Vol. 280, Issue 6, R1755-R1771, June 2001
Hypothesis testing of the aging male gonadal axis via a
biomathematical construct
Daniel M.
Keenan1 and
Johannes D.
Veldhuis2,3
1 Department of Statistics and 2 Center for
Biomathematical Technology, University of Virginia, Charlottesville
22903; and 3 Division of Endocrinology, Department of Internal
Medicine, Health Sciences Center, General Clinical Research Center,
Charlottesville, Virginia 22908
 |
ABSTRACT |
Neuroendocrine axes are feedback- and
feedforward-coupled dynamic ensembles. Disruption of selected pathways
in such networklike organizations may explicate loss of orderly
hormonal output as observed in aging. To test this notion more
explicitly, we implemented an earlier computer-assisted biomathematical
model of the interlinked male hypothalamo [gonadotropin-releasing
hormone (GnRH)]-pituitary [luteinizing hormone, (LH)]-testicular
[Leydig cell testosterone (Te)] axis (Am J Physiol
Endocrinol Metab Physiol 275: E157-E176, 1988; Keenan D., W. Sun, and J. D. Veldhuis, SIAM J Appl Math 61:
934-965, 2000). Thereby, we appraise mechanistic hypotheses for
more disorderly LH and Te secretion in aging men. We compare model
predictions with monitored abnormalities in the older male, namely,
irregular patterns of individual and synchronous LH and Te release,
reduced 24-h rhythmic Te output, and variably elevated LH secretion.
Among the mechanisms examined, the most parsimonious aging hypothesis
would entail impaired LH feedforward on Te without or with attenuated
Te feedback on GnRH/LH secretion. This investigative strategy should
aid in exploring new postulates of disrupted feedback networks in pathophysiology.
gonadotropin-releasing hormone; luteinizing hormone; Leydig cell
testosterone
 |
INTRODUCTION |
IN AGING PRIMATES,
reproductive quiescence emerges in midlife in the female, and
reproductive potential declines during the later lifetime in the male
(1, 4, 5, 8, 26, 31). Clinical analyses in aging men have
disclosed progressive age-related decrements in testosterone's
bioavailability (so called andropause) and somatotropic-axis output (so
called somatopause) (4, 5, 30, 35). The pathophysiological
mechanisms underlying waning activity of the gonadotropic and
somatotropic axes are not known but likely contribute to the frailty
that accompanies aging (21-24).
Dynamic properties of the aging male reproductive axis show evident
disruption before any reproductive loss occurs (36). For
example, the coordinate release of luteinizing hormone (LH) and
testostrone becomes markedly asynchronous in healthy older men despite
normal (young adult) serum concentrations of LH and testostrone
(12, 16, 27). The joint secretion patterns of ACTH and
cortisol are likewise disturbed in aging humans despite normal daily
secretion rates of both hormones (19). These data suggest
the postulate that intra-axis feedback-dependent (network level)
control of neurohormone secretion is impaired in the earlier stages of aging.
Deterioration of bihormonal secretory synchrony in a neuroendocrine
ensemble (above) could denote regulatory defects in interglandular pathway communication (3-5, 18, 20, 32, 34, 36).
However, interpreting or predicting a priori the precise site, nature, relevance, and/or magnitude of a postulated linkage defect in a complex
interconnected axis (6, 7, 26) is difficult on intuitive
grounds alone. Here, we implement an earlier computer-assisted biomathematical model (6, 7, 26) to test selected
hypotheses for disrupted control of the GnRH-LH-testesterone feedback
axis in the healthy aging male.
 |
METHODS |
Introduction
The male reproductive axis in a simplified construct
consists of three primary control signals: hypothalamic
gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH), pituitary LH, and gonadal
testosterone (Te). Dose-response relationships in the male system have
been largely defined for individual nodes acting in isolation [e.g.,
GnRH's stimulation of LH secretion, LH's dose-dependent stimulation
of Te secretion (26), etc.]. However, the implicitly
dynamic nature of this network arises from time-lagged feedback and
feedforward interactions among all three interconnected loci (6,
7). These connections are illustrated schematically in Fig.
1. Here, we use this biomathematical notion to compare various hypotheses of feedback and/or feedforward modifications due to aging.

View larger version (29K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 1.
Schematized interactive model of the ensemble male
gonadotropin-releasing hormone-luteinizing hormone-testicular
(GnRH-LH-Te) axis, with feedforward (double arrows) and
feedback (single arrows) as simulated here. Dashed lines denote
hypotheses of aging-associated pathway disruption explored here
(METHODS). sec, Secretion.
|
|
As formalized in detail in Refs. 6 and 7, we will denote the
three primary hormone concentrations [GnRH (G), LH (L), and Te] in
blood as: X(t) = [XG(t),
XL(t), XTe(t)] and
their respective rates of secretion as: Z(t) = [ZG(t), ZL(t),
ZTe(t)]. Assuming simple conservation of
mass, we begin with
|
(1)
|
The rate of hormone elimination is represented as proportional
to its concentration [
X(t)]. This has been
experimentally observed by injecting purified hormone into the blood
and monitoring its exponential disappearance rates in hormone-deficient
volunteers (26).
An earlier more comprehensive formalism (6, 7) relates how
each rate of secretion: ZG(t),
ZL(t), ZTe(t)
depends on the history of relevant hormone concentrations within the
interconnected feedback system {[XG(s),
XL(s), XTe(s)], s
t}.
We assume that GnRH feedforward on LH, LH feedforward on Te, and
Te feedback on GnRH or LH are exerted via a time-delayed (time delay
= [l1, l2]) and time-averaged
effect of the relevant hormone concentration (6, 7). Thus,
at time t and 0 < t
l2
t
l1 <
, the feedback signal
intensity (i.e.,

denotes a time average) is
We consider that feedback is exerted on the relevant control
nodes (system components) in Fig. 1 via putatively monotonic dose-response logistic functions (denoted by H(·)'s); see
Fig. 2.
For the simplified male
GnRH-LH-Te axis, we allow four major feedback/feedforward dose-response
functions: H1,2(·), which describes the GnRH
pulse firing rate as a joint function of Te (feedback) and GnRH
(autofeedback) concentration, H3(·), which gives
the rate of GnRH pulse-mass accumulation as a function of Te (feedback) concentration, H4(·), which defines the rate of
Te secretion as a function of LH (feedforward) concentration, and,
H5,6( · , · ) for the rate of
accumulation of the LH pulse mass as a function of Te (feedback) and
GnRH (feedforward); see Figs. 1 and 2. The subscripts correspond to
feedback/feedforward relationships [(1)-(7)] given in below; the
time delays for the jth relationship are denoted as
(lj,1, lj,2).


View larger version (77K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 2.
Dose-response feedback and feedforward (interface)
functions embedded in the male interlinked multinodal GnRH-LH-Te axis.
