Measurement of Serum Testosterone in Nondiabetic Young Obese Men: Comparison of Direct Immunoassay to Liquid Chromatography-Tandem Mass Spectrometry

Hypoandrogenemia, a frequent finding in men with obesity, is defined by low concentrations of serum testosterone. Although immunoassay (IA) is the most used method for the determination of this steroid in clinical practice, liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) is considered a more reliable method. In this study, we aimed to compare IA versus LC-MS/MS measurement for the diagnosis of hypoandrogenemia in a cohort of 273 nondiabetic young obese men. Mean total testosterone (TT) levels were 3.20 ± 1.24 ng/mL for IA and 3.78 ± 1.4 ng/mL for LC-MS/MS. 53.7% and 26.3% of patients were classified as presenting hypoandrogenemia with IA and LC-MS/MS, respectively. Considering LC-MS/MS as the reference method, sensitivity and specificity of IA were 91.4% (95% CI 82.3-96.8) and 61.1% (95% CI 54.0-67.8), respectively. IA presented an AUC of 0.879 (95% CI 0.83-0.928). Multivariate regression analysis indicated that sex hormone-binding globulin (SHBG) concentrations (p = 0.002) and insulin resistance (p = 0.008) were factors associated with discrepant IA values. In conclusion, the determination of TT by IA in nondiabetic young men with obesity yields lower concentrations of TT than LC-MS/MS, resulting in an equivocal increased diagnosis of hypoandrogenemia, which could lead to inaccurate diagnosis and unnecessary treatment.

Decision Making Impairment: A Shared Vulnerability in Obesity, Gambling Disorder and Substance Use Disorders?

Introduction

Addictions are associated with decision making impairments. The present study explores decision making in Substance use disorder (SUD), Gambling disorder (GD) and Obesity (OB) when assessed by Iowa Gambling Task (IGT) and compares them with healthy controls (HC).

Methods

For the aims of this study, 591 participants (194 HC, 178 GD, 113 OB, 106 SUD) were assessed according to DSM criteria, completed a sociodemographic interview and conducted the IGT.

Results

SUD, GD and OB present impaired decision making when compared to the HC in the overall task and task learning, however no differences are found for the overall performance in the IGT among the clinical groups. Results also reveal some specific learning across the task patterns within the clinical groups: OB maintains negative scores until the third set where learning starts but with a less extend to HC, SUD presents an early learning followed by a progressive although slow improvement and GD presents more random choices with no learning.

Conclusions

Decision making impairments are present in the studied clinical samples and they display individual differences in the task learning. Results can help understanding the underlying mechanisms of OB and addiction behaviors as well as improve current clinical treatments.