male fertility levels, as determined by the World Health Organization (WHO), was increased by at most 30%, when referring to the concentration of sperm per mL (21% in terms of total concentration). This inverse link was shown to be more pronounced during the first phase of the study (2005-2007), compared with the other two phases (2008-2011 and 2012-2018). Yet no links involving sperm mobility or morphology were found, and carrying a cellphone in a trouser pocket had no impact on the results. 

This study certainly involves a large cohort of nearly 3000 young men. It is, nonetheless, retrospective, and its methodology, despite being better than that of previous studies, is still open to criticism. Its results can only fuel hypotheses, nothing more. Only prospective cohort studies will allow conclusions to be drawn and, in the meantime, no causal link can be found between exposure to the high-frequency electromagnetic waves emitted by cellphones and the risk of infertility. 
 

This article was translated from JIM, which is part of the Medscape professional network. A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.

Infertility affects approximately one in six couples worldwide. More than half the time, it is the man’s low sperm quality that is to blame. Over the last three decades, sperm quality seems to have declined for no clearly identifiable reason. Theories are running rampant without anyone having the proof to back them up. 
 

Potential Causes 

The environment, lifestyle, excess weight or obesity, smoking, alcohol consumption, and psychological stress have all been alternately offered up as potential causes, following low-quality epidemiological studies. Cellphones are not exempt from this list, due to their emission of high-frequency (800-2200 MHz) electromagnetic waves that can be absorbed by the body. 

Clinical trials conducted in rats or mice suggest that these waves can affect sperm quality and lead to histological changes to the testicles, bearing in mind that the conditions met in these trials are very far from our day-to-day exposure to electromagnetic waves, mostly via our cellphones. 

The same observation can be made about experiments conducted on human sperm in vitro, but changes to the latter caused by electromagnetic waves leave doubts. Observational studies are rare, carried out in small cohorts, and marred by largely conflicting results. Publication bias plays a major role, just as much as the abundance of potential confounding factors does. 
 

Swiss Observational Study 

An observational study carried out in Switzerland had the benefit of involving a large cohort of 2886 young men who were representative of the general population. The participants completed an online questionnaire describing their relationship with their cellphone in detail and in qualitative and quantitative terms. 

The study was launched in 2005, before cellphone use became so widespread, and this timeline was considered when looking for a link between cellphone exposure and sperm quality. In addition, multiple adjustments were made in the multivariate analyses to account for as many potential confounding factors as possible. 

The participants, aged between 18 and 22 years, were recruited during a 3-day period to assess their suitability for military service. Each year, this cohort makes up 97% of the male population in Switzerland in this age range, with the remaining 3% being excluded from the selection process due to disability or chronic illness. 

Regardless of the review board’s decision, subjects wishing to take part in the study were given a detailed description of what it involved, a consent form, and two questionnaires. The first focused on the individual directly, asking questions about his health and lifestyle. The second, intended for his parents, dealt with the period before conception. 

This recruitment, which took place between September 2005 and November 2018, involved the researchers contacting 106,924 men. Ultimately, only 5.3% of subjects contacted returned the completed documentation. In the end, the study involved 2886 participants (3.1%) who provided all the necessary information, especially the laboratory testing (including a sperm analysis) needed to meet the study objectives. The number of hours spent on a smartphone and how it was used were routinely considered, as was sperm quality (volume, concentration, and total sperm count, as well as sperm mobility and morphology). 
 

Significant Associations 

A data analysis using an adjusted linear model revealed a significant association between frequent phone use (> 20 times per day) and lower sperm concentration (in mL) (adjusted β: -0.152, 95% CI -0.316 to 0.011). The same was found for their total concentration in ejaculate (adjusted β: -0.271, 95% CI -0.515 to -0.027). 

An adjusted logistic regression analysis estimated that the risk for subnormal male fertility levels, as determined by the World Health Organization (WHO), was increased by at most 30%, when referring to the concentration of sperm per mL (21% in terms of total concentration). This inverse link was shown to be more pronounced during the first phase of the study (2005-2007), compared with the other two phases (2008-2011 and 2012-2018). Yet no links involving sperm mobility or morphology were found, and carrying a cellphone in a trouser pocket had no impact on the results. 

This study certainly involves a large cohort of nearly 3000 young men. It is, nonetheless, retrospective, and its methodology, despite being better than that of previous studies, is still open to criticism. Its results can only fuel hypotheses, nothing more. Only prospective cohort studies will allow conclusions to be drawn and, in the meantime, no causal link can be found between exposure to the high-frequency electromagnetic waves emitted by cellphones and the risk of infertility. 
 

This article was translated from JIM, which is part of the Medscape professional network. A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.

This transcript has been edited for clarity.

It’s important for doctors to ask about erections. Not only do our patients and their partners care about them, but they are a marker for overall health. I mean it. Penis problems are very common and are an early sign that patients could have a cardiac event. Think about it: Clogging the arteries of the heart is called a heart attack; clogging the arteries to the penis is a penis attack, or as doctors like to call it, erectile dysfunction.

The arteries to the penis are only 1 mm in diameter. They develop plaque and clog the circulation long before the 3-mm cardiac arteries. So, it’s very important for primary care doctors to talk to their patients about erection health. And I’ll be honest: It’s easier to talk to patients about how lifestyle is affecting their penis health than it is to discuss how lifestyle affects longevity or prevents cancer. I get a lot of men to quit smoking because I tell them what it’s doing to their penises.

It can be challenging for doctors and patients to talk about penises. It doesn’t come naturally for many of us. If a 20-year-old comes in to my office with his 85-year-old grandfather and they both say their penises aren’t working, how do you figure out what’s going on? Do they even have the same thing wrong with them?

Here’s a fun and helpful tool that I use in my office. It’s called the Erection Hardness Score. It was developed around the time that Viagra came out, in 1998. It’s been game-changing for me to get patients more comfortable talking about their erection issues.

Courtesy Rachel S. Rubin, MD

Dr. Rubin is assistant clinical professor, department of urology, Georgetown University, Washington. She disclosed financial relationships with Absorption Pharmaceuticals, GlaxoSmithKline, and Endo Pharmaceuticals; has served as a speaker for Sprout; and has received research grant from Maternal Medical.

A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.

This transcript has been edited for clarity.

It’s important for doctors to ask about erections. Not only do our patients and their partners care about them, but they are a marker for overall health. I mean it. Penis problems are very common and are an early sign that patients could have a cardiac event. Think about it: Clogging the arteries of the heart is called a heart attack; clogging the arteries to the penis is a penis attack, or as doctors like to call it, erectile dysfunction.

The arteries to the penis are only 1 mm in diameter. They develop plaque and clog the circulation long before the 3-mm cardiac arteries. So, it’s very important for primary care doctors to talk to their patients about erection health. And I’ll be honest: It’s easier to talk to patients about how lifestyle is affecting their penis health than it is to discuss how lifestyle affects longevity or prevents cancer. I get a lot of men to quit smoking because I tell them what it’s doing to their penises.

It can be challenging for doctors and patients to talk about penises. It doesn’t come naturally for many of us. If a 20-year-old comes in to my office with his 85-year-old grandfather and they both say their penises aren’t working, how do you figure out what’s going on? Do they even have the same thing wrong with them?

Here’s a fun and helpful tool that I use in my office. It’s called the Erection Hardness Score. It was developed around the time that Viagra came out, in 1998. It’s been game-changing for me to get patients more comfortable talking about their erection issues.