H interface functions for experiments 0-2
(A) and experiments 3-5 (B). Each
experimental condition (dashed curves) corresponds to 2 rows displaying
the 4 H dose-response functions: e.g., experiment 0, the
top 2 rows of A; experiment 5, the
bottom 2 rows of B. The normal (experiment
0) H functions are presented for comparison in each experimental
panel as continuous curves. The 4 H dose-response functions are Te and
GnRH's bivariate inhibition of the pulsatile GnRH firing rate (by
respectively heterologous and homologous negative feedback)
[H1,2( · , · )], Te's inhibition of
rate of accumulation of GnRH pulse mass [H3(·)], Te and
GnRH's joint (respectively, negative and positive) control of the rate
of accumulation of LH pulse mass [H5,6( · , · )], and LH's stimulation of the rate of Te secretion
[H4(·)]. Experiments 0-5 are
experiment 0, normal young male; experiment 1, heightened Te feedback on GnRH and LH; experiment 2, attentuated LH feedforward on Te (A); experiment
3, heightened GnRH feedforward on LH; experiment 4, reduced Te feedback, triggering accelerated GnRH pulse frequency, and
decreased GnRH pulse mass; and, experiment 5 combined
experiments 1 and 2 (B). secr,
Secretion.
|
|
GnRH-LH-Te Feedback/Feedforward Interactions
Hypothalamus: Te and GnRH Feedback [interactions (1)-(3)]
on GnRH.
The blood Te concentration (ng/dl) is assumed to exert a negative
time-delayed (nominally 80-90 min) feedback (11, 12), and GnRH concentration (pg/ml) a (auto) negative time-delayed (approximately 1-1.5 min) feedback (2), on the GnRH
pulse firing rate (given in pulses/day) (see Figs. 1 and 2)
|
(2)
|
The Te concentration (ng/dl) is allowed to exert negative and
time-delayed (e.g. approximately 80-90 min) (26)
feedback on the rate of GnRH hormone synthesis
(pg · ml
1 · h
1) (see Figs.
1 and 2)
|
(3)
|
Testes: LH feedforward [interaction (4)] on Te secretion.
The blood LH concentration (IU/l) is viewed as producing a positive
time-delayed (~20-30 min) (12, 26) feedforward
action on Te rate of hormone synthesis
(ng · dl
1 · h
1) (see Figs.
1 and 2)
|
(4)
|
Pituitary: GnRH feedforward and Te feedback [interactions
(5)-(7)] on LH secretion.
The portal GnRH concentration (pg/ml) is presented as a positive
time-delayed (~0.5-1.5 min) feedforward signal driving the rate
of pituitary LH hormone (mass) synthesis
(IU · l
1 · h
1)
(2) (see Figs. 1 and 2). Conversely, the plasma Te
concentration (ng/dl) exerts a negative time-delayed (nominally
80-90 min) feedback on rate of LH hormone synthesis
(IU · l
1 · h
1)
(26).
|
(5)
|
where T
,
T
, ... are the LH pulse times,
and
The function
(·) is a sum of exponentials, which thus describes the
expected cascade of cellular reactions (2nd and 3rd messengers, etc.)
initiated by the GnRH signal acting on LH synthesis and storage for
release (7).
The times of pituitary LH pulses are envisioned to mirror hypothalamic
GnRH signals with a slight time delay
L (e.g., 1-2 min) and with a brief refractory period rL
(e.g., ~10-15 min) after a GnRH pulse time (2).
This refractory period is the interaction (7).
We model these feedback interactions [except for (7)] via monotonic
logistic dose-response functions
|
(6)
|
or where the coefficients themselves are described by logistic
functions, e.g.,
If Bi > 0, the feedback is positive
(i.e., feedforward effect); if Bi < 0, the
feedback is negative. For each hormone, the resulting nonbasal rate of
synthesis S(·) will depend on time-delayed feedback from the
system through such interface functions H(·), plus noise
(·). The H(·) defines a "conditional expectation," or
an average rate for all the cells in the endocrine gland (see Figs. 1
and 2); the actual realized rate of synthesis S(·) varies about H(·). Experimental evidence suggests that the noise
varies about the conditional expectation in a stationary manner; we
have formulated the noise
(·) similar to an Ornstein-Uhlenbeck
process, except that we have constrained the resulting rate of
synthesis S(·) to be nonnegative and bounded
(7). It is important to allow for such noise as
(·) in
the realized rates of synthesis, because in this specific context, one
could explore whether the young and older male reproductive systems
differ because: 1) the average rate of hormone synthesis
H(·) is altered by age and/or 2) with age, there
is greater variability about this average rate H(·). Other
pathway-specific postulates of aging are evaluated below.
Circadian Rhythm
The mean serum testosterone concentration in young men typically
decreases during the late day and rises in the early morning (9-12, 24, 26, 28, 30-32). The mechanisms
subserving this diurnal rhythmicity are not well understood. In a
simplified construct, the nyctohemeral rhythm could be viewed as a
modulation of LH's feedforward on the rate of secretion of Te,
H4(·), by a strictly positive, 24-h periodic
function µ(·). In the present simulations, the µ(·) function was
assumed among other possibilities to consist of one harmonic with
amplitudes B0, B1, and phase shift
1 being chosen so µ(·) would vary between a high at 4 AM and a low at 4 PM (e.g., B0 = 1.0, B1 = 0.35,
1 = 4.0, starting
at 8 AM; individual variability allowed, as discussed below
|
(7)
|
Construct of the Male GnRH-LH-Te Axis
According to the foregoing background and detailed motivation
given in (6, 7, 26), the ensemble formulation of the male
axis can be given by the following system of (stochastic differential) equations.
Pulse generator.
The pulse times of GnRH: T
,
T
, T
, ...
are the result of a (point) process with an intensity
|
(8)
|
where
(t)dt is interpretable as the instantaneous
probability of a pulse in the infinitesimal time increment (t,
t + dt). The conditional density for
T
given T
and
(·) will be
required to satisfy
|
(9)
|
resulting in GnRH pulse times
T
,
T
, ... , and LH pulse times
(due to the refractory period rL and time-delay
L):
and the associated counting processes:
and
This model for the pulse generator, based on assumed loosely coupled GnRH neuronal firing within an ensemble of excitable hypothalamic neurons, is: 1) dynamical, in the sense that the
probabilistic structure of the pulse times depends on feedback within
the system, and 2) flexible, wherein a Weibull renewal
process (corresponding to a constant
) allows for variability of the
interpulse interval lengths, independent of the mean, via the parameter
1 (6, 7).
Agonist-driven (nonbasal) rates of synthesis [S(·)]
for GnRH, LH, and Te.
(feedback from Te, plus allowable variability)
(feedforward from LH, plus allowable variability)
(feedforward/feedback from G and Te, plus allowable variability)
(accumulation of newly synthesized GnRH and LH in secretory
granules, and where
represents the time rate of release of newly
synthesized granules.)
Pulse masses Mj for GnRH and LH.
(normalized rates of secretion)
(fractional mass M
remaining at time T
)
(Available mass equals that not released from previous
pulse plus newly synthesized granules.)
The male axis (GnRH, LH, Te) core equations.
