4.3 Review

Testosterone level and risk of type 2 diabetes in men: a systematic review and meta-analysis

期刊

ENDOCRINE CONNECTIONS
卷 7, 期 1, 页码 220-231

出版社

BIOSCIENTIFICA LTD
DOI: 10.1530/EC-17-0253

关键词

testosterone; type 2 diabetes; meta-analysis

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [81270871]
  2. Key Disciplines Development of Shanghai Jinshan District [JSZK2015A02]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Type 2 diabetes is a risk factor for testosterone deficiency and impaired sex steroid status. Some studies also investigated the association of testosterone level with diabetes risk in men, but reported controversial findings. To clarify this issue, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis. Methods: PubMed, EMBASE and Web of Science were searched for eligible cohort or nested case-control studies published up to August 15, 2017. Meta-analysis was used to calculate the pooled relative risk (RR) of type 2 diabetes associated with higher testosterone level. Results: Thirteen cohort or nested case-control studies with 16,709 participants were included. Meta-analysis showed that higher total testosterone level could significantly decrease the risk of type 2 diabetes in men (RR = 0.65; 95% CI 0.50-0.84; P = 0.001), and higher free testosterone level could also decrease the risk of type 2 diabetes in men (RR = 0.94; 95% CI 0.90-0.99; P = 0.014). After excluding two studies that did not calculate RRs by quartiles of testosterone levels, both higher total testosterone and free testosterone levels could decrease the risk of type 2 diabetes in men, and the pooled RRs were 0.62 (95% CI 0.51-0.76; P < 0.001) and 0.77 (95% CI 0.61-0.98; P = 0.03), respectively. Conclusion: This meta-analysis suggests that higher testosterone level can significantly decrease the risk of type 2 diabetes in men. Therefore, combined with previous researches, the findings above suggest a reverse-causality scenario in the relation between testosterone deficiency and risk of type 2 diabetes in men.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据