Courtesy Rachel S. Rubin, MD

Dr. Rubin is assistant clinical professor, department of urology, Georgetown University, Washington. She disclosed financial relationships with Absorption Pharmaceuticals, GlaxoSmithKline, and Endo Pharmaceuticals; has served as a speaker for Sprout; and has received research grant from Maternal Medical.

A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.

This transcript has been edited for clarity.

It’s important for doctors to ask about erections. Not only do our patients and their partners care about them, but they are a marker for overall health. I mean it. Penis problems are very common and are an early sign that patients could have a cardiac event. Think about it: Clogging the arteries of the heart is called a heart attack; clogging the arteries to the penis is a penis attack, or as doctors like to call it, erectile dysfunction.

The arteries to the penis are only 1 mm in diameter. They develop plaque and clog the circulation long before the 3-mm cardiac arteries. So, it’s very important for primary care doctors to talk to their patients about erection health. And I’ll be honest: It’s easier to talk to patients about how lifestyle is affecting their penis health than it is to discuss how lifestyle affects longevity or prevents cancer. I get a lot of men to quit smoking because I tell them what it’s doing to their penises.

It can be challenging for doctors and patients to talk about penises. It doesn’t come naturally for many of us. If a 20-year-old comes in to my office with his 85-year-old grandfather and they both say their penises aren’t working, how do you figure out what’s going on? Do they even have the same thing wrong with them?

Here’s a fun and helpful tool that I use in my office. It’s called the Erection Hardness Score. It was developed around the time that Viagra came out, in 1998. It’s been game-changing for me to get patients more comfortable talking about their erection issues.

Courtesy Rachel S. Rubin, MD

Dr. Rubin is assistant clinical professor, department of urology, Georgetown University, Washington. She disclosed financial relationships with Absorption Pharmaceuticals, GlaxoSmithKline, and Endo Pharmaceuticals; has served as a speaker for Sprout; and has received research grant from Maternal Medical.

A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.

Black men are at higher risk of prostate cancer than their White counterparts at younger ages and lower prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels, a large new study conducted in a Veterans Affairs health care system suggests.

The findings suggest the need for PSA biopsy thresholds that are set with better understanding of patients’ risk factors, said the authors, led by Kyung Min Lee, PhD, with VA Informatics and Computing Infrastructure, at Salt Lake City Health Care System.

The study, which included more than 280,000 veterans, was published online in Cancer.
 

Risk higher, regardless of PSA level before biopsy

The researchers found that self-identified Black men are more likely than White men to be diagnosed with prostate cancer on their first prostate biopsy after controlling for age, prebiopsy PSA count, statin use, smoking status, and several socioeconomic variables.

Among the highlighted results are that a Black man who had a PSA level of 4.0 ng/mL before biopsy “had the same risk of prostate cancer as a White man with a PSA level 3.4 times higher [13.4 ng/mL].”

The gap was even more evident at younger ages. “Among men aged 60 years or younger, a Black man with a prebiopsy PSA level of 4.0 ng/mL had the same risk of prostate cancer as a White man with PSA level 3.7 times higher,” they wrote.

Researchers also found that Black veterans sought PSA screening and underwent their first diagnostic prostate biopsy at a younger age than did their White counterparts. Logistic regression models were used to predict the likelihood of a prostate cancer diagnosis on the first biopsy for 75,295 Black and 207,658 White male veterans.
 

U.S. Black men have an 80% higher risk of prostate cancer that White men

Previous research has shown that, in the United States, Black men have an 80% higher risk than White men of developing prostate cancer and are 220% more likely to die from it. Rigorous early screening has been suggested to decrease deaths from prostate cancer in Black men, but because that population group is underrepresented in randomized controlled trials, evidence for this has been lacking, the authors wrote.

Different national screening guidelines reflect the lack of clarity about best protocols. The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force acknowledges the higher risk but doesn’t make specific screening recommendations for Black men or those at higher risk. Conversely, the National Comprehensive Cancer Network “explicitly recommends earlier PSA screening and a shorter retest interval at lower PSA levels for populations at greater than average risk (including Black men). However, it does not otherwise recommend a different screening protocol.”
 

Social determinants of health may play a role

The reasons for the higher risk in Black men is unclear, the authors said, pointing out that recent studies suggest that “Black men may have higher genetic risk as assessed by polygenic scores.”

The authors wrote that nongenetic causes, such as access to care, mistrust of the health system, and environmental exposures may also be driving the association of Black race or ethnicity with higher risk of prostate cancer.

“Identifying and addressing these risk factors could further reduce racial disparities in prostate cancer outcomes,” they wrote.

The authors acknowledged that they are limited in their ability to account for socioeconomic status individually and used ZIP codes as proxies. Also, veterans generally have more comorbidities and mortality risks, compared with the general population.

The authors declared no relevant conflicts of interest.


 

Black men are at higher risk of prostate cancer than their White counterparts at younger ages and lower prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels, a large new study conducted in a Veterans Affairs health care system suggests.

The findings suggest the need for PSA biopsy thresholds that are set with better understanding of patients’ risk factors, said the authors, led by Kyung Min Lee, PhD, with VA Informatics and Computing Infrastructure, at Salt Lake City Health Care System.

The study, which included more than 280,000 veterans, was published online in Cancer.
 

Risk higher, regardless of PSA level before biopsy

The researchers found that self-identified Black men are more likely than White men to be diagnosed with prostate cancer on their first prostate biopsy after controlling for age, prebiopsy PSA count, statin use, smoking status, and several socioeconomic variables.

Among the highlighted results are that a Black man who had a PSA level of 4.0 ng/mL before biopsy “had the same risk of prostate cancer as a White man with a PSA level 3.4 times higher [13.4 ng/mL].”

The gap was even more evident at younger ages. “Among men aged 60 years or younger, a Black man with a prebiopsy PSA level of 4.0 ng/mL had the same risk of prostate cancer as a White man with PSA level 3.7 times higher,” they wrote.

Researchers also found that Black veterans sought PSA screening and underwent their first diagnostic prostate biopsy at a younger age than did their White counterparts. Logistic regression models were used to predict the likelihood of a prostate cancer diagnosis on the first biopsy for 75,295 Black and 207,658 White male veterans.
 

U.S. Black men have an 80% higher risk of prostate cancer that White men

Previous research has shown that, in the United States, Black men have an 80% higher risk than White men of developing prostate cancer and are 220% more likely to die from it. Rigorous early screening has been suggested to decrease deaths from prostate cancer in Black men, but because that population group is underrepresented in randomized controlled trials, evidence for this has been lacking, the authors wrote.

Different national screening guidelines reflect the lack of clarity about best protocols. The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force acknowledges the higher risk but doesn’t make specific screening recommendations for Black men or those at higher risk. Conversely, the National Comprehensive Cancer Network “explicitly recommends earlier PSA screening and a shorter retest interval at lower PSA levels for populations at greater than average risk (including Black men). However, it does not otherwise recommend a different screening protocol.”
 

Social determinants of health may play a role

The reasons for the higher risk in Black men is unclear, the authors said, pointing out that recent studies suggest that “Black men may have higher genetic risk as assessed by polygenic scores.”

The authors wrote that nongenetic causes, such as access to care, mistrust of the health system, and environmental exposures may also be driving the association of Black race or ethnicity with higher risk of prostate cancer.

“Identifying and addressing these risk factors could further reduce racial disparities in prostate cancer outcomes,” they wrote.

The authors acknowledged that they are limited in their ability to account for socioeconomic status individually and used ZIP codes as proxies. Also, veterans generally have more comorbidities and mortality risks, compared with the general population.

The authors declared no relevant conflicts of interest.