Combining the above (below, x+ denotes
max{x, 0})
|
(10)
|
where the Wi(·)'s are
independent standard Brownian motions and
idWi(t), subscripts i
= G, L, Te, describe the in vivo biological variability due to the
diffusive behavior (mixing, advection, turbulence, etc.) of the
neurohormone within the blood. The values of
i, i
= G, L, Te, were chosen so that the resulting coefficients of
variation were approximately 6%. Te synthesis and secretion are
assumed to be coupled (without an intervening response cascade) by
simple diffusion of the synthesized steroid, because no granular storage form exists for Te (unlike LH) (26).
Allowance for variation among individuals.
To allow for the variation among individuals, certain
parameters may vary randomly about a population value. In particular, we allow the Te basal secretion
Te (Eq. 10)
to be uniformly distributed between 1,000 and 1,500 ng · dl
1 · h
1, the
circadian rhythm amplitude B1 (Eq. 7) to be
uniformly distributed between 0.2 and 0.5 with B0 = 1, the pulse regularity parameter
(Eq. 9) to be uniformly
distributed between 2 and 6, and the slope of the Te feedback on the
instantaneous rate of GnRH pulsing (Eqs. 6, 8, and 9) to be uniformly distributed between
0.005 and
0.009
(6, 7, 26).
What one would actually observe in most experiments is a discrete-time
sampling of LH and Te (ordinarily not GnRH) with measurement error due
to sample collection, processing, and assay
|
(11)
|
Overview of Approximate Entropy (and Cross-Approximate
Entropy)
The approximate entropy (ApEn) statistic was developed to
quantify the degree of irregularity, or disorderliness, of a single time series. Analogously, cross-ApEn quantifies joint pattern synchrony
between two time series. The methods have broadly applied to both
medical and nonmedical data (14, 15, 17).
For a given data series Yk, k = 1, ... ,
N, ApEn is calculated as follows: the (sample) standard deviation
of Y, SD(Y), is calculated, and two values,
m (pattern length) and r (discriminating
threshold), are specified. The validated choices for m and
r for neurohormone series of the length sampled here are
m = 1, r = 0.2SD(Y). One then
calculates
|
(12)
|
|
|
Removing trends before ApEn calculation.
The formulations of ApEn and cross-ApEn apply to times series that are
at least asymptotically stationary (14, 15, 17). One
direct consequence of this assumption is an approximately constant
marginal standard deviation SD(Y), which is used as part of
the yardstick [r = 0.2SD(Y)] to monitor
significant pattern differences. If a series is not stationary in its
mean, then one would need to remove an estimated mean function, so that
the resulting estimated standard deviation is not inflated. In the case
of Te, which can exhibit prominent rhythmicity over 24 h (and to a
lesser extent, LH), any major effects of a circadian rhythm in the
concentration should thus be minimized before ApEn and cross-ApEn are
computed. In Application to Clinical Data, ApEn and
cross-ApEn are calculated for clinical data from older men and young
men; Fig. 3 (left) displays a
Te concentration (solid line) profile of a young male sampled every 10 min over 24 h (starting at 8 AM). The effect of the circadian
rhythm on Te concentrations and its (sample) SD are apparent, which in
part is a consequence of the nonstationarity in the mean.

View larger version (38K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 3.
Illustrative impact of detrending paradigms on a 24-h serum Te
concentration profile sampled every 10 min in 1 young man. A:
top: undetrended (original) Te time series with cosine fit (dashed
line) or heat equation fit (dashed-dotted line);
middle: cosine detrended; and bottom: heat
equation detrended. B: corresponding Te periodograms for the
original series (top) and the cosine (middle) and
heat equation (bottom) detrended (dashed line). Each is
superimposed on the original periodogram (solid line) to show that only
low frequencies are removed.
|
|
Periodic rhythmicity.
If the effect of the circadian rhythm were exerted purely via a cosine
function, then its removal by an estimated cosine function would
probably suffice. We tested this notion via trigonometric regression at
the first discrete Fourier frequency
= (2
/n), which will provide the least-squares fitted cosine function,
Acos(
t) +
. The periodogram I(n)(·),
a normalized version of the squared modulus of the Fourier transform of
a series {Yk} provides the squared amplitude
at this first frequency and all the other discrete Fourier frequencies
Figure 3 displays the fitted cosine function
superimposed (interrupted line) on the Te concentrations (Fig. 3,
top left). The cosine-detrended series is shown for
comparison (Fig. 3, middle left). The periodogram of the
original Te concentrations is compared on Fig. 3, top right.
The sample SD of the cosine-detrended series is 65, which is a
reduction from 79 of the original series. There appear to be residual
nonstationarities after cosine detrending: see Figure 3, middle
right, wherein the periodogram of the cosine-detrended series is
superimposed (interrupted line) on the periodogram of the original
series. One could attempt to remove these additional low frequencies
more systematically, as suggested in the following subsection.
Mean function estimation via smoothing by the heat (or
diffusion) equation.
If modulation of the 24-h neurohormone profile should occur in a more
complicated nonlinear manner, then the effects would probably be
smeared over a low-frequency band. One way to remove a complicated
nonlinear trend, without necessary knowledge of its form a priori, is
by implementing the heat equation. In this strategy, the data serve as
the initial conditions with Dirichlet, Neumann, or mixed boundary
conditions. We have used Dirichlet conditions and subtracted the
resulting smoothed version from the data Yk,
with
(the mean) then added back. This procedure removes the low-frequency band and thus achieves a "straightening out," without making a priori assumptions about its form (see more
detailed motivation in APPENDIX).
Suppose that the data Yk are obtained by
sampling a function {Y(t), 0
t
1}, with
t being observational time (units of days):
Yk = Y((k
1)/(N
1)), k = 1, 2, ... , N. Let U be the solution of the following
equation, with accompanying initial and boundary conditions
The variable s represents algorithmic time. Except
for the boundary conditions, one can envision the algorithm (at
algorithmic time s) as convolving Y(·) with
a Gaussian kernel whose variance is C2s. The
equation is implemented for 0
s
S (see
APPENDIX), where the terminal function is [U(t, S),
0
t
1], and the resulting smoothed (and discrete)
version of the data Yk is
k = U((k
1)/(N
1), S),
k = 1, 2, ... , N. This procedure is minimally dependent on the precise nature of the underlying slow trends. Figure 3, top left, shows serial serum testosterone concentrations
with the superimposed heat equation-smoothed series (dashed-dotted line). Figure 2, bottom left, gives the resulting series
with the heat equation-smoothed component removed. For comparison, Figure 3, bottom right, presents the periodograms of the
original (solid line) and heat equation-smoothed Te series (interrupted line). Note that only low-frequency terms are removed. The sample SD of
the heat equation-detrended series fell to 43 in this case (compared
with a value of 79 in the original and 65 in the cosine-detrended series). The resulting ApEn values for these three Te series were 1.5 (original), 1.6 (cosine detrended), and 1.8 (heat equation detrended).
 |
COMPUTER-ASSISTED EXPERIMENTS |
On the basis of the mathematical construct of the GnRH-LH-Te axis
given in Construct of the Male GnRH-LH-Te Axis (above and Refs. 6, 7, 26), we performed selected computer-assisted experiments, as described below. Each consisted of 500 simulations implemented in Matlab.
