Novel protein markers of androgen activity in humans: proteomic study of plasma from young chemically castrated men
===================================================================================================================

* Aleksander Giwercman
* K Barbara Sahlin
* Indira Pla
* Krzysztof Pawłowski
* Carl Fehniger
* Yvonne Lundberg Giwercman
* Irene Leijonhufvud
* Roger Appelqvist
* György Marko-Varga
* Aniel Sanchez
* Johan Malm

## Abstract

**Background** Reliable biomarkers ofv androgen activity in humans are lacking. The aim of this study was, therefore, to identify new protein markers of biological androgen activity and test their predictive value in relation to low vs. normal testosterone values and some androgen deficiency linked pathologies.

**Methods** Blood samples from 30 healthy GnRH-antagonist treated males were collected at three time points: a) before GnRH antagonist administration; b) 3 weeks later, just before testosterone undecanoate injection, and c) after additional 2 weeks. Subsequently they were analysed by mass spectrometry to identify potential protein biomarkers of testosterone activity. Levels of proteins most significantly associated with testosterone fluctuations were further tested in a cohort of 75 hypo- and eugonadal males suffering from infertility. Associations between levels of those markers and cardio-metabolic parameters, bone mineral density as well as androgen receptor CAG repeat lengths, were explored.

**Results** Using ROC analysis, 4-hydroxyphenylpyruvate dioxygenase (4HPPD), insulin-like growth factor-binding protein 6 (IGFBP6) and fructose-bisphosphate aldolase (ALDOB), as well as a Multi Marker Algorithm, based on levels of 4HPPD and IGFBP6, were shown to be best predictors of low (< 8 nmol/L) vs. normal (> 12 nmol/L) testosterone. They were also more strongly associated with metabolic syndrome and diabetes than testosterone levels. Levels of ALDOB and 4HPPD levels also showed association with AR CAG-repeat lengths.

**Conclusions** We identified potential new protein biomarkers of testosterone action. Further investigations to eluciadate their clinical potential are warranted.

Key words
*   testosterone
*   hypogonadism
*   proteomics
*   physiology
*   biomarker

## Introduction

The male sex hormone, testosterone (T), plays an important physiological role in regulating function of both reproductive and non-reproductive organs in males as well as in females. In males, the diagnosis of T deficiency (i.e. male hypogonadism) is based on the presence of low serum T levels combined with clinical symptoms, which, however, are not pathognomonic for this condition (1).

The most common way of assessing T activity is by measuring the total concentration of this hormone in a fasting morning blood sample. However, total T does not accurately reflect biological androgenic activity (BAA), which might be considered a more useful biological and clinical marker.

The association between T levels and BAA is affected by several biological mechanisms such as the concentration of binding proteins, body mass index, certain diseases (e.g. diabetes), androgen receptor (AR) sensitivity (2), and different co-factors (3). So far, no reliable algorithms for translating T levels into BAA are available, but could be useful for example in the diagnosis of male hypogonadism.

A correct hypogonadism diagnosis is important for proper identification of men for whom androgen replacement therapy is warranted. However, the treatment of men with hypogonadism represents a clinical challenge, because the symptoms associated with the condition are highly unspecific (4). Furthermore, there are limitations in using the level of T in defining testosterone deficiency. Generally, in many clinical guidelines, total T concentration below 8 nmol/L indicates an insufficient hormone concentration, whereas levels above 12 nmol/L are considered normal (5). Apart from the fact that men with testosterone levels between 8 and 12 nmol/L cannot be assigned to any of these distinct categories, those presenting with a lower or higher hormone concentration may also be misclassified due to an abnormal concentration of sex hormone binding protein (SHBG). Low SHBG levels, as often seen in obese men, may imply low total T despite unaffected BAA. On the other hand, some degree of reduced androgen sensitivity may be associated with decreased BAA despite normal or high testosterone levels (6).

Hypogonadism has been identified as a predictor of several non-communicable chronic diseases as well as premature mortality (7). Understanding the biology of androgen action may therefore contribute to clarifying the pathogenetic mechanisms linking androgen deficiency to comorbid conditions. Thus, the approach based on measuring the protein levels downstream of androgen action is a feasible and logical concept for identifying clinical and biological useful markers of BAA.

Proteomics is a technique aimed to study biological systems based on qualitative and quantitative measuring of proteins and, thereby, integrate the cellular output related to transcription as well as translation. Mapping the quantitative protein response downstream of androgen action may provide new clinically valuable markers of BAA. In order to identify such markers, we compared the protein profile of healthy individuals before and after T deprivation. Subsequently, we assessed the predictive value of the newly identified protein markers in relation to hypogonadism and risk of pathologies related to T deficiency.

## Subjects and Methods

### Study outline

The study was set up to I) identify new protein markers of BAA in healthy subjects; II) test the markers’ predictive values in relation to biochemically diagnosed hypogonadism, metabolic syndrome (MetS), cardiovascular risk lipid profile (CVRLP), diabetes mellitus II (DM) and low bone density (LBD) in infertile men; III) analyse androgen dependence of the identified proteins by assessing how their levels associate with androgen receptor gene CAG-repeat length.

### Subjects

All subjects were enrolled with informed written consent. The two studies from which they were recruited were approved by the Swedish Ethical Review Authority (Approval number: DNR 2014/311, date of approval 8 May 2014; DNR 2011/1, date of approval 11 January 2011).

The first part of the study includes plasma samples obtained from 30 healthy men (biological replicates) aged 19-32 years, BMI 19.1-26.9 kg/m2. They, underwent chemical castration by subcutaneous administration of 240 mg GnRH-antagonist (Degeralix®, Ferring Pharmaceuticals, Saint-Prex, Switzerland) followed by remediation of testosterone levels by intramuscular injection of 1000 mg testosterone undecanoate (Nebido®, Bayer AG, Leverkusen, Germany) after the duration of three weeks (8, 9). Blood samples were collected at baseline (A); three weeks later (B), and, at the end of the study, after two additional weeks (C) (**Figure 1)**.

![Figure 1.](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2021/11/14/2021.11.12.21266270/F1.medium.gif)

[Figure 1.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/11/14/2021.11.12.21266270/F1)

Figure 1. 
Study design. First, a model of 30 young healthy males was evaluated by proteomics at three time points (A, B and C), where testosterone changes were induced. Identified proteins proposed as candidate biomarkers were then evaluated in a cohort of infertile males. In both steps of the study, the quality of the blood samples was ensured by following an automated workflow for sample aliquoting and storage (−80°C).

To test the clinical predictive value of the proteins identified in the castrated men, we used a cohort of 75 serum samples from 75 men (biological replication, subject age 32-43 years) previously recruited for a study on hypogonadism among men from infertile couples (10). Eighty-five patients were randomly selected from 213 infertile men and 223 age-matched controls. The selected patients for the present study had the span of subnormal to upper normal range of T. Out of the 85 patients, ten patients were excluded; seven due to Klinefelter syndrome, one due to missing value of T and the last two were statistical outliers, which were removed after considering the possibles causes. One patient had a high level of T (41.6 nmol/L) without androgen replacement therapy (ART) and the other because he was the only one diagnosed with obstructive azoospermia. Background characteristics of these patients can be found in **Table 1a** and **Table 1b**.

View this table:
[Table 1a.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/11/14/2021.11.12.21266270/T1)

Table 1a. 
Background characteristics of infertile patients.

View this table:
[Table 1b.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/11/14/2021.11.12.21266270/T2)

Table 1b. 
Characteristics of the cohort of infertile patients.

The following comorbidities in the cohort of infertile patients were defined MetS, IR, CVRLP, DM and LBD. MetS was determined according to the criteria defined at the National Cholesterol Education Program Adult Treatment Panel III 2002 (**Table S1**). Homeostatic Model Assessment of Insulin Resistance (HOMA-IR) was calculated as (glucose x insulin)/22.5 and IR was defined as HOMA-IR > 2.5 (11). CVRLP was defined as the ratio apolipoprotein B/apolipoprotein A1 > 0.9 (12). DM was set at fasting blood glucose > 7 mmol/L (13). LBD was determined based on the DEXA lumbar Z score with the cut off at < −1 (14). The methods for laboratory tests, CAG-repeat length and proteomics are described in the supplementary file 1.