 

Black men are at higher risk of prostate cancer than their White counterparts at younger ages and lower prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels, a large new study conducted in a Veterans Affairs health care system suggests.

The findings suggest the need for PSA biopsy thresholds that are set with better understanding of patients’ risk factors, said the authors, led by Kyung Min Lee, PhD, with VA Informatics and Computing Infrastructure, at Salt Lake City Health Care System.

The study, which included more than 280,000 veterans, was published online in Cancer.
 

Risk higher, regardless of PSA level before biopsy

The researchers found that self-identified Black men are more likely than White men to be diagnosed with prostate cancer on their first prostate biopsy after controlling for age, prebiopsy PSA count, statin use, smoking status, and several socioeconomic variables.

Among the highlighted results are that a Black man who had a PSA level of 4.0 ng/mL before biopsy “had the same risk of prostate cancer as a White man with a PSA level 3.4 times higher [13.4 ng/mL].”

The gap was even more evident at younger ages. “Among men aged 60 years or younger, a Black man with a prebiopsy PSA level of 4.0 ng/mL had the same risk of prostate cancer as a White man with PSA level 3.7 times higher,” they wrote.

Researchers also found that Black veterans sought PSA screening and underwent their first diagnostic prostate biopsy at a younger age than did their White counterparts. Logistic regression models were used to predict the likelihood of a prostate cancer diagnosis on the first biopsy for 75,295 Black and 207,658 White male veterans.
 

U.S. Black men have an 80% higher risk of prostate cancer that White men

Previous research has shown that, in the United States, Black men have an 80% higher risk than White men of developing prostate cancer and are 220% more likely to die from it. Rigorous early screening has been suggested to decrease deaths from prostate cancer in Black men, but because that population group is underrepresented in randomized controlled trials, evidence for this has been lacking, the authors wrote.

Different national screening guidelines reflect the lack of clarity about best protocols. The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force acknowledges the higher risk but doesn’t make specific screening recommendations for Black men or those at higher risk. Conversely, the National Comprehensive Cancer Network “explicitly recommends earlier PSA screening and a shorter retest interval at lower PSA levels for populations at greater than average risk (including Black men). However, it does not otherwise recommend a different screening protocol.”
 

Social determinants of health may play a role

The reasons for the higher risk in Black men is unclear, the authors said, pointing out that recent studies suggest that “Black men may have higher genetic risk as assessed by polygenic scores.”

The authors wrote that nongenetic causes, such as access to care, mistrust of the health system, and environmental exposures may also be driving the association of Black race or ethnicity with higher risk of prostate cancer.

“Identifying and addressing these risk factors could further reduce racial disparities in prostate cancer outcomes,” they wrote.

The authors acknowledged that they are limited in their ability to account for socioeconomic status individually and used ZIP codes as proxies. Also, veterans generally have more comorbidities and mortality risks, compared with the general population.

The authors declared no relevant conflicts of interest.


 

Testosterone replacement therapy (TRT) is more effective than placebo in both correcting anemia and preventing anemia in middle-aged and older men with hypogonadism, according to a new analysis published online in JAMA Network Open.

The analysis comes from a randomized, placebo-controlled trial that included 5,204 men with hypogonadism at 316 U.S. sites. This study was nested within the Testosterone Replacement Therapy for Assessment of Long-term Vascular Events and Efficacy Response in Hypogonadal Men (TRAVERSE) Study. That study looked at whether TRT had an effect on major cardiovascular events and results were published earlier this year in the New England Journal of Medicine.
 

Hypogonadism increases with age

Hypogonadism includes specific symptoms in addition to a low testosterone level and has a lower prevalence (about 6%-12% vs. about 25% with low testosterone alone) in men 40-70 years old in the Massachusetts Male Aging Study (MMAS). But it is still common and increases with age, note authors of the current study, led by Karol M. Pencina, PhD, with the Research Program in Men’s Health: Aging and Metabolism, at Brigham and Women’s Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston.

Symptoms of hypogonadism include lower libido, erectile dysfunction, fatigue, reduced muscle mass, poor concentration, and disturbed sleep.
 

No approved treatment

Currently, there is no approved treatment for unexplained anemia during aging and nearly 15% of older men with hypogonadism experience anemia, the authors explain.

The proportion of participants whose anemia was corrected was significantly higher in the TRT group than the placebo group at 6 months (143 of 349 [41.0%] vs. 122 of 360 [27.5%]), 12 months (45.0% vs. 33.9%), 24 months (42.8% vs. 30.9%), 36 months (43.5% vs. 33.2%), and 48 months (44.6% vs. 39.2%); omnibus test P = .002.

A second aim in the study was to determine the effect of TRT on the development of anemia in participants who did not have anemia at enrollment.

In that group, a significantly smaller proportion of participants in the treatment group developed anemia, compared with the placebo group at 6 months (143 of 1,997 [7.2%] vs. 203 of 1,958 [10.4%]), 12 months (7.1% vs. 9.0%), 24 months (10.0% vs. 12.3%), 36 months (10.0% vs. 12.9%), and 48 months (9.0% vs 10.2%); omnibus test P  = .02.

The men in the study had an average age of 64.8; 66.7% were White; 30.3% were Black; 2% were other.
 

Clinical implications

Shabbir M. H. Alibhai, MD, MSc, with the Institute of Health Policy, Management, and Evaluation, Institute of Medical Sciences, department of medicine, University of Toronto, writes in an invited commentary that this is one of the largest trials of TRT and was well-designed and executed. He points out that it had a long follow-up (mean duration on TRT was more than 20 months).

Given the results, he says, “TRT appears to be generally safe in middle-aged and older men with symptomatic hypogonadism, corrected mild anemia in 10%-15% of recipients, and prevented anemia in 2%-3%, with small improvements in energy but no effect on self-reported cognitive function.”

He said that without further details on long-term benefit, “I would not offer TRT primarily to treat asymptomatic normocytic anemia in men with low testosterone levels. It is reasonable to offer TRT to men with symptomatic hypogonadism regardless of hemoglobin level.”

He advises counseling patients that they could see small increases in hemoglobin levels with TRT, with a small boost in energy if they had anemia, but the effect on cognition, well-being, or function is unclear.

He further advised, “Hemoglobin levels should be monitored in men starting TRT (to detect the development of polycythemia), and prostate-specific antigen levels should be normal prior to start of treatment. Of course, a basic workup for causes of anemia, guided by history and basic parameters such as the mean corpuscular volume and blood film, should be performed in all men with anemia regardless of levels.”

The study was funded by a consortium of testosterone manufacturers led by AbbVie. Coauthors Dr. Artz, Dr. Chan, and Dr. Diegel report receiving consulting fees, grants, or employment from several pharmaceutical companies including AbbVie. Dr. Alibhai reports no relevant financial relationships.

Testosterone replacement therapy (TRT) is more effective than placebo in both correcting anemia and preventing anemia in middle-aged and older men with hypogonadism, according to a new analysis published online in JAMA Network Open.

The analysis comes from a randomized, placebo-controlled trial that included 5,204 men with hypogonadism at 316 U.S. sites. This study was nested within the Testosterone Replacement Therapy for Assessment of Long-term Vascular Events and Efficacy Response in Hypogonadal Men (TRAVERSE) Study. That study looked at whether TRT had an effect on major cardiovascular events and results were published earlier this year in the New England Journal of Medicine.
 

Hypogonadism increases with age

Hypogonadism includes specific symptoms in addition to a low testosterone level and has a lower prevalence (about 6%-12% vs. about 25% with low testosterone alone) in men 40-70 years old in the Massachusetts Male Aging Study (MMAS). But it is still common and increases with age, note authors of the current study, led by Karol M. Pencina, PhD, with the Research Program in Men’s Health: Aging and Metabolism, at Brigham and Women’s Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston.