Normal young male (experiment 0).
Published young-adult male 24-h serum LH and Te concentration time
series (12, 18) are emulated realistically by the
foregoing biomathematical construct (6, 7). The
H dose-response functions for the normal young male are
displayed in Fig. 2A. Figure 4
displays one realization from each of the six (numbers
0-5) experiments, with the randomness in each realization
being initiated with the same seed. These profiles offer a visual
impression of the dynamics produced by modifying a given dose-response
H function. Figure 5 gives the
resulting histograms of the 500 values of (heat equation detrended) LH
ApEn, Te ApEn, and the cross-ApEn. And, Fig.
6 presents the histograms of the 500 LH
and Te means, and the ratio of the 24-h amplitude/mean of the simulated
Te profiles for each of the experiments. We obtained comparable
histograms in the case where there was no cosine modulation of LH's
feedforward on Te (i.e., B1 = 0 in
Eq. 7) (not shown). Thus comparable model-specific
predictions emerge both before and after eliminating all cosine
rhythmicity. Simulations of joint LH and Te time series yielded LH and
Te ApEn and LH-Te cross-ApEn histograms with median values of 1.2, 1.8, and 2.1, respectively. These values in the young adult male served as
baseline model parameters for further comparisons with simulated disturbances of H functions in various aging models
(experiments 1-7, below).

View larger version (33K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 4.
Realizations of LH and Te from each of the 6 (0-5) computer-assisted experiments. Each row is a pair
of plots that illustrates a single realization of (simulated) LH and Te
concentrations for 2 computer-assisted experiments, as follows:
top, experiment 0 (left), experiment 1 (right); second, experiment 2, experiment 3;
third, experiment 4, experiment 5, using the same initial
seed for generating randomness. Experiment 0: control
(baseline); experiment 1: enhanced Te feedback on GnRH and
LH; experiment 2: blunted LH feedforward on Te;
Experiment 3: elevated GnRH drive of LH; experiment
4: reduced Te feedback on GnRH and LH; experiment 5:
combined increased Te feedback and decreased LH feedforward
(experiments 1 and 2).
|
|

View larger version (53K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 5.
Histograms of the LH approximate entropy (ApEn), Te ApEn, and
(LH-Te) cross-ApEn (after detrending by heat equation). Each row
presents histograms of LH or Te ApEn and LH-Te cross-ApEn values
derived from 500 simulations in the computer-assisted experiments
0-5 (METHODS and Fig. 4). The scales have been
aligned to allow visual comparisons. Analyses apply cosine modulation
of LH feedforward on Te. Arrows denote mean model predictions in the
control ("young adult") setting. The numerical values in
parentheses at the top of each column are the mean values of LH ApEn,
Te ApEn, and (LH-Te) cross-ApEn for experiment 0 (normal).
These values serve as baseline model parameters. Fdbk, Fdfwd, feedback
and feedforward, respectively; CrApEn, cross-ApEn.
|
|

View larger version (54K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 6.
Histograms of model-predicted mean LH, mean Te, and ratios of Te
amplitude to mean Te concentrations according to 5 specific hypotheses
of aging (METHODS and Fig. 4). Each row depicts histograms
of the individual LH means, Te means, and ratios of Te amplitude to Te
mean. Data are based on 500 simulations of computer-assisted
experiments 0-5. The scales have been aligned to
enhance visual comparisons. Simulations embody cosine modulation of LH
fdfwd on Te. Data are presented otherwise as described in the
Fig. 5.
|
|
Heightened Te feedback in aging (experiment 1).
As reported experimentally by Winters et al. (34) and
Deslypere et al. (3) parenteral delivery of androgen seems
to impose greater feedback inhibition of LH release in aging than in
young men. To simulate the impact of this inference mathematically, we
left-shifted the dose-response relationship of Te feedback on both GnRH
and LH (Fig. 2A). The resultant histograms of uni- and
bivariate ApEn of LH and Te concentrations and of the fractional (24 h)
Te cosine amplitude are given in Fig. 6. Te ApEn rose, whereas Te
concentration and Te cosine rhythmicity fell, consistent with clinical
observations in older men. However, LH ApEn, LH-Te cross-ApEn, and the
mean 24-h LH concentration fell, which would be inappropriate for known
aging data (13).
Attenuated LH feedforward on Te (experiment 2).
Human experiments using injected human chorionic gonadotropin
as a surrogate for an LH stimulus have revealed a significant decline
in maximally stimulated Te production in older men (26, 30,
31). Other clinical studies concur with this notion
(12). To simulate this putative physiological decrease in
testis responsiveness to LH, we reduced the maximum of the LH-Te
dose-response curve, thus limiting LH actions on Leydig cells (Fig.
2A). This paradigm recapitulated all six observed changes in
aging: higher uni- and bivariate ApEn for LH, Te, and LH-Te; reduced
mean Te and elevated mean LH concentrations; and, lower 24-hour Te
rhythmicity (Fig. 5 and 6).
Heightened GnRH feedforward on LH (experiment 3).
A recent detailed intravenous GnRH dose-responsive study of LH release
in older versus young men revealed greater maximal LH secretion after
GnRH in older individuals (37). To represent this possible
primary change in the aging male axis, the maximum of the GnRH-LH
dose-response function was increased (Fig. 2B). This
simulation mimicked expected age-related changes in LH-Te only by way
of elevated 24-h serum LH concentrations (Fig. 6).
Accelerated GnRH pulse frequency and decreased GnRH pulse mass
(experiment 4).
Deconvolution analysis of intensively sampled (every 2.5 to 10 min)
serum LH concentrations in young and older men has disclosed reduced LH
secretory burst amplitude, possibly associated with a rise in LH pulse
frequency (11, 26, 31). The latter conjecture of
accelerated GnRH pulse frequency as a primary mechanism in aging was
evaluated by augmenting the mean frequency (intensity) of the point
process defining GnRH pulsatility (reduced mean waiting times) (Fig.
2B). All three ApEn measures increased (univariate LH and
Te, and bivariate LH-Te), but serum LH and Te concentrations did not
rise and fall, respectively, as recognized in older individuals.
Combined increased Te feedback (experiment 1) and decreased LH
feedforward (experiments 2 and 5).
The results for experiment 5 (combined experiments
1-2; see Fig. 2B) are shown in Figs. 5 and 6. This
model predicted only that ApEn of LH would rise and that concentrations
of Te would decline, as recognized in aging men.
 |
APPLICATION TO CLINICAL DATA |
We next evaluated the impact of detrending of the LH and Te time
series using clinical data from healthy older and young men (described
in Refs. 11, 12, 18). As shown in Fig.
7, both the cosine and heat equation
detrending procedures lowered the SDs of the LH and Te time series,
thus reducing r [e.g., 0.2SD(Y)] in Eq. 12 and
increasing ApEn, preserving an age contrast. The latter was also
prominent in analysis of the untransformed (nondetrended) data (Fig.
7).