### Statistical analysis

We briefly describe the statistical analyses performed. A full description of the statistical analysis is available in supplementary file 2. Proteomics data pre-processing was done using Perseus v1.6.7.0 (18) software and unless other software is specified, the statistical analyzes were performed using R software (19, 20).

### Healthy human model

Protein intensities were Log2 transformed and standardized by Subtract Median normalization. Differentially expressed proteins were determined by one-way repeated measures ANOVA followed by a pairwise t-test (two-tails and paired). Adjusted *p*-values < 0.05 were considered significant. The power of the candidate biomarkers to discriminate between normal and low T was evaluated by doing receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis. Significant proteins (between A-B with significant recovery in B-C) with a) area under the curve (AUC) > 0.80 or b) AUC between 0.75 – 0.80 and highly enriched in liver tissues (Human Proteome Map (24) and Kampf C. et. *al*. (25)) were considered candidate biomarker. These candidates were included as predictors in a stepwise regression (method: backward) to select the best combination of markers that predict the odds of being low T. Bootstrap resampling with replacement method was applied to assess consistency. A new variable called Multi Marker Algorithm (MMA) was derived from the predicted log-odds (of being low T) obtained from a binomial logistic regression analysis (see supplementary file 2) and it was evaluated together with marker candidates proteins.

### Infertile cohort of patients

The normal distribution of the variables that descrive background characteristics of the infertile cohort of patients (**Table 1a**) was evaluated by Kolmogorov-Smirnov test. The intensities of the candidate biomarkers were Log2 transformed to achieve normal distributions. In this cohort, MMA variable was created to predict the odds of suffering low T or other medical conditions associated with low T levels.

Overall changes between more than two groups were evaluated by one-way ANOVA followed by a pairwise FDR correction (29) and adjusted *p*-values < 0.05 were considered significant. In order to know if the changes in the candidate markers occur with the change in T as observed in the healthy human model, three groups of patients were created based on total T concentration (group 1: low T (LT) ≤ 8 nmol/L (n= 22); group 2: borderline low T (BL_T) between 8 and 12 nmol/L (n=17); group 3: normal T (NT) > 12 nmol/L (n= 36)). The power of the candidate biomarkers to discriminate between NT and LT or BL_T, or to distinguish patients with medical conditions associated with low T levels (MetS, IR, CVRLP, DM or LBD) was evaluated by a ROC analysis. The DeLong’s test (paired) was used to compare the AUCs.

To investigate the androgenic dependence of the candidate biomarkers, we looked for associations between their expression and the androgen receptor (AR) CAG repeat length (33–36): reference group 1: patients with CAG repeat length 21 and 22 (n= 18); group 2: patients with CAG repeat length < 21 (n= 26) and group 3: patients with CAG repeat length >22).

## Results

### Proteins differentially expressed in chemically castrated men

In total, in the healthy men, the expression level of 31 out of 676 proteins was statistically significantly associated with T concentration (**Tables S2**). The levels of 23 proteins changed in the same direction as T, whereas, the remaining eight markers changed in an opposite way. LH and FSH changed significantly in A-B but not in B-C. The protein changes visualised as boxplots can be found in the Supplementary Figure S1.

### Proteins capable to distinguish between low and normal testosterone

Based on *p*-values for AUC in the ROC analysis, among healthy young men, 90% of the 31 proteins distinguished the low T time point (B) from the normal ones (A and C) with statistical significance (Table S3, **Figure 2a**). ROC-AUC values greater than 0.80 were obtained for the proteins 4-hydroxyphenylpyruvate dioxygenase (4HPPD) and insulin-like growth factor-binding protein 6 (IGFBP6). Additionally, fructose-bisphosphate aldolase (ALDOB) was the only protein enriched in liver tissue with ROC-AUC between 0.75 and 0.80.

![Figure 2.](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2021/11/14/2021.11.12.21266270/F2.medium.gif)

[Figure 2.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/11/14/2021.11.12.21266270/F2)

Figure 2. 
Proteins influenced by testosterone in the model of young healthy males. a) Top 25 significant proteins selected in the healthy human model (ROC-p < 0.01, Table S3). The arrows indicate the direction of change in protein expression in the different conditions. The tissue with highest expression of each protein is indicated in colours. Also, results from the ROC analysis are shown as bar chart (AUC) and heat-map (p-values). **b**) Boxplot (mean (min; max)) of the top three significant proteins proposed as biomarker candidates, able to discriminate between low and normal testosterone (Table S4). The adjusted p-values are specified on top of the comparative horizontal lines. **c)** ROC of the analytes proposed as biomarker candidates, including Multi Marker Algorithm (MMA).

The stepwise regression method selected 4HPPD and IGFBP6 as the best markers to be combined to predict the odds of being low T, and thus, they were the basis for the new variable MMA (see Material and Methods). MMA together with 4HPPD, ALDOB and IGFBP6 were selected as potential candidate markers for the diagnosis of BAA (**Figures 2b and 2c**). The expression of the 4HPPD and ALDOB proteins were significantly increased at low T (*p*<0.001; *p*<0.001) and remediated in response to the T treatment, whereas IGFBP6 expression was significantly decreased (*p*<0.001) by castration.

### Testing of the candidate biomarkers in infertile men

The three proteins and MMA showed statistically significant differences (4HPPD: *p*< 0.001, ALDOB: *p*= 0.003, IGFBP6: *p*= 0.016, MMA: *p*< 0.001, **Figure 3a**) between the three groups defined according to the total T levels (**Table S2**). 4HPPD, ALDOB, and MMA showed a negative association with T changes, while IGFBP6 displayed a positive association. The three proteins and MMA significantly distinguished the patients with LT from BL_T/NT (4HPPD: AUC=0.75, *p*= 0.001; ALDOB: AUC= 0.70, *p*= 0.008; IGFBP6: AUC= 0.69, *p*= 0.01; MMA: AUC= 0.79, *p*< 0.001) (**Figure 3b**). Additionally, the power to discern low T values improved for all the biomarkers tested when the patients with BL_T were excluded (**Table 2**).

![Figure 3.](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2021/11/14/2021.11.12.21266270/F3.medium.gif)

[Figure 3.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/11/14/2021.11.12.21266270/F3)

Figure 3. 
New markers to discern states of different testosterone levels in men investigated for infertility (n=75). **a**) Patients grouped by three levels of total testosterone: low testosterone (LT) ≤ 8 nmol/L (n=22), border line testosterone (BL_T) between 8 and 12 nmol/L (n=17) and normal testosterone (HT) > 12 nmol/L (n=36). Each group is represented by the mean and its 95% CI. Horizontal lines indicate significant differences between groups and the adjusted p-values are specified on top of these lines (Table S5). **b**) ROC analysis to discriminate patients with LT in the entire cohort and **c**) in a cohort that excluded patients with borderline testosterone levels (LT_B). MMA is based on is the combination of levels of the proteins 4HPPD and IGFBP6.

View this table:
[Table 2](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/11/14/2021.11.12.21266270/T3)

Table 2 
. Comparison of ROC-Areas Under the Curve for testosterone and the candidate biomarkers in relation to the prediction of hypogonadism and its sequels in patients.

### Ability to distinguish men with abnormal metabolic comorbidities or reduced bone mineral density

The AUCs for 4HPPD, ALDOB and MMA in relation to risk of DM and MetS were statistically significant whereas for T the p-value for AUC was 0.72. The AUCs for 4HPPD, ALDOB and MMA were also statistically significantly larger than this for T (DM: 4HPPD (*p*= 0.005), ALDOB (*p*= 0.009), MMA (*p*= 0.002); MetS: 4HPPD (*p*= 0.032), ALDOB (*p*= 0.030), MMA (*p*= 0.002)), (**Table 2**). Additionally, the AUC values in relation to CVRLP and IR were numerically higher for 4HPPD, ALDOB and MMA than for T, however, the differences between the AUC values were not statically significant (CVRLP marker vs T: 4HPPD (*p*= 0.97), ALDOB (*p*= 0.61), MMA (*p*= 0.87); IR marker vs T: 4HPPD vs T (*p*= 0.30), ALDOB vs T (*p*= 0.88), MMA (*p*= 0.31)). 4HPPD and MMA statistically significantly distinguished between patients with normal bone density and LBD. The same was true for T, the differences between the AUC for T and those for 4HPPD and MMA not being statistically significant (LBD vs T: 4HPPD (*p*= 0.28), MMA (*p*= 0.30)). No statistical significance, in relation to prediction of LBD was found for IGFBP6 (**Figure 4)**

![Figure 4](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2021/11/14/2021.11.12.21266270/F4.medium.gif)

[Figure 4](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/11/14/2021.11.12.21266270/F4)

Figure 4 
Results from ROC analysis to determine whether the analytes discriminate between the presence of comorbidities or not. Analytes included in the analysis are 4HPPD, IGFBP6, ALDOB and MMA (combination of 4HPPD and IGFBP6). AUC, p-values can be found in Table 2. IR: insulin resistance; DM: type 2 diabetes mellitus; LBD: low bone density; CVRLP: cardiovascular risk lipid profile; MetS: metabolic syndrome.