Symptoms of hypogonadism include lower libido, erectile dysfunction, fatigue, reduced muscle mass, poor concentration, and disturbed sleep.
 

No approved treatment

Currently, there is no approved treatment for unexplained anemia during aging and nearly 15% of older men with hypogonadism experience anemia, the authors explain.

The proportion of participants whose anemia was corrected was significantly higher in the TRT group than the placebo group at 6 months (143 of 349 [41.0%] vs. 122 of 360 [27.5%]), 12 months (45.0% vs. 33.9%), 24 months (42.8% vs. 30.9%), 36 months (43.5% vs. 33.2%), and 48 months (44.6% vs. 39.2%); omnibus test P = .002.

A second aim in the study was to determine the effect of TRT on the development of anemia in participants who did not have anemia at enrollment.

In that group, a significantly smaller proportion of participants in the treatment group developed anemia, compared with the placebo group at 6 months (143 of 1,997 [7.2%] vs. 203 of 1,958 [10.4%]), 12 months (7.1% vs. 9.0%), 24 months (10.0% vs. 12.3%), 36 months (10.0% vs. 12.9%), and 48 months (9.0% vs 10.2%); omnibus test P  = .02.

The men in the study had an average age of 64.8; 66.7% were White; 30.3% were Black; 2% were other.
 

Clinical implications

Shabbir M. H. Alibhai, MD, MSc, with the Institute of Health Policy, Management, and Evaluation, Institute of Medical Sciences, department of medicine, University of Toronto, writes in an invited commentary that this is one of the largest trials of TRT and was well-designed and executed. He points out that it had a long follow-up (mean duration on TRT was more than 20 months).

Given the results, he says, “TRT appears to be generally safe in middle-aged and older men with symptomatic hypogonadism, corrected mild anemia in 10%-15% of recipients, and prevented anemia in 2%-3%, with small improvements in energy but no effect on self-reported cognitive function.”

He said that without further details on long-term benefit, “I would not offer TRT primarily to treat asymptomatic normocytic anemia in men with low testosterone levels. It is reasonable to offer TRT to men with symptomatic hypogonadism regardless of hemoglobin level.”

He advises counseling patients that they could see small increases in hemoglobin levels with TRT, with a small boost in energy if they had anemia, but the effect on cognition, well-being, or function is unclear.

He further advised, “Hemoglobin levels should be monitored in men starting TRT (to detect the development of polycythemia), and prostate-specific antigen levels should be normal prior to start of treatment. Of course, a basic workup for causes of anemia, guided by history and basic parameters such as the mean corpuscular volume and blood film, should be performed in all men with anemia regardless of levels.”

The study was funded by a consortium of testosterone manufacturers led by AbbVie. Coauthors Dr. Artz, Dr. Chan, and Dr. Diegel report receiving consulting fees, grants, or employment from several pharmaceutical companies including AbbVie. Dr. Alibhai reports no relevant financial relationships.

Testosterone replacement therapy (TRT) is more effective than placebo in both correcting anemia and preventing anemia in middle-aged and older men with hypogonadism, according to a new analysis published online in JAMA Network Open.

The analysis comes from a randomized, placebo-controlled trial that included 5,204 men with hypogonadism at 316 U.S. sites. This study was nested within the Testosterone Replacement Therapy for Assessment of Long-term Vascular Events and Efficacy Response in Hypogonadal Men (TRAVERSE) Study. That study looked at whether TRT had an effect on major cardiovascular events and results were published earlier this year in the New England Journal of Medicine.
 

Hypogonadism increases with age

Hypogonadism includes specific symptoms in addition to a low testosterone level and has a lower prevalence (about 6%-12% vs. about 25% with low testosterone alone) in men 40-70 years old in the Massachusetts Male Aging Study (MMAS). But it is still common and increases with age, note authors of the current study, led by Karol M. Pencina, PhD, with the Research Program in Men’s Health: Aging and Metabolism, at Brigham and Women’s Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston.

Symptoms of hypogonadism include lower libido, erectile dysfunction, fatigue, reduced muscle mass, poor concentration, and disturbed sleep.
 

No approved treatment

Currently, there is no approved treatment for unexplained anemia during aging and nearly 15% of older men with hypogonadism experience anemia, the authors explain.

The proportion of participants whose anemia was corrected was significantly higher in the TRT group than the placebo group at 6 months (143 of 349 [41.0%] vs. 122 of 360 [27.5%]), 12 months (45.0% vs. 33.9%), 24 months (42.8% vs. 30.9%), 36 months (43.5% vs. 33.2%), and 48 months (44.6% vs. 39.2%); omnibus test P = .002.

A second aim in the study was to determine the effect of TRT on the development of anemia in participants who did not have anemia at enrollment.

In that group, a significantly smaller proportion of participants in the treatment group developed anemia, compared with the placebo group at 6 months (143 of 1,997 [7.2%] vs. 203 of 1,958 [10.4%]), 12 months (7.1% vs. 9.0%), 24 months (10.0% vs. 12.3%), 36 months (10.0% vs. 12.9%), and 48 months (9.0% vs 10.2%); omnibus test P  = .02.

The men in the study had an average age of 64.8; 66.7% were White; 30.3% were Black; 2% were other.
 

Clinical implications

Shabbir M. H. Alibhai, MD, MSc, with the Institute of Health Policy, Management, and Evaluation, Institute of Medical Sciences, department of medicine, University of Toronto, writes in an invited commentary that this is one of the largest trials of TRT and was well-designed and executed. He points out that it had a long follow-up (mean duration on TRT was more than 20 months).

Given the results, he says, “TRT appears to be generally safe in middle-aged and older men with symptomatic hypogonadism, corrected mild anemia in 10%-15% of recipients, and prevented anemia in 2%-3%, with small improvements in energy but no effect on self-reported cognitive function.”

He said that without further details on long-term benefit, “I would not offer TRT primarily to treat asymptomatic normocytic anemia in men with low testosterone levels. It is reasonable to offer TRT to men with symptomatic hypogonadism regardless of hemoglobin level.”

He advises counseling patients that they could see small increases in hemoglobin levels with TRT, with a small boost in energy if they had anemia, but the effect on cognition, well-being, or function is unclear.

He further advised, “Hemoglobin levels should be monitored in men starting TRT (to detect the development of polycythemia), and prostate-specific antigen levels should be normal prior to start of treatment. Of course, a basic workup for causes of anemia, guided by history and basic parameters such as the mean corpuscular volume and blood film, should be performed in all men with anemia regardless of levels.”

The study was funded by a consortium of testosterone manufacturers led by AbbVie. Coauthors Dr. Artz, Dr. Chan, and Dr. Diegel report receiving consulting fees, grants, or employment from several pharmaceutical companies including AbbVie. Dr. Alibhai reports no relevant financial relationships.

WASHINGTON – Children of fathers who develop postpartum depression are more likely to experience multiple adverse childhood experiences by the time they’re 5 years old, according to research presented at the annual meeting of the American Academy of Pediatrics.

Paternal depression and adverse childhood experiences

The study involved an analysis of six waves of data from the Future of Families & Child Wellbeing Study, which follows a national cohort of children born in large U.S. cities between 1998 and 2000. The cohort includes an intentional over-representation of unmarried mothers, who make up about 75% of the overall population.

The researchers used the World Health Organization’s Composite International Diagnosis Interview Short Form (CIDI-SF) to assess fathers’ depression when their children were 1 year old. Then the researchers looked at the number of adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) children had at 5 years old.