View larger version (18K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 7.
Application of statistical regularity calculations to
clinical data in young (n = 11) and older (n = 13) men. ApEn (1,20%) and cross-ApEn (X-ApEn) were used as
regularity statistics to monitor subpattern reproducibility of LH and
Te output in young and older men, in whom blood was sampled every 10 min for 24 h for later assay of serum LH and Te concentrations.
ApEn and X-ApEn for LH and/or Te were calculated without detrending
("untransformed") and after cosine versus heat-equation detrending
(METHODS). P values are estimated via Student's
t-test (unpaired, 2-tailed, unequal variances). Higher ApEn
denotes greater relative pattern irregularity.
|
|
 |
NEW HYPOTHESES SUGGESTED BY COMPUTER-ASSISTED SIMULATIONS |
Earlier clinical experiments in young men have disclosed that LH
ApEn rises consistently on pharmacological withdrawal of Te negative
feedback, e.g., via treatment with the antiandrogenic drug, flutamide
(25), or the steroidogenesis inhibitor, ketoconazole (29). Consequently, we also tested the network-predicted
response to simulated attenuation of androgen negative feedback on GnRH and LH (experiment 6). Such a postulated age-related
reduction in Te negative feedback (right shifted response curves)
yielded an anomalous rise in serum Te concentrations, which is not
evident in older individuals, but predicted appropriate increases in
ApEn of LH and Te individually and jointly, as well as a rise in LH concentrations (Figs. 8, A and
B).


View larger version (95K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 8.
Computer-assisted experiments 6 and 7. A (facing page): the H dose-response functions for
experiment 6 (isolated damping of Te feedback on GnRH and LH
secretion) are displayed in the top 2 rows, and those of
experiment 7 (dual muting of Te feedback and reduced LH
feedforward on Te secretion) in the middle 2 rows in the same format as
Fig. 2. The normal (experiment 0) H functions are presented
for comparison in each experimental panel as continuous curves. The
bottom 2 rows portray illustrative predicted single
realizations of 24-h blood LH and Te concentration time series in
experiment 6 (left) and experiment 7 (right). B: corresponding paired histograms for
500 realizations of experiment 6 and experiment 7 (as depicted in Figs. 5 and 6): top 2 rows are the histograms of the LH
ApEn, Te ApEn, and (LH-Te) cross-ApEn; bottom 2 rows are the
histograms of model-predicted mean LH, mean Te, and ratios of Te
amplitude to mean Te concentrations. Arrows denote mean values in
control ("young adult") simulations.
|
|
The foregoing analysis was also combined with experiment 2 (reduced LH feedforward on Te) to test the hypothesis of dually impaired Te feedback and LH feedforward [see Fig. 8, A and
B (experiment 7)]. This bipartite postulate
forecasted increased LH and/or Te ApEn and cross-ApEn values and
reduced Te and elevated LH concentrations, as reported in older men
(see introduction).
 |
DISCUSSION |
To test specific hypotheses of interglandular pathway disruption
within the aging male GnRH-LH-Te axis, the present experiments implement an earlier stochastic differential equation-based
biomathematical model that embodies the dynamic time-delayed and
dose-responsive feedback and feedforward linkages known within this
interactive system (6, 7, 26). We here apply this more
formal computer-assisted construct to explore selected hypotheses of
altered regulatory behavior due to aging. Several primary hypotheses
for more disorderly LH and Te secretion patterns in healthy older men
originated from published clinical studies (1, 3, 8, 11, 12, 16, 18, 20, 25, 26, 31, 32, 34). In addition, new (secondary) hypotheses emerged on the basis of initial predictions of the ensemble
model. Available clinical literature points to multiple plausible
pathway (interglandular) or nodal (glandular)-level disturbances in the
aging male; e.g., hypothalamic GnRH release, reduced GnRH feedforward
on LH secretion, impaired LH feedforward on Te production, and altered
Te feedback on GnRH and LH output. However, most earlier experimental
investigations of necessity have addressed individual nodal alterations
in isolation; i.e., by analyzing GnRH's dose-responsive stimulation of
pituitary LH release (37), hCG's feedforward drive of
gonadal Te secretion (31), and Te's feedback restraint of
GnRH/LH production (22, 24). The present networklike
analyses show that single-node studies cannot readily distinguish
between partial failure of a control node and disruption of internodal
signaling (16). Indeed, a crucial prediction of the
present computer-assisted experiments is that disturbing the function
of any one regulatory locus disrupts the networklike behavior of this
axis, due to the strong feedback and feedforward dependencies that
interlink GnRH, LH, and Te secretion (6, 7, 26). Because
dynamic interfaces in neuroendocrine axes are multiple, nonlinear,
time-lagged, and stochastically variable, a priori intuitive
predictions of the impact of nodal disruption and/or pathway failure on
overall system performance are very difficult. Indeed, the current
formalism highlights the unexpected implications of some earlier
intuitions (below).
As a sensitive new statistical tool to quantify the network-level
consequences of selected disruption of any given regulatory site and/or
its interconnections, we applied the univariate and bivariate (joint)
regularity measures, ApEn and cross-ApEn (12, 14-18,
27). This family of measures appears to capture among the
earliest quantifiable changes in the pattern orderliness of reproductive hormone secretion in the healthy aging male
(16) and female (18). As complementary
outcome measures, we also used mean and 24-h rhythmic LH and Te output
to monitor aging hypothesis-specific predictions (26).
Among the five primary (single node) hypotheses explored, we observed
that only partial failure of LH's feedforward drive of Te secretion
forecasts the principal changes in LH and Te reported in aging men,
namely: 1) elevated LH concentrations, 2) more
disorderly LH and Te release, considered both individually and jointly,
3) reduced Te concentrations, and 4) blunted
24-hr rhythmicity of Te secretion. Accordingly, from a
feedback/feedforward model perspective, muted feedforward drive by LH
of Te secretion appears to be necessary and sufficient to predict the
multifold GnRH-LH-Te disturbances documented consistently in clinical
experiments (26).
In complementary computer-assisted simulations, we imposed accentuated
versus reduced Te negative feedback on GnRH-LH release. These putative
pathway defects recapitulated some, but not all, the expected
age-related changes in LH and Te secretion recognized in the aging
male. In particular, model-based enhancement of Te's negative feedback
on GnRH and LH secretion, as suggested by reports of heightened
suppression of LH production by pharmacological delivery of androgens
in older men (3, 33, 34), forecasted a rise in Te ApEn and
fall in Te concentrations, but not an increase in LH ApEn and LH-Te
cross-ApEn, as required by clinical data (16). Conversely,
computer-simulated attenuation of Te's negative feedback on GnRH and
LH secretion, as intimated in other clinical studies (26),
predicted higher LH concentrations and LH and Te ApEn and LH-Te
cross-ApEn, but an anomalous rise in serum Te concentrations. Thus the
foregoing computer-assisted hypothesis testing argues against excessive
or deficient Te feedback on GnRH/LH as an exclusive mechanism driving
the constellation of reported neuroendocrine changes in the human male
reproductive axis in aging.