### Association of the candidate biomarkers with androgen receptor CAG-repeat length

Statistically significant inter-CAG-group overall differences were observed for 4HPPD (*p*= 0.012) and ALDOB (*p*= 0.008) (**Figure 5**). Additionally, the protein expressions were significantly higher in the groups with <21 and >l22 CAG repeat length as compared with the reference (**Table 3** and **Figure 5**). However, we did not observe any statistically significant association between CAG number and expression of IGFBP6.

![Figure 5.](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2021/11/14/2021.11.12.21266270/F5.medium.gif)

[Figure 5.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/11/14/2021.11.12.21266270/F5)

Figure 5. 
Association between androgen receptor CAG <21 (n=26), and CAG<22 (n=30) and 4HPPD and ALDOB, respectively, with CAG=21 and 22 (n=18) set as reference.

View this table:
[Table 3.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/11/14/2021.11.12.21266270/T4)

Table 3. 
Ratio between mean concentrations of 4HPPD and ALDOB in men with CAG repeat length < 21 or >22 as compared to the reference group

## Discussion

We have identified three plasma proteins, which are potential markers of BAA. In young healthy men the three markers ALDOB, 4HPPD and IGFB6 were strongly associated with T levels. In a slightly older cohort of infertile men, these markers were indicative of T deficiency (5). Furthermore, levels of two of the markers, ALDOB and 4HPPD, were more strongly associated with risk of metabolic disturbances than total T. The association seemed to become stronger by creating a combined marker MMA, based on both 4HPPD and IGFBP6 levels. Finally, the androgen dependence of ALDOB and 4HPPD was confirmed by the association between the concentration of those proteins and the length of androgen receptor CAG repeats.

The ALDOB is a glycolytic enzyme, predominantly expressed in liver and kidney, that catalyzes the reversible cleavage of fructose-1,6-bisphosphate into glyceraldehyde 3-phosphate and dihydroxyacetone phosphate. The B isoform of aldolase, e.g. ALDOB, in the liver is under dietary control (37). Ingestion of fructose induces ALDOB mRNA expression in the liver, which is otherwise low in fasting conditions. In humans, absence of functional ALDOB enzyme due to mutations in the ALDOB gene cause hereditary fructose intolerance, characterized by metabolic disturbances that include hypoglycemia, lactic acidosis, and hypophosphatemia (38). An upregulation of ALDOB in human pancreatic *β*-cells occurs upon the development of hyperglycemia and may contribute to the impairment of insulin secretion in humans (39). In a study on goats, the ALDOB gene was found to be downregulated at the time of post-natal initiation of spermatogenesis (40). This finding is in accordance with our data showing that rising testosterone is inhibiting ALDOB.

Similar to ALDOB, we found that 4HPPD was negatively associated with T levels. This enzyme is involved in the catabolic pathway of tyrosine and catalyzes the conversion of 4-hydroxyphenylpyruvate to homogentisic acid in the tyrosine catabolism pathway (41). The expression of the gene is regulated by hepatocyte-specific and liver-enriched transcription factors, as well as by hormones (24). Tyrosine has previously been reported to be upregulated in hypogonadal men and both tyrosine and phenylalanine levels were suggested as predictors of the risk of developing diabetes many years before manifest disease (43–45). In male tyrosine hydroxylase knock-out mice normal body weight, puberty onset, and basal gonadotropin levels in adulthood were evident, although T was significantly elevated in adult mice (46).

The last marker, IGFBP6 is expressed in most tissues (24) and is one of the binding proteins for Insulin-Like Growth Factor (IGF). The principal function of IGFBP-6 is inhibiting IGF-II actions, whereby IGF-II induced cell proliferation, differentiation, migration and survival is reduced. Serum levels of IGFBP-6 increase gradually with age and are higher in men than in women, but there are conflicting studies of the direct effects of sex steroids on IGFBP-6 expression in different tissues (47). A positive association between the levels of T and IGFBP-6 have previously been found (48) (49). The latter study has a somewhat similar set up as the present study, based on chemical castration with a GnRH agonist, and has also focused on identifying novel markers of BAA, but with candidate markers previously identified as being associated with changes in fat-free mass. The study showed that early increases in IGFBP6 levels in men receiving testosterone were associated with increases in fat-free mass and muscle strength.

Altogether, our findings may not only be clinically valuable in developing new methods of assessing BAA but also add to our understanding of the biological role of T in human metabolism, regulation of testicular function (ALDOB), as well as muscle strength and body composition (IGFBP6). The combined parameter MMA may in this context be an important tool in the detection of long-term morbidity, such as bone mineral density and cardio-metabolic risk, even before clinical diagnosis.

Our study has some strengths and limitations. Using a chemical castration model in young healthy men, we were able to identify proteins influenced by androgens and select those that were most strongly associated with T levels. By utilizing proteomics, we had an explorative approach to identify new markers of BAA without being restricted by previously published findings.

Another strength is the depth of the analysis due to the depletion abundant proteins from plasma. We were able to identify more than 450 proteins, which were identified in the same concentration range as 87 % of FDA-approved biomarkers (50). If depletion is not performed the detection level is dampened by the components from the digested abundant proteins as the proteins removed are of highest abundance in plasma and plasma proteome and exceed some lower abundance proteins by 10 orders of magnitude (51).

Although more clinical testing is needed, we have provided preliminary results showing that these protein markers may also be clinically useful. We have previously shown that median length CAG number is associated with most active AR (52). Thus, the fact that we find the lowest ALDOB and 4HPPD levels in those subjects having AR CAG repeat length close to median, confirms that the candidate markers identified in the present study are androgen dependent.

A limitation of our study is that the lack of reliable criteria for clinical hypogonadism, which made it impossible to test the power of the new markers in men in whom androgen replacement is needed. Furthermore, the clinical part of the study was limited, because we do not have sufficient information about potential factors influencing the inter- and intra-individual variation in the levels of these proteins and, thereby, their suitability as clinical markers.

Furthermore, we are not reporting absolute values of quantifications for the potential markers, but the relative quantifications for comparing the protein expression between groups. This kind of comparative proteomics is favorable in research studies, in which preliminary results of protein changes between groups are obtained. Also, the sample processing is complicated putting high demands on the lab. In proteomics, there can be a high variation between labs in reporting absolute concentration proteins in plasma, especially when small sample sizes are reported (53). In order to obtain trustworthy absolute concentration ranges or determine the activity level of the enzymes, it is necessary to analyze the potential markers in large cohorts including both healthy subjects and patients.

In this study, we have applied an immunoassay for measuring T levels, although some consider liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) as gold standard in assessment of sex hormone levels. However, worldwide the former is most commonly used for T measurements. Additionally, in prediction of cardiometabolic risk, assessment of T by LC-MS/MS was not shown to be superior to that performed by standard methodology (54).

In conclusion, we have identified three new potential biomarkers of BAA. Those proteins – alone or in combination – are promising as useful parameters in the clinical diagnosis of male hypogonadism and in the prediction of its long-term sequelae, as well as in studying the biology of androgen action. More extensive testing is vital to elucidate their BAA potential, not only in men but also in women and in prepubertal boys.

## Data Availability

The mass spectrometry proteomics data have been deposited to the ProteomeXchange Consortium via the PRIDE partner repository with the dataset identifier PXD024448. Supplementary tables (datasets) and source data can be found on: https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.14875431. Supplementary Figure S1: https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.14876562. R code: https://github.com/indirapla/TP1\_proteins\_marker\_of\_androgen_activity.

[https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.14876562.v1](https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.14876562.v1) 

[https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.14875431.v2](https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.14875431.v2) 

## Data availability

The mass spectrometry proteomics data have been deposited to the ProteomeXchange Consortium via the PRIDE (55) partner repository with the dataset identifier PXD024448.