The analysis was adjusted to account for the child’s sex and the father’s age, race/ethnicity, and education as well as whether he was born inside or outside the United States. The findings were also adjusted for the whether the child’s parents were married or cohabiting, whether the child had low birth weight, whether the birth was covered by Medicaid, and whether the mother had postpartum depression.

Among the 1,933 pairs of fathers and children in the analysis, nearly half the fathers were non-Hispanic Black (48%) and more than half (64%) had a high school education or lower level of education. Medicaid paid for half the children’s births.

Nine percent of the fathers experienced depression during their child’s first year, and 70% of the children had at least one ACE at 5 years old. Two in five children (39%) had two ACEs at age 5, and 21% of children had three ACEs.

Children were twice as likely to have three ACEs at 5 years old if their father had depression during the child’s first year (adjusted odds ratio, 2.04; 95% confidence interval, 1.42-2.93). Paternal depression was also significantly associated with children having one ACE (OR, 2.35; 95% CI, 1.45-3.81) and two ACES (OR, 1.89; 95% CI, 1.35-2.63) at age 5.

The ACE with the highest association with paternal depression was the father’s absence from children’s lives (aOR, 2.65; 95% CI, 1.74-4.04). In addition, children of fathers with depression had 60% greater odds of exposure to substance use (aOR, 1.6; 95% CI, 1.08-2.34).

Children also had greater odds of child maltreatment at age 5 if their father had depression in their child’s first year. Odds were greater for psychological maltreatment (aOR, 1.55; 95% CI, 1.02-2.34), neglect (aOR, 1.63; 95% CI, 1.08-2.46), and physical maltreatment (aOR, 1.56; 95% CI, 1.04-2.35). The researchers did not find any association between paternal depression and the ACEs of sexual maltreatment, maternal depression, incarceration of someone in the home, or violence toward the mother.

”We know that dads play a critical role in the family,” Dr. Schmitz said. “We as pediatricians have a really unique position with families, and we should capitalize on that opportunity to engage with fathers just like we do with mothers and postpartum depression. Hopefully by doing that, we’ll reduce hardships for children and families down the road.”

Dr. Schmitz also said it’s important for pediatricians to advocate at a policy level “to really include dads more explicitly in maternal and child health policy and advocate for better father-focused interventions from father-focused research.” She further acknowledged the stigma that exists around men’s mental health in general and the need to find out the best ways to help overcome that stigma.
 

‘Concerning’ findings may suggest a need for screening

Jason Terk, MD, a pediatrician practicing in north Texas and past president of the Texas Pediatric Society, was not surprised to see a link between depression in fathers and adversity in their children. Dr. Terk was not involved in the research but noted that the 9% rate of paternal depression seen in the study is similar to national rates of depression in U.S. adults.

“I think that the presence of paternal depression being associated with ACEs in their children in their first 5 years of life is certainly concerning and worthy of intervention for both the fathers and their children,” Dr. Terk said. “The key take-home message for clinicians who care for infants and small children is that the presence of paternal depression should increase awareness of adverse effects on those children. We need to consider screening for this at 12 months of age in much the same way we screen for maternal depression for younger infants.”

Dr. Terk noted one limitation of the study was that it didn’t suggest any specific risk factors pediatricians might look for to increase surveillance of potential depression in fathers.

“Also, unlike maternal depression, in which moms may be connected with their obstetricians if they screen positive on an Edinburgh questionnaire, we will be hard-pressed to know where to refer dads who are found to be depressed when their babies are 12 months old,” Dr. Terk said. “Screening must lead to helpful responses if the screening reveals a problem.”

The research was funded by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, the National Institutes of Health, and the Health Resources and Services Administration. Dr. Schmitz had no disclosures. Dr. Terk has been a speaker for Sanofi on a topic unrelated to this research.

WASHINGTON – Children of fathers who develop postpartum depression are more likely to experience multiple adverse childhood experiences by the time they’re 5 years old, according to research presented at the annual meeting of the American Academy of Pediatrics.

Paternal depression and adverse childhood experiences

The study involved an analysis of six waves of data from the Future of Families & Child Wellbeing Study, which follows a national cohort of children born in large U.S. cities between 1998 and 2000. The cohort includes an intentional over-representation of unmarried mothers, who make up about 75% of the overall population.

The researchers used the World Health Organization’s Composite International Diagnosis Interview Short Form (CIDI-SF) to assess fathers’ depression when their children were 1 year old. Then the researchers looked at the number of adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) children had at 5 years old.

The analysis was adjusted to account for the child’s sex and the father’s age, race/ethnicity, and education as well as whether he was born inside or outside the United States. The findings were also adjusted for the whether the child’s parents were married or cohabiting, whether the child had low birth weight, whether the birth was covered by Medicaid, and whether the mother had postpartum depression.

Among the 1,933 pairs of fathers and children in the analysis, nearly half the fathers were non-Hispanic Black (48%) and more than half (64%) had a high school education or lower level of education. Medicaid paid for half the children’s births.

Nine percent of the fathers experienced depression during their child’s first year, and 70% of the children had at least one ACE at 5 years old. Two in five children (39%) had two ACEs at age 5, and 21% of children had three ACEs.

Children were twice as likely to have three ACEs at 5 years old if their father had depression during the child’s first year (adjusted odds ratio, 2.04; 95% confidence interval, 1.42-2.93). Paternal depression was also significantly associated with children having one ACE (OR, 2.35; 95% CI, 1.45-3.81) and two ACES (OR, 1.89; 95% CI, 1.35-2.63) at age 5.

The ACE with the highest association with paternal depression was the father’s absence from children’s lives (aOR, 2.65; 95% CI, 1.74-4.04). In addition, children of fathers with depression had 60% greater odds of exposure to substance use (aOR, 1.6; 95% CI, 1.08-2.34).

Children also had greater odds of child maltreatment at age 5 if their father had depression in their child’s first year. Odds were greater for psychological maltreatment (aOR, 1.55; 95% CI, 1.02-2.34), neglect (aOR, 1.63; 95% CI, 1.08-2.46), and physical maltreatment (aOR, 1.56; 95% CI, 1.04-2.35). The researchers did not find any association between paternal depression and the ACEs of sexual maltreatment, maternal depression, incarceration of someone in the home, or violence toward the mother.

”We know that dads play a critical role in the family,” Dr. Schmitz said. “We as pediatricians have a really unique position with families, and we should capitalize on that opportunity to engage with fathers just like we do with mothers and postpartum depression. Hopefully by doing that, we’ll reduce hardships for children and families down the road.”

Dr. Schmitz also said it’s important for pediatricians to advocate at a policy level “to really include dads more explicitly in maternal and child health policy and advocate for better father-focused interventions from father-focused research.” She further acknowledged the stigma that exists around men’s mental health in general and the need to find out the best ways to help overcome that stigma.
 

‘Concerning’ findings may suggest a need for screening

Jason Terk, MD, a pediatrician practicing in north Texas and past president of the Texas Pediatric Society, was not surprised to see a link between depression in fathers and adversity in their children. Dr. Terk was not involved in the research but noted that the 9% rate of paternal depression seen in the study is similar to national rates of depression in U.S. adults.

“I think that the presence of paternal depression being associated with ACEs in their children in their first 5 years of life is certainly concerning and worthy of intervention for both the fathers and their children,” Dr. Terk said. “The key take-home message for clinicians who care for infants and small children is that the presence of paternal depression should increase awareness of adverse effects on those children. We need to consider screening for this at 12 months of age in much the same way we screen for maternal depression for younger infants.”

