Exogenous testosterone administration is associated with differential neural response to unfamiliar peer's and own caregiver's voice in transgender adolescents

Limitations and Future Directions in Sex, Sexuality, and Gender Diverse Research in Neurology

Sex, sexuality, and gender diversity is understudied and underserved in neurology. Neurology research inclusive of LGBTQIA+ (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, intersex, asexual) people is limited. Existing research struggles with a paucity of neurology studies collecting sex, sexuality, and gender diverse (SSGD) data, conflation of sex and gender, lack of precision in measures, neglect of younger and older populations, nebulous benefit to community, and absent intersectionality. Future directions in SSGD neurology research include precise and community-based measurements, respect for LGBTQIA+ colleagues, and the application of minority stress models. All patients stand to benefit from research that elucidates how SSGD variables influence neurological health. ANN NEUROL 2024;95:421-431.

[Beyond NICE: Updated Systematic Review on the Current Evidence of Using Puberty Blocking Pharmacological Agents and Cross-Sex-Hormones in Minors with Gender Dysphoria]

Beyond NICE: Updated Systematic Review on the Current Evidence of Using Puberty Blocking Pharmacological Agents and Cross-Sex-Hormones in Minors with Gender Dysphoria Abstract: Objective: The suppression of physiological puberty using puberty-blocking pharmacological agents (PB) and prescribing cross-sex hormones (CSH) to minors with gender dysphoria (GD) is a current matter of discussion, and in some cases, PB and CSH are used in clinical practice for this particular population. Two systematic reviews (one on PB, one on CSH treatment) by the British National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE) from 2020 indicated no clear clinical benefit of such treatments regarding critical outcome variables. In particular, these two systematic NICE reviews on the use of PB and CSH in minors with GD detected no clear improvements of GD symptoms. Moreover, the overall scientific quality of the available evidence, as discussed within the above-mentioned two NICE reviews, was classified as "very low certainty" regarding modified GRADE criteria. Method: The present systematic review presents an updated literature search on this particular topic (use of PB and CSH in minors with GD) following NICE principles and PICO criteria for all relevant new original research studies published since the release of the two above-mentioned NICE reviews (updated literature search period was July 2020-August 2023). Results: The newly conducted literature search revealed no newly published original studies targeting NICE-defined critical and important outcomes and the related use of PB in minors with GD following PICO criteria. For CSH treatment, we found two new studies that met PICO criteria, but these particular two studies had low participant numbers, yielded no significant additional clear evidence for specific and clearly beneficial effects of CSH in minors with GD, and could be classified as "low certainty" tfollowing modified GRADE criteria. Conclusions: The currently available studies on the use of PB and CSH in minors with GD have significant conceptual and methodological flaws. The available evidence on the use of PB and CSH in minors with GD is very limited and based on only a few studies with small numbers, and these studies have problematic methodology and quality. There also is a lack of adequate and meaningful long-term studies. Current evidence doesn't suggest that GD symptoms and mental health significantly improve when PB or CSH are used in minors with GD. Psychotherapeutic interventions to address and reduce the experienced burden can become relevant in children and adolescents with GD. If the decision to use PB and/or CSH is made on an individual case-by-case basis and after a complete and thorough mental health assessment, potential treatment of possibly co-occurring mental health problems as well as after a thoroughly conducted and carefully executed individual risk-benefit evaluation, doing so as part of clinical studies or research projects, as currently done in England, can be of value in terms of generation of new research data. The electronic supplement (ESM) 1 is an adapted and abreviated English version of this work.

Assessment of Transgender and Gender-Diverse Adolescents: Incorporating the World Professional Association of Transgender Health Standard of Care 8th Edition

This article provides an overview of the World Professional Association of Transgender Health (WPATH) Standard of Care 8th edition (SOC8) recommendations for adolescents seeking gender-affirming care. SOC8 was the first iteration of the guidelines to employ a Delphi consensus process that required 75% agreement of 120 multidisciplinary international transgender health experts for approval of its recommendations. While the evidence base for adolescent care is evolving, gender-affirming treatment is medically necessary and promotes long-term psychological wellbeing. The guidelines emphasize the importance of an assessment to determine maturity and decision-making capacity for treatments that have long-term body implications.