Supplementary tables (datasets):

[https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.14875431](https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.14875431)

Source data of the Figures can be found on:

[https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.14875431](https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.14875431)

Supplementary Figure S1:

[https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.14876562](https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.14876562)

R code:

[https://github.com/indirapla/TP1\_proteins\_marker\_of\_androgen\_activity](https://github.com/indirapla/TP1\_proteins\_marker_of_androgen_activity)

## Declaration of conflict of interest

The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest that could be perceived as prejudicing the impartiality of the research reported.

## SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL

### Supplementary method description

#### Laboratory tests and dual X-ray absorptiometry

The analysis of the clinical chemistry parameters as well as bone mineral density were conducted as previously described (1) in the study on infertile men. Markers measured in fasting morning plasma samples included: total T, luteinizing hormone (LH), follicle stimulating hormone (FSH), estradiol (E2), glucose, insulin, apolipoprotein A1, and apolipoprotein B. The parameters were analyzed at the Department of clinical chemistry, Skåne University Hospital, Malmö, Sweden. Total testosterone, LH and FSH were measured by electrochemiluminescence immunoassay (ECLIA) and an immunofluorometric method (DELFIA Estradiol, Wallac OY, Finland) was utilized to measure E2. Glucose was measured by an automated hexokinase method and insulin was measured by immunometric sandwich assay. Bone mineral density (BMD, g/cm²) at total hip (TH) and lumbar spine L1–L4 (LS) was measured using dual X-ray absorptiometry.

#### CAG-repeat length

Androgen receptor CAG-repeat length was determined in all the infertile men. For the analysis, DNA was extracted from peripheral leukocytes. The androgen receptor CAG stretch was amplified by polymerase chain reaction (PCR), purified and directly sequenced in a Beckman Coulter CEQ 2000 XL (Beckman Coulter, Bromma, Sweden) as previously described (2).

#### Proteomics experiments

Sigma Aldrich (St. Louis, MO). Modified porcine trypsin was from Promega (Madison, WI), water from Milli-Q Ultrapure Water system (Millipore, Billerica, MA). Water and organic solvents for LC-MS were of LC-MS quality (Merck, Darmstadt, Germany).

The plasma and serum samples from respective cohort (healthy men and infertile patients) were randomized regarding the order before starting sample preparation. Quantitation of total protein content in the samples was performed using the bicinchoninic acid (BCA) assay (3). Following the instructions provided by the manufacturer, the top seven most-abundant proteins (albumin, IgG, IgA, transferrin, haptoglobin, antitrypsin and fibrinogen) were depleted from approximately 10 µL of each sample using a MARS7 column (Agilent, Santa Clara, CA). The buffer was exchanged to 1.6% SDC, 50 mM NH4HCO3 with Amicon ultra-centrifugal filters (0.5 mL, 10 kDa cut-off, Millipore, Tullagreen, Ireland). The disulphide bonds were reduced by adding DTT to a final concentration of 10 mM and incubated 1 h at 37 °C. The free thiol groups were alkylated by adding iodoacetamide to a final concentration of 25 mM, and the reaction proceeded for an additional 30 min at room temperature in darkness (reduction and alkylation occurred in the Amicon filter). The buffer was exchanged to 50 mM NH4HCO3 and the samples were resuspended in 100 µL 50mM NH4HCO3 (30 µg protein after BCA quantitation) and digested with trypsin at an enzyme-to-substrate mass ratio of 1:30 (w/w) for 16 h at 37°C. The remaining SDC was precipitated by adding 20% formic acid prior to filtering the samples through a polypropylene filter plate with a hydrophilic PVDF membrane (mean pore size 0.45 μm, Porvair Filtration Group, Fareham, UK).

A Q-Exactive Plus mass spectrometer connected to an Easy-nLC 1000 liquid chromatography system (Thermo Scientific, San José, CA, USA) was used to analyse the samples for automated Data Dependent Acquisition (DDA) methods. Peptides (2 µL, 1 µg on the column) were loaded onto an Acclaim PepMap 100 precolumn (75 μm × 2 cm, Thermo Scientific, San José, CA, USA) and separated on an easy-Spray column (25 cm × 75 μm i.d., PepMap C18 2 μm, 100 Å) at a flow rate of 300 nL/min and a column temperature of 35°C. Solvent A (0.1% formic acid) and solvent B (0.1% formic acid in acetonitrile) were used to create a nonlinear gradient to elute the peptides (90 min).

The MS1 spectra of the peptides were acquired in the orbitrap mass analyser from *m/z* 400–1600 and a resolution of 70,000 (at *m/z* 200). The target automated gain control (AGC) value and maximum injection time (IT) were 1e6 and 100 ms, respectively. The ten most intense peaks with charge state ≥ 2 were fragmented by higher-energy collisional dissociation (HCD) with 26% normalised collision energy. Tandem mass spectra were acquired in the orbitrap mass analyser at a resolution of 35,000 (at *m/z* 200), a target AGC value of 5e4 and a maximum IT of 100 ms. The underfill ratio was 10% and dynamic exclusion was 45 s. The normalised collision energy was 26%.

Selected proteins from the heatlhy individuals were monitored also in patients by Multiple Reaction Monitoring (MRM) method. A TSQ Quantiva mass spectrometer equipped with an EASY-Spray NG ion source and connected to an EASY n-LC 1000 liquid chromatography system (Thermo Scientific, San José, CA, USA) was used for the MRM method. Peptides (5 µL, 1 µg on the column) were loaded onto an Acclaim PepMap 100 precolumn (100 μm × 2 cm, Thermo Scientific, San José, CA, USA) and separated on an easy-Spray column (15 cm × 75 μm i.d., PepMap C18 3 μm, 100 Å) at a flow rate of 300 nL/min and a column temperature of 35°C. Solvent nonlinear gradient to elute the peptides (60 min). Internal references, isotopically labelled synthetic peptides (UVic-Genome BC Proteomics Centre, BC, Canada) were added in order to determine relative quantifications of proteins. Data was acquired in scheduled MRM mode with 5 min detection windows. SRM transitions were acquired in Q1 and Q3 operated at unit resolution (0.7 full witdth at half maximun, FWHM), the collision gas pressure in Q2 was 1.5 mTorr. The cycle time was 2 s, and calibrated radio frequency (RF) and S-lens values were used. At least three transition per precursor were monitored and in most cases the ratio is reported between the relative total intensities vs the references.

For peptide and protein identification the Proteome Discoverer v2.2 (PD) software (Thermo Scientific, San José, CA) was used. Peptides were identified using SEQUEST HT against UniProt ([http://www.uniprot.org](http://www.uniprot.org)) human database (Human 9606, Reviewed, 20 165) integrated into PD. The search was performed with the following parameters: cysteine carbamidomethylation as a static modification, oxidation of methionine as a dynamic modification, 10 ppm precursor tolerance and 0.02 Da fragment tolerance. Up to one missed cleavage for tryptic peptides was allowed. According to the PD software, the filters applied were high- (FDR<0.01) and medium confidence (FDR<0.05) at peptide- and protein levels, respectively. The peptide and protein quantifications were based on the quantification of MS peptide signals (label-free quantification). Label-free quantification used the Minora Feature Detector node in the processing workflow, and the Precursor Ions Quantifier node and the Feature Mapper in the consensus workflow.

To analyse the MRM data, all MS files were imported into Skyline v3.5(4) (MacCoss Lab Software, Seattle, WA). The peak integration was performed automatically by the software, using Savitzky-Golay smoothing and to confirm the correct peak detection it was in addition, manually inspected. The relative total intensities vs the references (ratios), were reported as expression values. Only the values that passed the inspected intensity selection criteria according to PD or in Skyline were reported.

## Supplementary Statistical analyses

### Identification of candidate marker proteins from chemically castrated men

Proteins identified by mass spectrometry techniques in samples from healthy subjects were pre-processed in Perseus v1.6.7.0 (1) software. Intensities were Log2 transformed to follow a normal distribution and standardized by subtracting the median of its respective sample from each value. The statistical analyses were performed using R software (2, 3) and SPSS Statistics 21.0 (IBM, Somers, IL, USA). Differentially expressed proteins were determined by doing one-way repeated measures ANOVA (R function: ezANOVA{ez}) to reveal overall differences between conditions (normal (A), low (B) and restored (C) T) and differences between individual conditions were detected by performing a post-hoc test based on pairwise t-test (two-tails and paired) (R function: pairwise.t.test{stats}). The ‘pairwise.t.test*’* function utilized the proteins with significant overall changes (ANOVA *p*-value < 0.05) to perform pairwise comparisons between conditions while corrected for multiple pairwise testing. Proteins with adjusted *p*-values (‘*fdr’* method) < 0.05 following the pairwise t-test were considered significant.