Dr. Terk noted one limitation of the study was that it didn’t suggest any specific risk factors pediatricians might look for to increase surveillance of potential depression in fathers.

“Also, unlike maternal depression, in which moms may be connected with their obstetricians if they screen positive on an Edinburgh questionnaire, we will be hard-pressed to know where to refer dads who are found to be depressed when their babies are 12 months old,” Dr. Terk said. “Screening must lead to helpful responses if the screening reveals a problem.”

The research was funded by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, the National Institutes of Health, and the Health Resources and Services Administration. Dr. Schmitz had no disclosures. Dr. Terk has been a speaker for Sanofi on a topic unrelated to this research.

WASHINGTON – Children of fathers who develop postpartum depression are more likely to experience multiple adverse childhood experiences by the time they’re 5 years old, according to research presented at the annual meeting of the American Academy of Pediatrics.

Paternal depression and adverse childhood experiences

The study involved an analysis of six waves of data from the Future of Families & Child Wellbeing Study, which follows a national cohort of children born in large U.S. cities between 1998 and 2000. The cohort includes an intentional over-representation of unmarried mothers, who make up about 75% of the overall population.

The researchers used the World Health Organization’s Composite International Diagnosis Interview Short Form (CIDI-SF) to assess fathers’ depression when their children were 1 year old. Then the researchers looked at the number of adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) children had at 5 years old.

The analysis was adjusted to account for the child’s sex and the father’s age, race/ethnicity, and education as well as whether he was born inside or outside the United States. The findings were also adjusted for the whether the child’s parents were married or cohabiting, whether the child had low birth weight, whether the birth was covered by Medicaid, and whether the mother had postpartum depression.

Among the 1,933 pairs of fathers and children in the analysis, nearly half the fathers were non-Hispanic Black (48%) and more than half (64%) had a high school education or lower level of education. Medicaid paid for half the children’s births.

Nine percent of the fathers experienced depression during their child’s first year, and 70% of the children had at least one ACE at 5 years old. Two in five children (39%) had two ACEs at age 5, and 21% of children had three ACEs.

Children were twice as likely to have three ACEs at 5 years old if their father had depression during the child’s first year (adjusted odds ratio, 2.04; 95% confidence interval, 1.42-2.93). Paternal depression was also significantly associated with children having one ACE (OR, 2.35; 95% CI, 1.45-3.81) and two ACES (OR, 1.89; 95% CI, 1.35-2.63) at age 5.

The ACE with the highest association with paternal depression was the father’s absence from children’s lives (aOR, 2.65; 95% CI, 1.74-4.04). In addition, children of fathers with depression had 60% greater odds of exposure to substance use (aOR, 1.6; 95% CI, 1.08-2.34).

Children also had greater odds of child maltreatment at age 5 if their father had depression in their child’s first year. Odds were greater for psychological maltreatment (aOR, 1.55; 95% CI, 1.02-2.34), neglect (aOR, 1.63; 95% CI, 1.08-2.46), and physical maltreatment (aOR, 1.56; 95% CI, 1.04-2.35). The researchers did not find any association between paternal depression and the ACEs of sexual maltreatment, maternal depression, incarceration of someone in the home, or violence toward the mother.

”We know that dads play a critical role in the family,” Dr. Schmitz said. “We as pediatricians have a really unique position with families, and we should capitalize on that opportunity to engage with fathers just like we do with mothers and postpartum depression. Hopefully by doing that, we’ll reduce hardships for children and families down the road.”

Dr. Schmitz also said it’s important for pediatricians to advocate at a policy level “to really include dads more explicitly in maternal and child health policy and advocate for better father-focused interventions from father-focused research.” She further acknowledged the stigma that exists around men’s mental health in general and the need to find out the best ways to help overcome that stigma.
 

‘Concerning’ findings may suggest a need for screening

Jason Terk, MD, a pediatrician practicing in north Texas and past president of the Texas Pediatric Society, was not surprised to see a link between depression in fathers and adversity in their children. Dr. Terk was not involved in the research but noted that the 9% rate of paternal depression seen in the study is similar to national rates of depression in U.S. adults.

“I think that the presence of paternal depression being associated with ACEs in their children in their first 5 years of life is certainly concerning and worthy of intervention for both the fathers and their children,” Dr. Terk said. “The key take-home message for clinicians who care for infants and small children is that the presence of paternal depression should increase awareness of adverse effects on those children. We need to consider screening for this at 12 months of age in much the same way we screen for maternal depression for younger infants.”

Dr. Terk noted one limitation of the study was that it didn’t suggest any specific risk factors pediatricians might look for to increase surveillance of potential depression in fathers.

“Also, unlike maternal depression, in which moms may be connected with their obstetricians if they screen positive on an Edinburgh questionnaire, we will be hard-pressed to know where to refer dads who are found to be depressed when their babies are 12 months old,” Dr. Terk said. “Screening must lead to helpful responses if the screening reveals a problem.”

The research was funded by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, the National Institutes of Health, and the Health Resources and Services Administration. Dr. Schmitz had no disclosures. Dr. Terk has been a speaker for Sanofi on a topic unrelated to this research.

Exercising for at least 30 minutes three times a week can be just as effective as Viagra and similar medications at improving erectile function, according to a new analysis of the best research to date on aerobic exercise and erectile function.

The study, published in The Journal of Sexual Medicine, found that aerobic activities – such as walking or cycling – improved erectile function in all men with erectile dysfunction, regardless of body weight, overall health, or medication use. Men with the most severe erectile dysfunction saw the greatest benefit.

“This study provides physicians and patients the proof needed to definitively recommend aerobic activity as part of ED management,” said study author Larry E. Miller, PhD, president, Miller Scientific Consulting, Johnson City, Tenn.

Doctors have long known that erectile function is linked to cardiovascular health, but there is limited high-quality evidence on the impact of exercise on the disorder.

The researchers scoured the scientific literature and found 11 randomized, controlled trials – a preferred study design where participants are randomly assigned to receive an intervention or not. Of the 1,100 men involved in the studies, 600 were assigned to “experimental” groups that typically exercised for 30 to 60 minutes, three to five times a week, while 500 were assigned to “control” groups with no exercise plan.

The worse the ED was, the more exercise helped, the researchers found. On a standardized scale of 6 to 30, men with severe ED who exercised reported a 5-point improvement in erectile function. Those with mild and moderate ED saw improvements of 2 and 3 points, respectively.

By comparison, phosphodiesterase-5 inhibitors – like sildenafil (Viagra) or tadalafil (Cialis) – can lead to improvements of 4 to 8 points, the study authors note. And testosterone replacement therapy can lead to an improvement of 2 points.

“We were particularly impressed by the finding that men with more severe erectile dysfunction saw greater improvements with exercise, and these improvements were similar to those seen in men taking” drugs like Viagra, Dr. Miller said.
 

ED and heart health

Erectile dysfunction can often be traced to the same causes as cardiovascular disease, including inflammation, a narrowing of the arteries (endothelial dysfunction), or a hardening of the arteries (atherosclerosis).

“It’s important to recognize that erectile dysfunction can often serve as an indicator or barometer of underlying cardiovascular health,” said Amy Pearlman, MD, a urologist specializing in male sexual health at Prime Institute in Miami.

Dr. Pearlman was not involved in the study but thinks the results make sense. “It stands to reason that any intervention aimed at enhancing cardiovascular health may also have a positive impact on erectile health.”