Unlike the foregoing hypothesis of an isolated reduction in Te's
negative feedback on GnRH-LH output in the aging male, a bipartite
hypothesis, which combined the latter defect with impaired LH
feedforward drive of Te secretion, predicted the expected (older male)
neuroendocrine phenotype of elevated ApEn of LH and Te, higher
cross-ApEn of LH-Te, increased LH and reduced Te secretion, and blunted
24-h rhythmic Te production. Accordingly, these biostatistical experiments allow for, but do not prove, a more complex gonadal-axis pathophysiology in older men, consisting of dual defects that involve
both positive and negative control; i.e.: 1) an impairment of LH's feedforward on Te, and 2) a reduction in Te's
feedback on GnRH and LH. To affirm or refute this bipartite prediction will require further clinical and laboratory experiments.
Further analyses were carried out to evaluate the network implications
of heightened endogenous GnRH feedforward on LH in the aging male. This
clinical hypothesis reflects the empirical finding that graded GnRH
injections stimulate greater LH secretion in older men than young men
(37). However, computer-simulated feedforward enhancement
of GnRH on LH, although emulating increased LH output, failed to drive
elevated ApEn or cross-ApEn of LH and Te or lower Te concentrations.
According to these data, we posit that the reported heightening of GnRH
potency and/or efficacy in older men may be a consequence (rather than
a cause) of diminished Te feedback. Indeed, reduced Te feedback is
inferrable from the well established 30-50% fall in bioavailable
(nonsex hormone binding globulin associated) testosterone in older
individuals (9, 10, 13, 26, 31, 33).
Accelerated LH pulse frequency and reciprocally reduced LH pulse
amplitude have been reported in some aging men (3, 11, 26, 28,
31). We reasoned that both neuroendocrine features might be
secondary consequences of restricted Te availability and hence
diminished negative feedback on GnRH/LH. In particular, on the basis of
the present biomathematical systems model, restraining Te negative
feedback (by right shifting the corresponding negative dose response
functions of Te on GnRH and LH secretion) projected an increase in
GnRH/LH pulse frequency and a reciprocal decrease in LH peak amplitude.
The latter inverse relationship is also consistent with reportedly
damped gonadotrope responsiveness to higher GnRH pulse
frequencies in experimental animals (2). Thus the
foregoing model-predicted considerations highlight the thesis that
examining any one control node (e.g., here GnRH's feedforward action
on LH) in isolation may not illuminate full network operation (see introduction).
The bipartite postulate of age-related defects in LH drive of Te
secretion along with augmented Te feedback on GnRH and LH output
nullified three of the age-appropriate outcomes otherwise predicted by
the single (uncombined) model of decreased LH feedforward on Te. In
contrast, combining impaired LH stimulation of Te secretion with
reduced Te feedback on GnRH/LH predicted relevant age-related entropic,
mean and 24-h rhythmic changes in LH and Te output. These feedback
distinctions, if validated independently by further in vivo
physiological experiments, illustrate the challenge of intuitively
based predictions and the utility of more formalized biomathematical
tools to explore combinatorial defects within an axis.
The present study did not attempt to appraise all possible paired (or
multiply combined) mechanisms of pathway disruption in the aging male.
Thus other plurinodal or multipathway models might also explicate
reported disturbances in the older male reproductive axis. Further
studies will be needed to explore this interesting issue. In addition,
it will be important to investigate further model sensitivity to
different renditions of circadian linkages (e.g. imparting diurnal
periodicity to GnRH pulse generation and/or GnRH's action on
gonadotropes), of the interface functions for LH-Te and Te-GnRH-LH, of
time-lagged and time-averaged inputs, and stochastic variability
embodied in feedback and/or feedforward interfaces. The current
model-based perspective on hypothesis testing will be important to
explore further in relation to the more complex menstrual and
aging-related dynamics of the female reproductive axis, as well as the
integrative control of the thyrotropic, lactotropic, somatotropic, and
corticotropic axes.
Perspectives
The time-evolving behavior of an integrated neuroendocrine
ensemble is difficult to envision intuitively, because of stochastic features, time delays, joint feedback and feedforward activities, and
nonlinear dose dependencies mediating the several interactions. Analytically tractable computer-assisted biomathematical models seem critical to amalgamate the consequences of such complex linkages conceptually. Here, we illustrate an application of one published model
structure of the male GnRH-LH-Te axis to specific hypothesis testing in
aging. In physiological applications of this kind, the biostatistical
construct should enhance understanding of and insights into potentially
confounding, costly, invasive, and/or extended experimental
measurements of observable output (e.g., LH and testosterone). As
importantly, the model should ultimately aid in the accurate prediction
of unobservable output (e.g., GnRH) and internodal connections (e.g.
Te's feedback on GnRH LH). Assumptions inherent in the primary model
structure must be made explicit, remain faithful to the extant body of
knowledge, and be tractable to amendment by evolving scientific data.
In the last regard, ad hoc elements of the model thereby will be
refined (e.g., the stochastic properties of the pulse generator system)
and fundamental connections refuted or corroborated (e.g., the putative
sinusoidal modulation of the LH Te feedforward pathway). Accordingly,
structural model progress is coupled to experimental developments and
vice versa. Robust model forms should therein foster more insightful data reconstruction, enhance experimental strategies, and stimulate new
mechanistic hypotheses.
 |
APPENDIX |
Removing the Circadian Rhythm via the Heat Equation
The heat (or diffusion) equation is one of a triad of
fundamental partial differential equations in physical mathematics. Historically, it was used to describe the time evolution of such spatially defined processes as the temperature distribution in a
heat-conducting medium and dispersion of a chemical concentration. Today, however, it is also being used in such areas as image processing for noise removal and image restoration. Within the later context, it
is typically used as a low-pass filter. However, as described below,
other special properties make it appropriate to the present intent of
removing the effects of the circadian rhythm. To this end, we construct
its complementary high-pass filter, which is analogous to image
deblurring or enhancement.
For the present problem, this procedure functions essentially as
Gaussian smoothing, wherein the degree of smoothing is not strictly
fixed. Rather, the oscillatory nature of the data influences the amount
of smoothing. One must slightly qualify the preceding expectation,
because there is the issue of what to do at the boundary of the data
series. For the present description, we illustrate that the algorithm
handles the boundary in an intelligent manner.
Let F(r) denote a signal at time r, and let
µ(r) be a periodic function, which modulates the signal
F. In the present construct, F is the feedforward
signal of LH on testosterone, which is a time-delayed and
time-averaging of LH concentrations. Because of the pulsatile nature of
LH secretion, F will tend to be composed of higher than
circadian frequencies with periods on the order of 1-3 h, along
with even higher frequency sample-by-sample variability. The circadian
rhythm µ, on the other hand, primarily represents low frequencies
with periods on the order of 24 h. In METHODS, the
rate of secretion for testosterone was defined, at time
r, as a sum of the basal and nonbasal components:
+ H[µ(r)F(r)], where H is a
dose-response function. The resulting Te concentration is then given by
|
(13)
|
where
is the rate of elimination. If one ignores the first
term due to the initial Te concentration, then
X(µ) is a convolution integral. Let
X represent the solution where µ
1, so there is
no circadian rhythm. The goal is to recover X approximately,
given only observed X(µ) and without making
any rigid assumptions concerning µ. We thus have
|
(14)
|
|
(15)
|
where E is the one-sided exponential
(e
x, x
0; 0 for x < 0), and * denotes convolution.