Because gonadotropins (FSH, LH) did not change their levels between conditions B and C, while T did recover its value (4), proteins that changed with statistical significance between A-B and recovered their values significantly between B and C were considered mainly influenced by T changes and, hence, were selected for further analyses.

Based on the outcome of the first selection step of the analysis, we performed receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis to select proteins capable to discriminate between normal and low T. Two categories of samples were created: ‘low T’ that included samples evaluated at time point B and ‘normal T’ that included samples evaluated at time point A and C. Although there is no consensus about the threshold for sufficient diagnostic accuracy, the area under the curve (AUC) can be interpreted as the following rough classifying system: > 0.90 = excellent; 0.80 – 0.90 = very good; > 0.70 – 0.80 = good; 0.60 – 0.70 = sufficient and 0.50 – 0.60 = poor (5–7). Consequently, based on the ROC-AUC values, we created two cut-off values to select the final protein biomarkers: a) AUC > 0.80 (i.e. very good) and b) AUC 0.75 – 0.80 (i.e. good) and highly enriched in liver tissues (according to the Human Proteome Map (8) and Kampf C. et. *al*. (9)), which, unlike other organs, appears to be relatively protected from age-related changes (10, 11). The Human Proteome Map tool (8) was used to determine the tissue-specific localization of the proteins.

Because the combination of different markers may improve the discriminative power to diagnose hypogonadism and predict its long term sequelae, proteins selected from the ROC-AUC analysis were included as predictors in a stepwise regression (method: backward) to select the best combination of markers that predict the odds of being low T. Bootstrap resampling with replacement method was applied to assess consistency of predictors selected with the stepwise regression. A new variable called Multi Marker Algorithm (MMA) was derived from the predicted log-odds (of being low T) obtained from a binomial logistic regression analysis, in which the dichotomized variable ‘testosterone level’ (0: normal T (time points A, C) and 1: low T (time point B)) was used as the dependent variable and the intensities of the selected proteins from the stepwise regression were the predictors’ variables. Finally, MMA variable was evaluated together with marker candidates proteins. Subsequently, an ROC analysis was performed based on the predicted values and the Younden index method (12) was used to select the optimal cut-off point for the sensitivity and specificity of each marker. All analyses described in this part were performed in R software and plotted using ggroc{pROC} function.

### Background characteristics of the infertile cohort of patients

To describe background characteristics of the infertile cohort of patients (**Table 1a**), the mean and standard deviation (SD) was calculated for variables that followed a normal distribution or the median and minimum-maximum (min-max) for variables that were not normally distributed (non-Gaussian). The normal distribution was checked by applying a Kolmogorov-Smirnov test.

### Testing of the candidate biomarkers in infertile men

To further perform statistical analyses, the quantified intensities of the candidate biomarkers in infertile men were Log2 transformed to achieve normal distributions. Markers selected from the stepwise regression in the healthy human model were also considered in this cohort to create the MMA variable. In this case, MMA was created to predict the odds of suffering low T or other medical conditions associated with low T levels. Unless other software is specified, the statistical analyzes described in the next steps were performed using R software (2, 3).

### Distinguishing infertile men with different testosterone levels

In order to know if the change in the proteins occur with the change in T as observed in the healthy human model, we created three groups of patients based on total T concentration values commonly described in clinical guidelines (13) to define T deficiency: Group 1 contains patients commonly defined with low T (LT): ≤ 8 nmol/L (n = 22), Group 2 contains patients defined with borderline low T (BL_T): between 8 and 12 nmol/L (n=17), and Group 3 contains patients with normal T (NT): > 12 nmol/L (n = 36). Differences among the three groups of patients were detected by doing a one-way ANOVA per protein (outcome variable: protein intensity) followed by a pairwise analysis that was corrected to control the FDR provoked by multiple pairwise comparisons (Two-stage linear step-up procedure of Benjamini, Krieger and Yekutieli (14), performed in GraphPad Prism software, version 9.00 for Windows, CA, USA). Adjusted p-values < 0.05 were considered significant. An ROC analysis was performed to discriminate the patients with LT from those with BL_T or NT. The same analysis was repeated after excluding the BL_T patients as this group includes males in the gray zone for hypogonadism diagnosis (15–17).

### Distinguishing between men with abnormal cardio-metabolic parameters or reduced bone mineral density

In order to evaluate the diagnostic value of our new protein markers in relation to conditions associated with low T levels, we performed a ROC analysis to discriminate patients with MetS, IR, CVRLP, DM or LBD within the patient cohort using the expression level of the candidate biomarkers and T. Based on the ROC curves, the DeLong’s test (paired) was applied in R (roc.test {pROC} function) to compare the AUCs of the candidate biomarkers vs the AUC of T levels to discriminate the above mentioned pathological conditions.

### Association with Androgen receptor CAG-repeat length

To investigate the androgenic dependence of the levels of the newly defined protein markers, we looked for associations between CAG repeat length and concentration of those markers. The infertile cohort was separated into three groups based on CAG repeat length of the androgen receptor (AR); a group of patients with CAG repeat length 21 and 22 (n=18) was defined as reference group (18–21). Patients with CAG repeat length less than the reference group (< 21) were included in a group (n=26) and patients with CAG repeat length longer than the reference group (>22) made up the third group (n=30). Using the softwere GraphPad Prism version 9.0.0 for Windows (CA, USA), a one-way ANOVA followed by a pairwise test (two-stage linear step-up procedure of Benjamini, Krieger and Yekutieli (14)) which controls FDR for multiple pairwise comparison was conducted and adjusted p-values < 0.05 were considered significant.

## Supplementary Figure

![](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2021/11/14/2021.11.12.21266270/F6/graphic-10.medium.gif)

[](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/11/14/2021.11.12.21266270/F6/graphic-10)

![](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2021/11/14/2021.11.12.21266270/F6/graphic-11.medium.gif)

[](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/11/14/2021.11.12.21266270/F6/graphic-11)

Fig. S1. 
Boxplots based on the Log2 intensities of the differenciatlly expressed proteins. The healthy human model (i.e. castrated men).

## Supplementary tables

View this table:
[Table S1](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/11/14/2021.11.12.21266270/T5)

Table S1 
Metabolic syndrome criteria (NCEP, 2002)

View this table:
[Table S2](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/11/14/2021.11.12.21266270/T6)

Table S2 
Significant proteins selected in the healthy human model from Step 1 and 2.

## Footnotes

*   *† The authors share the first and last positions.

*   **Funding**: The work was supported by ReproUnion 2.0 (grant no 20201846), which is funded by the Interreg V EU program.

*   Received November 12, 2021.
*   Revision received November 12, 2021.
*   Accepted November 14, 2021.


*   © 2021, Posted by Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory

This pre-print is available under a Creative Commons License (Attribution 4.0 International), CC BY 4.0, as described at [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/](http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)

## References

1.  1.Traish AM, Miner MM, Morgentaler A, Zitzmann M. Testosterone deficiency. Am J Med. 2011;124(7):578–87.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/j.amjmed.2010.12.027&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=21683825&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2021%2F11%2F14%2F2021.11.12.21266270.atom) 

2.  2.Zitzmann M. The Role of the CAG Repeat Androgen Receptor Polymorphism in Andrology. In: Advances in the Management of Testosterone Deficiency. Basel: KARGER; 2008. p. 52–61.
    
    

3.  3.Furuya K, Yamamoto N, Ohyabu Y, Morikyu T, Ishige H, Albers M, et al. Mechanism of the tissue-specific action of the selective androgen receptor modulator s-101479. Biol Pharm Bull. 2013 Mar;36(3):442–51.
    
    

4.  4.Miner M, Barkin J, Rosenberg MT. Testosterone deficiency: myth, facts, and controversy. Can J Urol. 2014 Jun;21 Suppl 2(3):39–54.
    
    

5.  5.Arver S, Lehtihet M. Current guidelines for the diagnosis of testosterone deficiency. Vol. 37, Frontiers of Hormone Research. Front Horm Res; 2009. p. 5–20.
    