But what was surprising was that aerobic exercise reduced symptoms on par with medications like Viagra, said urologist Rahul Mehan, MD, founder of East Valley Urology Center, in Mesa, Ariz. (Dr. Mehan was also not involved in the study.)

While erectile dysfunction medications are generally affordable and accessible, some patients don’t want to take them or can’t tolerate the side effects. These can include “headache, heartburn, nausea, flushing, and pain in muscles, back, arms, or legs,” said Dr. Mehan. He adds, “Everyone can exercise.”

Some doctors, including Dr. Mehan, already recommend exercise to their patients with ED.

Now they can tell patients that it’s “a proven approach backed by high-quality data from randomized studies,” Dr. Miller said. “Exercise is low risk and affordable, making it an ideal first-line treatment option for erectile difficulties, especially for patients unwilling or unable to use medications.”

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

Exercising for at least 30 minutes three times a week can be just as effective as Viagra and similar medications at improving erectile function, according to a new analysis of the best research to date on aerobic exercise and erectile function.

The study, published in The Journal of Sexual Medicine, found that aerobic activities – such as walking or cycling – improved erectile function in all men with erectile dysfunction, regardless of body weight, overall health, or medication use. Men with the most severe erectile dysfunction saw the greatest benefit.

“This study provides physicians and patients the proof needed to definitively recommend aerobic activity as part of ED management,” said study author Larry E. Miller, PhD, president, Miller Scientific Consulting, Johnson City, Tenn.

Doctors have long known that erectile function is linked to cardiovascular health, but there is limited high-quality evidence on the impact of exercise on the disorder.

The researchers scoured the scientific literature and found 11 randomized, controlled trials – a preferred study design where participants are randomly assigned to receive an intervention or not. Of the 1,100 men involved in the studies, 600 were assigned to “experimental” groups that typically exercised for 30 to 60 minutes, three to five times a week, while 500 were assigned to “control” groups with no exercise plan.

The worse the ED was, the more exercise helped, the researchers found. On a standardized scale of 6 to 30, men with severe ED who exercised reported a 5-point improvement in erectile function. Those with mild and moderate ED saw improvements of 2 and 3 points, respectively.

By comparison, phosphodiesterase-5 inhibitors – like sildenafil (Viagra) or tadalafil (Cialis) – can lead to improvements of 4 to 8 points, the study authors note. And testosterone replacement therapy can lead to an improvement of 2 points.

“We were particularly impressed by the finding that men with more severe erectile dysfunction saw greater improvements with exercise, and these improvements were similar to those seen in men taking” drugs like Viagra, Dr. Miller said.
 

ED and heart health

Erectile dysfunction can often be traced to the same causes as cardiovascular disease, including inflammation, a narrowing of the arteries (endothelial dysfunction), or a hardening of the arteries (atherosclerosis).

“It’s important to recognize that erectile dysfunction can often serve as an indicator or barometer of underlying cardiovascular health,” said Amy Pearlman, MD, a urologist specializing in male sexual health at Prime Institute in Miami.

Dr. Pearlman was not involved in the study but thinks the results make sense. “It stands to reason that any intervention aimed at enhancing cardiovascular health may also have a positive impact on erectile health.”

But what was surprising was that aerobic exercise reduced symptoms on par with medications like Viagra, said urologist Rahul Mehan, MD, founder of East Valley Urology Center, in Mesa, Ariz. (Dr. Mehan was also not involved in the study.)

While erectile dysfunction medications are generally affordable and accessible, some patients don’t want to take them or can’t tolerate the side effects. These can include “headache, heartburn, nausea, flushing, and pain in muscles, back, arms, or legs,” said Dr. Mehan. He adds, “Everyone can exercise.”

Some doctors, including Dr. Mehan, already recommend exercise to their patients with ED.

Now they can tell patients that it’s “a proven approach backed by high-quality data from randomized studies,” Dr. Miller said. “Exercise is low risk and affordable, making it an ideal first-line treatment option for erectile difficulties, especially for patients unwilling or unable to use medications.”

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

Exercising for at least 30 minutes three times a week can be just as effective as Viagra and similar medications at improving erectile function, according to a new analysis of the best research to date on aerobic exercise and erectile function.

The study, published in The Journal of Sexual Medicine, found that aerobic activities – such as walking or cycling – improved erectile function in all men with erectile dysfunction, regardless of body weight, overall health, or medication use. Men with the most severe erectile dysfunction saw the greatest benefit.

“This study provides physicians and patients the proof needed to definitively recommend aerobic activity as part of ED management,” said study author Larry E. Miller, PhD, president, Miller Scientific Consulting, Johnson City, Tenn.

Doctors have long known that erectile function is linked to cardiovascular health, but there is limited high-quality evidence on the impact of exercise on the disorder.

The researchers scoured the scientific literature and found 11 randomized, controlled trials – a preferred study design where participants are randomly assigned to receive an intervention or not. Of the 1,100 men involved in the studies, 600 were assigned to “experimental” groups that typically exercised for 30 to 60 minutes, three to five times a week, while 500 were assigned to “control” groups with no exercise plan.

The worse the ED was, the more exercise helped, the researchers found. On a standardized scale of 6 to 30, men with severe ED who exercised reported a 5-point improvement in erectile function. Those with mild and moderate ED saw improvements of 2 and 3 points, respectively.

By comparison, phosphodiesterase-5 inhibitors – like sildenafil (Viagra) or tadalafil (Cialis) – can lead to improvements of 4 to 8 points, the study authors note. And testosterone replacement therapy can lead to an improvement of 2 points.

“We were particularly impressed by the finding that men with more severe erectile dysfunction saw greater improvements with exercise, and these improvements were similar to those seen in men taking” drugs like Viagra, Dr. Miller said.
 

ED and heart health

Erectile dysfunction can often be traced to the same causes as cardiovascular disease, including inflammation, a narrowing of the arteries (endothelial dysfunction), or a hardening of the arteries (atherosclerosis).

“It’s important to recognize that erectile dysfunction can often serve as an indicator or barometer of underlying cardiovascular health,” said Amy Pearlman, MD, a urologist specializing in male sexual health at Prime Institute in Miami.

Dr. Pearlman was not involved in the study but thinks the results make sense. “It stands to reason that any intervention aimed at enhancing cardiovascular health may also have a positive impact on erectile health.”

But what was surprising was that aerobic exercise reduced symptoms on par with medications like Viagra, said urologist Rahul Mehan, MD, founder of East Valley Urology Center, in Mesa, Ariz. (Dr. Mehan was also not involved in the study.)

While erectile dysfunction medications are generally affordable and accessible, some patients don’t want to take them or can’t tolerate the side effects. These can include “headache, heartburn, nausea, flushing, and pain in muscles, back, arms, or legs,” said Dr. Mehan. He adds, “Everyone can exercise.”

Some doctors, including Dr. Mehan, already recommend exercise to their patients with ED.

Now they can tell patients that it’s “a proven approach backed by high-quality data from randomized studies,” Dr. Miller said. “Exercise is low risk and affordable, making it an ideal first-line treatment option for erectile difficulties, especially for patients unwilling or unable to use medications.”

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

TOPLINE:

When provided detailed information on options, most men with low-risk prostate cancer chose active surveillance over treatment, and there was no difference in outcomes, new research from Italy shows.

METHODOLOGY:

• Active surveillance for patients with low-risk prostate cancer has been recommended for years, but its adoption often varies within and between countries.
• The current study, based in Italy, aimed to promote the adoption of active surveillance in two regions in Northern Italy and to understand patient acceptance and outcomes in comparison with active treatment.
• Men newly diagnosed with low-risk prostate cancer between June 2015 and December 2021 were eligible. All were informed of treatment options and were offered active surveillance.
• Multilevel models identified factors associated with choosing active surveillance over active treatment, which consisted of either radical prostatectomy or radiation therapy.