Removing the circadian input requires eliminating the effects of µ from the right-hand side of Eq. 14, without altering
F in the process. The output of the heat equation algorithm
after time a is essentially a convolution of the input
X(µ) with the Gaussian density,
Ga, of mean 0 and variance a2:
Ga * X(µ). The foregoing is an
appropriate filter in the present setting, because it is a convolution,
and, more importantly, because convolving Ga
with a cosine function of frequency
, merely multiplies the cosine
function by
e
(
2a2/2).
For the sake of exposition, let µ and F each consist of a
single frequency (low and high, respectively): µ(r) = 1 + B1cos(
0r +
0), F(r) = D0 + D1cos(
1r +
1). If µ and F are respectively a sum
of low-frequency terms and a sum of high-frequency terms, the result
will follow by linearity. What is key is that when a2 is not terribly large, low-frequency
sinusoidals remain virtually unaffected, whereas high-frequency
sinusoidals are dampened. The properties of linearity, commutivity, and
associativity of convolutions are also important, as well as the fact
that since Ga integrates to one, its convolution with a
constant results in that constant: Ga commutes with E, E
and Ga each commute with the operation of averaging, and
Ga *
=
.
Because µF equals D0µ + F
D0 plus any terms of reduced amplitudes at frequencies
1 ±
0 (which are high frequencies),
then Ga * µF
D0µ.
Also, because µF = D0 + a sum of cosines at
0,
1,
1 ±
0, one can reasonably assume that the average of
µF:
D0. In the region of
the dose-response function H that is approximately linear
and hence
If the domain of the spatial variable (t) were
unbounded (
< t < +
), then the solution of
the heat equation U(t, s) in Mean function
estimation via smoothing by the heat (or diffusion) equation is
given by the convolution of X(µ) with
Ga, where X(µ) = Y
(the data) and a2 equals
C2s. The variable t is observational
time, and s is (smoothing or) algorithmic time. If the
spatial domain is bounded, as in most applications, the solution is
slightly different, but one can still solve the heat equation
numerically by way of the algorithm described in METHODS.
The remaining issue is how long to implement the algorithm (i.e., what
is the choice of a) in the present context? Here, because µ and F will tend to have frequencies at the two extremes,
the choice of a is less critical. In Mean function
estimation via smoothing by the heat (or diffusion) equation the
algorithm is implemented for an amount of algorithmic time
S (i.e., a2 above equals
C2S). Certainly if S were taken to be
enormous, the algorithm would smooth the input to a constant. In the
present application, where there are few midrange frequencies of
interest for ApEn analysis, the choice does not require subtlety.
 |
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS |
Supported in part by the University of Virginia Center for
Biomathematical Technology, National Institutes of Health (NIH) General Clinical Research Center Grant M01-RR-00847, NIH RCDA 1K04-HD-00634, and NIH U54 Center for Specialized Studies in
Reproduction P30-HD-28934.
 |
FOOTNOTES |
Address for reprint requests and other correspondence: J. D. Veldhuis, PO Box 800202, Univ. of VA, Charlottesville, VA 22908-0202 (E-mail: jdv{at}virginia.edu).
The costs of publication of this
article were defrayed in part by the
payment of page charges. The article
must therefore be hereby marked
"advertisement"
in accordance with 18 U.S.C. Section 1734 solely to indicate this fact.
Received 25 September 2000; accepted in final form 26 January
2001.
 |
REFERENCES |
1.
Burger, GH,
Dudley EC,
Hopper JL,
Shelley JM,
Green A,
Smith A,
Dennerstein L,
and
Morse C.
The endocrinology of the menopausal transition.
J Clin Endocrinol Metab
80:
3537-3545,
1995[Abstract].
2.
Clarke, IJ,
and
Cummins JT.
GnRH pulse frequency determines LH pulse amplitude by altering the amount of releasable LH in the pituitary glands of ewes.
J Reprod Fertil
73:
425-431,
1985[Abstract/Free Full Text].
3.
Deslypere, JP,
Kaufman JM,
Vermeulen T,
Vogelaers D,
Vandalem JL,
and
Vermeulen A.
Influence of age on pulsatile luteinizing hormone release and responsiveness of the gonadotrophs to sex hormone feedback in men.
J Clin Endocrinol Metab
64:
68-73,
1987[Abstract/Free Full Text].
4.
Gray, A,
Berlin JA,
McKinlay JB,
and
Longcope C.
An examination of research design effects on the association of testosterone and male aging: results of a meta-analysis.
J Clin Epidemiol
44:
671-684,
1991[Web of Science][Medline].
5.
Gray, A,
Feldman HS,
McKinlay JB,
and
Longcope C.
Age, disease, and changing sex hormone levels in middle-aged men: results of the Massachusetts Male Aging Study.
J Clin Endocrinol Metab
73:
1016-1025,
1991[Abstract/Free Full Text].
6.
Keenan, D,
and
Veldhuis JD.
A biomathematical model of time-delayed feedback in the human male hypothalamic-pituitary-Leydig cell axis.
Am J Physiol Endocrinol Metab Physiol
275:
E157-E176,
1998[Abstract/Free Full Text].
7.
Keenan, D,
Sun W,
and
Veldhuis JD.
A stochastic biomathematical model of the male reproductive hormone system.
SIAM J Appl Math
61:
934-965,
2000.
8.
Knobil, E,
and
Yen SSC
The advent of menopause.
Science
274:
19-20,
1996.
9.
Morley, JE,
Kaiser FE,
Perry HM,
Patrick P,
Morley PM,
Stauber PM,
Vellas B,
Baumgartner RN,
and
Garry PJ.
Longitudinal changes in testosterone, luteinizing hormone, and follicle-stimulating hormone in healthy older men.
Metabolism
46:
410-413,
1997[Web of Science][Medline].
10.
Morley, JE,
Kaiser FE,
Raum WJ,
Perry HW,
Flood JF,
Jensen J,
Silver AJ,
and
Roberts E.
Potentially predictive and manipulable blood serum correlates of aging in the healthy human male: progressive decreases in bioavailable testosterone, dehydroepiandrosterone sulfate, and the ratio of insulin-like growth factor I to growth hormone.
Proc Natl Acad Sci USA
94:
7537-7542,
1997[Abstract/Free Full Text].
11.
Mulligan, T,
Iranmanesh A,
Gheorghiu S,
Godschalk M,
and
Veldhuis JD.
Amplified nocturnal luteinizing hormone (LH) secretory burst frequency with selective attenuation of pulsatile (but not basal) testosterone secretion in healthy aged men: possible Leydig cell desensitization to endogenous LH signaling
a clinical research center study.
J Clin Endocrinol Metab
80:
3025-3031,
1995[Abstract/Free Full Text].