    

6.  6.Diaz-Arjonilla M, Schwarcz M, Swerdloff RS, Wang C. Obesity, low testosterone levels and erectile dysfunction. Vol. 21, International Journal of Impotence Research. Int J Impot Res; 2009. p. 89–98.
    
    

7.  7.Muraleedharan V, Jones TH. Testosterone and mortality. Clin Endocrinol (Oxf). 2014;81(4):477–87.
    
    

8.  8.Sahlin KB, Pla I, Sanchez A, Pawłowski K, Leijonhufvud I, Appelqvist R, et al. Short-term effect of pharmacologically induced alterations in testosterone levels on common blood biomarkers in a controlled healthy human model. Scand J Clin Lab Invest. 2019 Nov 18;80(1):1–7.
    
    

9.  9.Pla I, Sahlin KB, Pawłowski K, Appelqvist R, Marko-Varga G, Sanchez A, et al. A pilot proteomic study reveals different protein profiles related to testosterone and gonadotropin changes in a short-term controlled healthy human cohort. J Proteomics. 2020 May 30;220:1–3.
    
    

10. 10.Bobjer J, Bogefors K, Isaksson S, Leijonhufvud I, Åkesson K, Giwercman YL, et al. High prevalence of hypogonadism and associated impaired metabolic and bone mineral status in subfertile men. Clin Endocrinol (Oxf). 2016 Aug;85(2):189–95.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1111/cen.13038&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=26857217&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2021%2F11%2F14%2F2021.11.12.21266270.atom) 

11. 11.Wickramasinghe VP, Arambepola C, Bandara P, Abeysekera M, Kuruppu S, Dilshan P, et al. Insulin resistance in a cohort of 5-15 year old children in urban Sri Lanka. BMC Res Notes. 2017 Jul;10(1).
    
    

12. 12.Walldius G, Jungner I. Apolipoprotein B and apolipoprotein A-I: Risk indicators of coronary heart disease and targets for lipid-modifying therapy. Vol. 255, Journal of Internal Medicine. 2004. p. 188–205.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1046/j.1365-2796.2003.01276.x&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=14746556&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2021%2F11%2F14%2F2021.11.12.21266270.atom) 
    
    [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000188411100004&link_type=ISI) 

13. 13.Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes-2010. 2010;
    
    

14. 14.Isaksson S, Bogefors K, Åkesson K, Egund L, Bobjer J, Leijonhufvud I, et al. Risk of low bone mineral density in testicular germ cell cancer survivors: association with hypogonadism and treatment modality. Andrology. 2017;5(5):898–904.
    
    

15. 15.Lundin KB, Giwercman A, Richthoff J, Abrahamsson PA, Giwercman YL. No association between mutations in the human androgen receptor GGN repeat and inter-sex conditions. Mol Hum Reprod. 2003;9(7–8):375–9.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1093/molehr/gag048&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=12802043&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2021%2F11%2F14%2F2021.11.12.21266270.atom) 
    
    [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000183952000001&link_type=ISI) 

16. 16.Smith PK, Krohn RI, Hermanson GT, Mallia AK, Gartner FH, Provenzano MD, et al. Measurement of protein using bicinchoninic acid. Anal Biochem. 1985;150(1):76–85.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/0003-2697(85)90442-7&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=3843705&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2021%2F11%2F14%2F2021.11.12.21266270.atom) 
    
    [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=A1985ASJ2400010&link_type=ISI) 

17. 17.MacLean B, Tomazela DM, Shulman N, Chambers M, Finney GL, Frewen B, et al. Skyline: an open source document editor for creating and analyzing targeted proteomics experiments. Bioinformatics. 2010 Apr 1;26(7):966–8.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1093/bioinformatics/btq054&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=20147306&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2021%2F11%2F14%2F2021.11.12.21266270.atom) 
    
    [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000276045800019&link_type=ISI) 

18. 18.Tyanova S, Temu T, Sinitcyn P, Carlson A, Hein MY, Geiger T, et al. The Perseus computational platform for comprehensive analysis of (prote)omics data. Nat Methods. 2016 Sep 27;13(9):731–40.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1038/nmeth.3901&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=27348712&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2021%2F11%2F14%2F2021.11.12.21266270.atom) 

19. 19.RStudio Team. RStudio: Integrated Development for R. RStudio. Boston; 2016.
    
    

20. 20.Team RC. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing. 2016.
    
    

21. 21.Marshall KW, Mohr S, Khettabi F El, Nossova N, Chao S, Bao W, et al. A blood-based biomarker panel for stratifying current risk for colorectal cancer. Int J Cancer. 2009 Mar;126(5):1177–86.
    
    

22. 22.Bowers AJ, Zhou X. Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) Area Under the Curve (AUC): A Diagnostic Measure for Evaluating the Accuracy of Predictors of Education Outcomes. J Educ Students Placed Risk. 2019 Jan;24(1):20–46.
    
    

23. 23.Šimundić A-MM. Measures of Diagnostic Accuracy: Basic Definitions. Ejifcc. 2009 Jan;19(4):203–11.
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=27683318&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2021%2F11%2F14%2F2021.11.12.21266270.atom) 

24. 24.Kim M-SS, Pinto SM, Getnet D, Nirujogi RS, Manda SS, Chaerkady R, et al. A draft map of the human proteome. Nature. 2014 May 29;509(7502):575–81.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1038/nature13302&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=24870542&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2021%2F11%2F14%2F2021.11.12.21266270.atom) 
    
    [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000336457100040&link_type=ISI) 

25. 25.Kampf C, Mardinoglu A, Fagerberg L, Hallström BM, Edlund K, Lundberg E, et al. The human liver-specific proteome defined by transcriptomics and antibody-based profiling. FASEB J • Res Commun.
    
    

26. 26.Kholodenko I V, Yarygin KN. Cellular Mechanisms of Liver Regeneration and Cell-Based Therapies of Liver Diseases. Biomed Res Int. 2017;v.2017:17 pages.
    
    

27. 27.Schmucker DL, Sanchez H. Liver Regeneration and Aging: A Current Perspective. Curr Gerontol Geriatr Res. 2011;2011.
    
    

28. 28.Youden WJ. Index for rating diagnostic tests. Cancer. 1950 Jan;3(1):32–5.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1002/1097-0142(1950)3:1<32::AID-CNCR2820030106>3.0.CO;2-3&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=15405679&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2021%2F11%2F14%2F2021.11.12.21266270.atom) 
    
    [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=A1950UD97200004&link_type=ISI) 

29. 29.Benjamini Y, Krieger AM, Yekutieli D. Adaptive linear step-up procedures that control the false discovery rate. Biometrika. 2006 Sep 1;93(3):491–507.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1093/biomet/93.3.491&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000241271700001&link_type=ISI) 

30. 30.Chan I, Tang Fui MN, Zajac JD, Grossmann M. Assessment and management of male androgen disorders: An update. Aust Fam Physician. 2014;43(5):277–82.
    
    

31. 31.Lunenfeld B, Arver S, Moncada I, Rees DA, Schulte HM. How to help the aging male? Current approaches to hypogonadism in primary care. Vol. 15, Aging Male. Aging Male; 2012. p. 187–97.
    
    

32. 32.Zitzmann M, Faber S, Nieschlag E. Association of specific symptoms and metabolic risks with serum testosterone in older men. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2006;91(11):4335–43.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1210/jc.2006-0401&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=16926258&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2021%2F11%2F14%2F2021.11.12.21266270.atom) 
    
    [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000241816300023&link_type=ISI) 

33. 33.Casella R, Maduro MR, Lipshultz LI, Lamb DJ. Significance of the polyglutamine tract polymorphism in the androgen receptor. Urology. 2001;58(5):651–6.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/S0090-4295(01)01401-7&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=11711330&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2021%2F11%2F14%2F2021.11.12.21266270.atom) 
    
    [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000172331000003&link_type=ISI) 

34. 34.Stanworth RD, Kapoor D, Channer KS, Jones TH. Androgen receptor CAG repeat polymorphism is associated with serum testosterone levels, obesity and serum leptin in men with type 2 diabetes. Eur J Endocrinol. 2008;159(6):739–46.
    