TAKEAWAY:

• Overall, 83% (706 of 852) men chose active surveillance over immediate treatment. There was an upward trend over time, from 78% in 2015-2017 to 90% in 2020-2021.
• Patients who chose active surveillance over any radical treatment were more likely to be aged 75 years or older (odds ratio, 4.27), to have a Charlson Comorbidity Index ≥ 2 (OR, 1.98), to have undergone independent revision of the first biopsy (OR, 2.35), and to have undergone multidisciplinary assessment (OR, 2.65).
• Worse prostate cancer prognostic factors, such as stage T2a (OR, 0.54) and Gleason Score 3+4 (OR, 0.20), were associated with lower odds of choosing active surveillance than any radical treatment.
• In an adjusted intention-to-treat analysis, among patients who initially chose active surveillance, overall survival was not worse in comparison with those who chose any radical treatment (hazard ratio, 0.86; 95% confidence interval, 0.41-1.79) or in comparison with those who chose radical prostatectomy (HR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.37-2.20).

IN PRACTICE:

“The main remarkable finding of [the trial] is represented by the widespread adoption of active surveillance in our [Regional Oncology Network] since the beginning of the study, and the increasing trend over time, reaching approximately 90% of eligible patients in 2020 to 2021,” the authors wrote.

SOURCE:

The study, with first author Giovannino Ciccone, MD, PhD, AOU City of Health and Science of Turin, Italy, was published online in JAMA Network Open.

LIMITATIONS:

Key limitations include the relatively short follow-up (median, 57 months), variability between centers in terms of enrolling patients and discussing their choices, and the high rate of patients who abandoned active surveillance by year 2 of follow-up. Overall, about 281 patients (~40%) abandoned active surveillance by year 2, most commonly because of biochemical progression.

DISCLOSURES:

The START project was funded by the Fondazione Compagnia di San Paolo and partially by Rete Oncologica del Piemonte e Valle d’Aosta, Turin, Italy. Dr. Ciccone has disclosed no relevant financial relationships.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

TOPLINE:

When provided detailed information on options, most men with low-risk prostate cancer chose active surveillance over treatment, and there was no difference in outcomes, new research from Italy shows.

METHODOLOGY:

• Active surveillance for patients with low-risk prostate cancer has been recommended for years, but its adoption often varies within and between countries.
• The current study, based in Italy, aimed to promote the adoption of active surveillance in two regions in Northern Italy and to understand patient acceptance and outcomes in comparison with active treatment.
• Men newly diagnosed with low-risk prostate cancer between June 2015 and December 2021 were eligible. All were informed of treatment options and were offered active surveillance.
• Multilevel models identified factors associated with choosing active surveillance over active treatment, which consisted of either radical prostatectomy or radiation therapy.

TAKEAWAY:

• Overall, 83% (706 of 852) men chose active surveillance over immediate treatment. There was an upward trend over time, from 78% in 2015-2017 to 90% in 2020-2021.
• Patients who chose active surveillance over any radical treatment were more likely to be aged 75 years or older (odds ratio, 4.27), to have a Charlson Comorbidity Index ≥ 2 (OR, 1.98), to have undergone independent revision of the first biopsy (OR, 2.35), and to have undergone multidisciplinary assessment (OR, 2.65).
• Worse prostate cancer prognostic factors, such as stage T2a (OR, 0.54) and Gleason Score 3+4 (OR, 0.20), were associated with lower odds of choosing active surveillance than any radical treatment.
• In an adjusted intention-to-treat analysis, among patients who initially chose active surveillance, overall survival was not worse in comparison with those who chose any radical treatment (hazard ratio, 0.86; 95% confidence interval, 0.41-1.79) or in comparison with those who chose radical prostatectomy (HR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.37-2.20).

IN PRACTICE:

“The main remarkable finding of [the trial] is represented by the widespread adoption of active surveillance in our [Regional Oncology Network] since the beginning of the study, and the increasing trend over time, reaching approximately 90% of eligible patients in 2020 to 2021,” the authors wrote.

SOURCE:

The study, with first author Giovannino Ciccone, MD, PhD, AOU City of Health and Science of Turin, Italy, was published online in JAMA Network Open.

LIMITATIONS:

Key limitations include the relatively short follow-up (median, 57 months), variability between centers in terms of enrolling patients and discussing their choices, and the high rate of patients who abandoned active surveillance by year 2 of follow-up. Overall, about 281 patients (~40%) abandoned active surveillance by year 2, most commonly because of biochemical progression.

DISCLOSURES:

The START project was funded by the Fondazione Compagnia di San Paolo and partially by Rete Oncologica del Piemonte e Valle d’Aosta, Turin, Italy. Dr. Ciccone has disclosed no relevant financial relationships.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

TOPLINE:

When provided detailed information on options, most men with low-risk prostate cancer chose active surveillance over treatment, and there was no difference in outcomes, new research from Italy shows.

METHODOLOGY:

• Active surveillance for patients with low-risk prostate cancer has been recommended for years, but its adoption often varies within and between countries.
• The current study, based in Italy, aimed to promote the adoption of active surveillance in two regions in Northern Italy and to understand patient acceptance and outcomes in comparison with active treatment.
• Men newly diagnosed with low-risk prostate cancer between June 2015 and December 2021 were eligible. All were informed of treatment options and were offered active surveillance.
• Multilevel models identified factors associated with choosing active surveillance over active treatment, which consisted of either radical prostatectomy or radiation therapy.

TAKEAWAY:

• Overall, 83% (706 of 852) men chose active surveillance over immediate treatment. There was an upward trend over time, from 78% in 2015-2017 to 90% in 2020-2021.
• Patients who chose active surveillance over any radical treatment were more likely to be aged 75 years or older (odds ratio, 4.27), to have a Charlson Comorbidity Index ≥ 2 (OR, 1.98), to have undergone independent revision of the first biopsy (OR, 2.35), and to have undergone multidisciplinary assessment (OR, 2.65).
• Worse prostate cancer prognostic factors, such as stage T2a (OR, 0.54) and Gleason Score 3+4 (OR, 0.20), were associated with lower odds of choosing active surveillance than any radical treatment.
• In an adjusted intention-to-treat analysis, among patients who initially chose active surveillance, overall survival was not worse in comparison with those who chose any radical treatment (hazard ratio, 0.86; 95% confidence interval, 0.41-1.79) or in comparison with those who chose radical prostatectomy (HR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.37-2.20).

IN PRACTICE:

“The main remarkable finding of [the trial] is represented by the widespread adoption of active surveillance in our [Regional Oncology Network] since the beginning of the study, and the increasing trend over time, reaching approximately 90% of eligible patients in 2020 to 2021,” the authors wrote.

SOURCE:

The study, with first author Giovannino Ciccone, MD, PhD, AOU City of Health and Science of Turin, Italy, was published online in JAMA Network Open.

LIMITATIONS:

Key limitations include the relatively short follow-up (median, 57 months), variability between centers in terms of enrolling patients and discussing their choices, and the high rate of patients who abandoned active surveillance by year 2 of follow-up. Overall, about 281 patients (~40%) abandoned active surveillance by year 2, most commonly because of biochemical progression.

DISCLOSURES:

The START project was funded by the Fondazione Compagnia di San Paolo and partially by Rete Oncologica del Piemonte e Valle d’Aosta, Turin, Italy. Dr. Ciccone has disclosed no relevant financial relationships.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.