12.
Mulligan, T,
Iranmanesh A,
Johnson ML,
Straume M,
and
Veldhuis JD.
Aging alters feedforward and feedback linkages between LH and testosterone in healthy men.
Am J Physiol Regulatory Integrative Comp Physiol
273:
R1407-R1413,
1997[Abstract/Free Full Text].
13.
Nankin, HR,
and
Calkins JH.
Decreased bioavailable testosterone in aging normal and impotent men.
J Clin Endocrinol Metab
63:
1418-1423,
1986[Abstract/Free Full Text].
14.
Pincus, SM.
Approximate entropy as a measure of system complexity.
Proc Natl Acad Sci USA
88:
2297-2301,
1991[Abstract/Free Full Text].
15.
Pincus, SM,
and
Huang WM.
Approximate entropy: statistical properties and applications.
Comm Stat Theory Meth
21:
3061-3077,
1992.
16.
Pincus, SM,
Mulligan T,
Iranmanesh A,
Gheorghiu S,
Godschalk M,
and
Veldhuis JD.
Older males secrete luteinizing hormone and testosterone more irregularly, and jointly more asynchronously, than younger males.
Proc Natl Acad Sci USA
93:
14100-14105,
1996[Abstract/Free Full Text].
17.
Pincus, SM,
and
Singer BH.
Randomness and degrees of irregularity.
Proc Natl Acad Sci USA
93:
2083-2088,
1996[Abstract/Free Full Text].
18.
Pincus, SM,
Veldhuis JD,
Mulligan T,
Iranmanesh A,
and
Evans WS.
Effects of age on the irregularity of LH and FSH serum concentrations in women and men.
Am J Physiol Endocrinol Metab Physiol
273:
E989-E995,
1997[Abstract/Free Full Text].
19.
Roelfsema, F,
Pincus SM,
and
Veldhuis JD.
Patients with Cushing's disease secrete adrenocorticotropin and cortisol jointly more asynchronously than healthy subjects.
J Clin Endocrinol Metab
83:
688-692,
1998[Abstract/Free Full Text].
20.
Rossmanith, WG,
Reichelt C,
and
Sherbauam WA.
Neuroendocrinology of aging in humans: attenuated sensitivity to sex steroid feedback in elderly postmenopausal women.
Neuroendocrinology
59:
355-362,
1994[Web of Science][Medline].
21.
Rudman, D,
Drinka PJ,
Wilson CR,
Mattson DE,
Scherman F,
Cuisinier MC,
and
Schultz S.
Relations of endogenous anabolic hormones and physical activity to bone mineral density and lean body mass in elderly men.
Clin Endocrinol
40:
653-661,
1994[Medline].
22.
Rudman, D,
Feller AG,
Nagraj HS,
Gergans GA,
Lalitha PY,
Goldberg AF,
Schlenker RA,
Cohn L,
Rudman IW,
and
Mattson DE.
Effects of human growth hormone in men over 60 years old.
N Engl J Med
323:
1-6,
1990[Abstract/Free Full Text].
23.
Rudman, D,
and
Shetty KR.
Unanswered questions concerning the treatment of hyposomatotropism and hypogonadism in elderly men.
J Am Geriatr Soc
42:
522-527,
1994[Web of Science][Medline].
24.
Tenover, JS.
Testosterone in the aging male.
J Androl
18:
103-106,
1997[Abstract/Free Full Text].
25.
Urban, RJ,
Davis MR,
Rogol AD,
Johnson ML,
and
Veldhuis JD.
Acute androgen receptor blockade increases luteinizing-hormone secretory activity in men.
J Clin Endocrinol Metab
67:
1149-1155,
1988[Abstract/Free Full Text].
26.
Veldhuis, JD.
Recent insights into neuroendocrine mechanisms of aging of the human male hypothalamo-pituitary-gonadal axis.
J Androl
20:
1-17,
1999[Free Full Text].
27.
Veldhuis, JD,
and
Pincus SM.
Orderliness of hormone release patterns: a complementary measure to conventional pulsatile and circadian analyses.
Eur J Endocrinol
138:
358-362,
1998[Web of Science][Medline].
28.
Veldhuis, JD,
Urban RJ,
Lizarralde G,
Johnson ML,
and
Iranmanesh A.
Attenuation of luteinizing hormone secretory burst amplitude is a proximate basis for the hypoandrogenism of healthy aging in men.
J Clin Endocrinol Metab
75:
52-58,
1992[Web of Science].
29.
Veldhuis, JD,
Zwart AD,
and
Iranmanesh A.
Neuroendocrine mechanisms by which selective Leydig-cell castration unleashes increased pulsatile LH release in the human: an experimental paradigm of short-term ketoconazole-induced hypoandrogenemia and deconvolution-estimated LH secretory enhancement.
Am J Physiol Regulatory Integrative Comp Physiol
272:
R464-R474,
1997[Abstract/Free Full Text].
30.
Vermeulen, A.
The male climacterium.
Ann Med
25:
531-534,
1993[Web of Science][Medline].
31.
Vermeulen, A.
Nyctohemeral growth hormone profiles in young and aged men: correlation with somatomedin-C levels.
J Clin Endocrinol Metab
64:
884-888,
1987[Abstract/Free Full Text].
32.
Vermeulen, A,
and
Deslypere JP.
Long-term transdermal dihydrotestosterone therapy: effects on pituitary gonadal axis and plasma lipoproteins.
Maturitas
7:
281-289,
1985[Web of Science][Medline].
33.
Winters, SJ,
and
Atkinson L.
Serum LH concentrations in hypogonadal men during transdermal testosterone replacement through scrotal skin: further evidence that aging enhances testosterone negative feedback.
Clin Endocrinol
47:
317-322,
1997[Medline].
34.
Winters, SJ,
Sherins RJ,
and
Troen P.
The gonadotropin-suppressive activity of androgen is increased in elderly men.
Metabolism
33:
1052-1059,
1984[Web of Science][Medline].
35.
Winters, SJ,
and
Troen P.
Episodic luteinizing hormone (LH) secretion and the response of LH and follicle-stimulating hormone to LH-releasing hormone in aged men: evidence for coexistent primary testicular insufficiency and an impairment in gonadotropin secretion.
J Clin Endocrinol Metab
55:
560-565,
1982[Abstract/Free Full Text].
36.
Wise, PM,
Krajnak KM,
and
Kashon ML.
Menopause. The aging of multiple pacemakers.
Science
273:
53-70,
1996.
37.
Zwart, AD,
Urban RJ,
Odell WD,
and
Veldhuis JD.
Contrasts in the gonadotropin-releasing dose-response relationships for luteinizing hormone, follicle-stimulating hormone, and alpha-subunit release in young versus older men: appraisal with high-specificity immunoradiometric assay and deconvolution analysis.
Eur J Endocrinol
135:
399-406,
1996[Abstract/Free Full Text].
Am J Physiol Regul Integr Comp Physiol 280(6):R1755-R1771
0363-6119/01 $5.00
Copyright © 2001 the American Physiological Society