    [Abstract/FREE Full Text](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiQUJTVCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6MzoiZWplIjtzOjU6InJlc2lkIjtzOjk6IjE1OS82LzczOSI7czo0OiJhdG9tIjtzOjUwOiIvbWVkcnhpdi9lYXJseS8yMDIxLzExLzE0LzIwMjEuMTEuMTIuMjEyNjYyNzAuYXRvbSI7fXM6ODoiZnJhZ21lbnQiO3M6MDoiIjt9) 

35. 35.Kim JW, Bae YD, Ahn ST, Kim JW, Kim JJ, Moon DG. Androgen Receptor CAG Repeat Length as a Risk Factor of Late-Onset Hypogonadism in a Korean Male Population. Sex Med. 2018 Sep 1;6(3):203–9.
    
    

36. 36.Ferlin A, Bartoloni L, Rizzo G, Roverato A, Garolla A, Foresta C. Androgen receptor gene CAG and GGC repeat lengths in idiopathic male infertility. Mol Hum Reprod. 2004;10(6):417–21.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1093/molehr/gah054&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=15044606&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2021%2F11%2F14%2F2021.11.12.21266270.atom) 
    
    [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000221295600006&link_type=ISI) 

37. 37.Munnich A, Besmond C, Darquy S, Reach G, Vaulont S, Dreyfus JC, et al. Dietary and hormonal regulation of aldolase B gene expression. J Clin Invest. 1985;75(3):1045–52.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1172/JCI111766&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=2984252&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2021%2F11%2F14%2F2021.11.12.21266270.atom) 

38. 38.Hannou SA, Haslam DE, McKeown NM, Herman MA. Fructose metabolism and metabolic disease. Vol. 128, Journal of Clinical Investigation. American Society for Clinical Investigation; 2018. p. 545–55.
    
    

39. 39.Gerst F, Jaghutriz BA, Staiger H, Schulte AM, Lorza-Gil E, Kaiser G, et al. The expression of aldolase B in islets is negatively associated with insulin secretion in humans. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2018;103(12):4373–83.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1210/jc.2018-00791&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=30202879&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2021%2F11%2F14%2F2021.11.12.21266270.atom) 

40. 40.Bo D, Jiang X, Liu G, Xu F, Hu R, Wassie T, et al. Multipathway synergy promotes testicular transition from growth to spermatogenesis in early-puberty goats. BMC Genomics. 2020 May 25;21(1).
    
    

41. 41.Hager SE, Gregerman RI, Kox WE. p-Hydroxyphenylpyruvate oxidase of liver. J Biol Chem. 1957;225(2):935–47.
    
    [FREE Full Text](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6MzoiUERGIjtzOjExOiJqb3VybmFsQ29kZSI7czozOiJqYmMiO3M6NToicmVzaWQiO3M6OToiMjI1LzIvOTM1IjtzOjQ6ImF0b20iO3M6NTA6Ii9tZWRyeGl2L2Vhcmx5LzIwMjEvMTEvMTQvMjAyMS4xMS4xMi4yMTI2NjI3MC5hdG9tIjt9czo4OiJmcmFnbWVudCI7czowOiIiO30=) 

42. 42.Barroso F, Correia J, Bandeira A, Carmona C, Vilarinho L, Almeida M, et al. Tyrosinemia type III: A case report of siblings and literature review. Revista Paulista de Pediatria. 2020.
    
    

43. 43.Wang TJ, Larson MG, Vasan RS, Cheng S, Rhee EP, McCabe E, et al. Metabolite profiles and the risk of developing diabetes. Nat Med. 2011 Apr;17(4):448–53.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1038/nm.2307&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=21423183&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2021%2F11%2F14%2F2021.11.12.21266270.atom) 
    
    [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000289245100035&link_type=ISI) 

44. 44.Fanelli G, Gevi F, Belardo A, Zolla L. Metabolic patterns in insulin-sensitive male hypogonadism article /101/58. Cell Death Dis. 2018 Jun 1;9(6).
    
    

45. 45.Guasch-Ferré M, Hruby A, Toledo E, Clish CB, Martínez-González MA, Salas-Salvadó J, et al. Metabolomics in prediabetes and diabetes: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Diabetes Care. 2016.
    
    

46. 46.Stephens SBZ, Rouse ML, Tolson KP, Liaw RB, Parra RA, Chahal N, et al. Effects of selective deletion of tyrosine hydroxylase from kisspeptin cells on puberty and reproduction in male and female mice. eNeuro. 2017;
    
    

47. 47.Bach LA, Fu P, Yang Z. Insulin-like growth factor-binding protein-6 and cancer. Clinical Science. 2013.
    
    

48. 48.Rooman RPA,  Op De Beeck L, Martin M, van Doorn J, Mohan S, Du Caju MVL. Ethinylestradiol and testosterone have divergent effects on circulating IGF system components in adolescents with constitutional tall stature. Eur J Endocrinol. 2005 Apr;152(4):597–604.
    
    [Abstract/FREE Full Text](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiQUJTVCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6MzoiZWplIjtzOjU6InJlc2lkIjtzOjk6IjE1Mi80LzU5NyI7czo0OiJhdG9tIjtzOjUwOiIvbWVkcnhpdi9lYXJseS8yMDIxLzExLzE0LzIwMjEuMTEuMTIuMjEyNjYyNzAuYXRvbSI7fXM6ODoiZnJhZ21lbnQiO3M6MDoiIjt9) 

49. 49.Huang G, Rocha G V., Pencina KM, Cox K, Krishnan V, Henriksen K, et al. Circulating Biomarkers of Testosterone’s Anabolic Effects on Fat-Free Mass. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2019 Apr 11;104(9):3768–78.
    
    

50. 50.Anderson NL. The Clinical Plasma Proteome: A Survey of Clinical Assays for Proteins in Plasma and Serum. Clin Chem. 2010 Feb;56(2):177–85.
    
    [Abstract/FREE Full Text](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiQUJTVCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6ODoiY2xpbmNoZW0iO3M6NToicmVzaWQiO3M6ODoiNTYvMi8xNzciO3M6NDoiYXRvbSI7czo1MDoiL21lZHJ4aXYvZWFybHkvMjAyMS8xMS8xNC8yMDIxLjExLjEyLjIxMjY2MjcwLmF0b20iO31zOjg6ImZyYWdtZW50IjtzOjA6IiI7fQ==) 

51. 51.Tu C, Rudnick PA, Martinez MY, Cheek KL, Stein SE, Slebos RJC, et al. Depletion of abundant plasma proteins and limitations of plasma proteomics. J Proteome Res. 2010 Oct;9(10):4982–91.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1021/pr100646w&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=20677825&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2021%2F11%2F14%2F2021.11.12.21266270.atom) 
    
    [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000282257800011&link_type=ISI) 

52. 52.Nenonen H, Björk C, Skjaerpe PA, Giwercman A, Rylander L, Svartberg J, et al. CAG repeat number is not inversely associated with androgen receptor activity in vitro. Mol Hum Reprod. 2009 Nov;16(3):153–7.
    
    

53. 53.Nanjappa V, Thomas JK, Marimuthu A, Muthusamy B, Radhakrishnan A, Sharma R, et al. Plasma Proteome Database as a resource for proteomics research: 2014 update. Nucleic Acids Res. 2014 Jan;42(D1):D959–65.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1093/nar/gkt1251&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=24304897&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2021%2F11%2F14%2F2021.11.12.21266270.atom) 
    
    [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000331139800141&link_type=ISI) 

54. 54.Haring R, Baumeister SE, Nauck M, Volzke H, Keevil BG, Brabant G, et al. Testosterone and cardiometabolic risk in the general population - the impact of measurement method on risk associations: A comparative study between immunoassay and mass spectrometry. Eur J Endocrinol. 2013 Oct;169(4):463–70.
    
    [Abstract/FREE Full Text](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiQUJTVCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6MzoiZWplIjtzOjU6InJlc2lkIjtzOjk6IjE2OS80LzQ2MyI7czo0OiJhdG9tIjtzOjUwOiIvbWVkcnhpdi9lYXJseS8yMDIxLzExLzE0LzIwMjEuMTEuMTIuMjEyNjYyNzAuYXRvbSI7fXM6ODoiZnJhZ21lbnQiO3M6MDoiIjt9) 

55. 55.Perez-Riverol Y, Csordas A, Bai J, Bernal-Llinares M, Hewapathirana S, Kundu DJ, et al. The PRIDE database and related tools and resources in 2019: improving support for quantification data. Nucleic Acids Res. 2019 Jan 8;47(D1):D442–50.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1093/nar/gky1106&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=30395289&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2021%2F11%2F14%2F2021.11.12.21266270.atom) 

## References (Supplementary methods)

1.  1.Bobjer J, Bogefors K, Isaksson S, Leijonhufvud I, Åkesson K, Giwercman YL, et al. High prevalence of hypogonadism and associated impaired metabolic and bone mineral status in subfertile men. Clin Endocrinol (Oxf) [Internet]. 2016 Aug [cited 2018 Nov 26];85(2):189–95. Available from: [http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26857217](http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26857217)
    
    

2.  2.Lundin KB, Giwercman A, Richthoff J, Abrahamsson PA, Giwercman YL. No association between mutations in the human androgen receptor GGN repeat and inter-sex conditions. Mol Hum Reprod [Internet]. 2003 [cited 2021 Jan 14];9(7–8):375–9. Available from: [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/12802043/](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/12802043/)
    
    

3.  3.Smith PK, Krohn RI, Hermanson GT, Mallia AK, Gartner FH, Provenzano MD, et al. Measurement of protein using bicinchoninic acid. Anal Biochem. 1985;150(1):76–85.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/0003-2697(85)90442-7&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=3843705&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2021%2F11%2F14%2F2021.11.12.21266270.atom) 
    
    [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=A1985ASJ2400010&link_type=ISI) 

4.  4.MacLean B, Tomazela DM, Shulman N, Chambers M, Finney GL, Frewen B, et al. Skyline: an open source document editor for creating and analyzing targeted proteomics experiments. Bioinformatics. 2010 Apr;26(7):966–8.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1093/bioinformatics/btq054&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=20147306&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2021%2F11%2F14%2F2021.11.12.21266270.atom) 
    
    [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000276045800019&link_type=ISI) 

## References (Supplementary statistics)

1.  1.Tyanova S, Temu T, Sinitcyn P, Carlson A, Hein MY, Geiger T, et al. The Perseus computational platform for comprehensive analysis of (prote)omics data [Internet]. Vol. 13, Nature Methods. Nature Publishing Group; 2016 [cited 2020 Nov 20]. p. 731–40. Available from: [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27348712/](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27348712/)
    
    

2.  2.RStudio Team. RStudio: Integrated Development for R. RStudio. Boston; 2016.
    
    

3.  3.Team RC. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing. 2016.
    
    

4.  4.Sahlin KB, Pla I, Sanchez A, Pawłowski K, Leijonhufvud I, Appelqvist R, et al. Short-term effect of pharmacologically induced alterations in testosterone levels on common blood biomarkers in a controlled healthy human model. Scand J Clin Lab Invest. 2019 Nov;1–7.
    
    

5.  5.Marshall KW, Mohr S,  Khettabi F El, Nossova N, Chao S, Bao W, et al. A blood-based biomarker panel for stratifying current risk for colorectal cancer. Int J Cancer [Internet]. 2009 Mar 1 [cited 2020 Nov 20];126(5):NA-NA. Available from: [http://doi.wiley.com/10.1002/ijc.24910](http://doi.wiley.com/10.1002/ijc.24910)
    
    

6.  6.Bowers AJ, Zhou X. Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) Area Under the Curve (AUC): A Diagnostic Measure for Evaluating the Accuracy of Predictors of Education Outcomes. J Educ Students Placed Risk [Internet]. 2019 Jan 2 [cited 2020 Nov 20];24(1):20–46. Available from: [https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/10824669.2018.1523734](https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/10824669.2018.1523734)
    
    

7.  7.Šimundić A-M. Measures of diagnostic accuracy: basic definitions.
    
    

8.  8.Kim MS, Pinto SM, Getnet D, Nirujogi RS, Manda SS, Chaerkady R, et al. A draft map of the human proteome. Nature [Internet]. 2014 [cited 2020 Dec 4];509(7502):575–81. Available from: [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24870542/](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24870542/)
    
    

9.  9.Kampf C, Mardinoglu A, Fagerberg L, Hallström BM, Edlund K, Lundberg E, et al. The human liver-specific proteome defined by transcriptomics and antibody-based profiling. FASEB J [Internet]. 2014 Jul 1 [cited 2021 Apr 29];28(7):2901–14. Available from: [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24648543/](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24648543/)
    
    

10. 10.Kholodenko I V, Yarygin KN. Cellular Mechanisms of Liver Regeneration and Cell-Based Therapies of Liver Diseases. 2017;
    
    

11. 11.Schmucker DL, Sanchez H. Liver Regeneration and Aging: A Current Perspective. Curr Gerontol Geriatr Res. 2011;2011.
    
    

12. 12.Youden WJ. Index for rating diagnostic tests. Cancer [Internet]. 1950 Jan 1 [cited 2020 Nov 20];3(1):32–5. Available from:[https://acsjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/1097-0142%281950%293%3A1%3C32%3A%3AAID-CNCR2820030106%3E3.0.CO%3B2-3](https://acsjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/1097-0142%281950%293%3A1%3C32%3A%3AAID-CNCR2820030106%3E3.0.CO%3B2-3)
    
    

13. 13.Arver S, Lehtihet M. Current guidelines for the diagnosis of testosterone deficiency [Internet]. Vol. 37, Frontiers of Hormone Research. Front Horm Res; 2009 [cited 2020 Nov 19]. p. 5–20. Available from: [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19011285/](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19011285/)
    
    

14. 14.Benjamini Y, Krieger AM, Yekutieli D. Adaptive linear step-up procedures that control the false discovery rate. Biometrika. 2006 Sep;93(3):491–507.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1093/biomet/93.3.491&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000241271700001&link_type=ISI) 

15. 15.Chan I, Fui MN, Zajac J, Grossmann M. Assessment and management of male androgen disorders: an update - PubMed [Internet]. Aust Fam Physician. [cited 2020 Nov 20]. Available from: [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24791767/](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24791767/)
    
    

16. 16.Lunenfeld B, Arver S, Moncada I, Rees DA, Schulte HM. How to help the aging male? Current approaches to hypogonadism in primary care [Internet]. Vol. 15, Aging Male. Aging Male; 2012 [cited 2020 Nov 20]. p. 187–97. Available from: [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23067307/](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23067307/)
    
    

17. 17.Zitzmann M, Faber S, Nieschlag E. Association of specific symptoms and metabolic risks with serum testosterone in older men. J Clin Endocrinol Metab [Internet]. 2006 [cited 2020 Nov 20];91(11):4335–43. Available from: [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16926258/](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16926258/)
    
    

18. 18.Casella R, Maduro MR, Lipshultz LI, Lamb DJ. Significance of the polyglutamine tract polymorphism in the androgen receptor. Urology. 2001;58(5):651–6.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/S0090-4295(01)01401-7&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=11711330&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2021%2F11%2F14%2F2021.11.12.21266270.atom) 
    
    [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000172331000003&link_type=ISI) 

19. 19.Stanworth RD, Kapoor D, Channer KS, Jones TH. Androgen receptor CAG repeat polymorphism is associated with serum testosterone levels, obesity and serum leptin in men with type 2 diabetes. Eur J Endocrinol. 2008;159(6):739–46.
    
    [Abstract/FREE Full Text](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiQUJTVCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6MzoiZWplIjtzOjU6InJlc2lkIjtzOjk6IjE1OS82LzczOSI7czo0OiJhdG9tIjtzOjUwOiIvbWVkcnhpdi9lYXJseS8yMDIxLzExLzE0LzIwMjEuMTEuMTIuMjEyNjYyNzAuYXRvbSI7fXM6ODoiZnJhZ21lbnQiO3M6MDoiIjt9) 

20. 20.Kim JW, Bae YD, Ahn ST, Kim JW, Kim JJ, Moon DG. Androgen Receptor CAG Repeat Length as a Risk Factor of Late-Onset Hypogonadism in a Korean Male Population. Sex Med [Internet]. 2018;6(3):203–9. Available from: [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esxm.2018.04.002](https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esxm.2018.04.002)
    
    

21. 21.Ferlin A, Bartoloni L, Rizzo G, Roverato A, Garolla A, Foresta C. Androgen receptor gene CAG and GGC repeat lengths in idiopathic male infertility. Mol Hum Reprod. 2004;10(6):417–21.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1093/molehr/gah054&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=15044606&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2021%2F11%2F14%2F2021.11.12.21266270.atom) 
    
    [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000221295600006&link_type=ISI)