Male hypogonadism is associated with metabolic and cardiovascular comorbidities, and emerging evidence implicates testosterone deficiency in immune dysregulation that may elevate cancer risk. To review current evidence on the relationship between male hypogonadism, immune function, and cancer risk, focusing on mechanisms linking testosterone deficiency to immune suppression and oncologic outcomes. PubMed/MEDLINE, Google Scholar, and SciSpace were systematically searched (through April 2026) using predefined search strings. After removal of duplicates (n = 1535 records screened), 156 full-text articles were assessed for eligibility; 20 studies met predefined inclusion criteria (comprising 4 experimental studies, 4 prospective/RCT studies, 7 observational studies, and 5 reviews used as secondary literature) and were included in a narrative synthesis. Testosterone deficiency was consistently associated with elevated IL-6, TNF-α, IL-1β, and CRP, impaired neutrophil maturation, and reduced NK-cell cytotoxicity. Androgen deprivation augmented thymic output and anti-tumor T cell responses in prostate cancer models, yet promoted chronic inflammation in other contexts. Epidemiologically, low testosterone correlated with increased colorectal cancer risk and poorer survival in advanced malignancies; the prostate cancer relationship followed a paradoxical saturation model. The immunological consequences of hypogonadism are context-dependent. Testosterone deficiency drives pro-inflammatory signaling that may promote carcinogenesis, while androgen-mediated immunosuppression can paradoxically impair anti-tumor surveillance. No simple linear relationship exists between hypogonadism and cancer risk via immune suppression. Prospective studies are needed to guide clinical decisions on testosterone replacement therapy in hypogonadal men.
S. La Vignera, R. Condorelli· International Journal of Mol...· 0 citations
BACKGROUND
This study examined how automatic correction boluses (ABs) vary according to active insulin time (AIT) and glucose target settings, and how these parameters impact glycemic control in individuals with type 1 diabetes.
METHODS
Retrospective data from 287 individuals with type 1 diabetes using the MiniMed 780G system in auto-mode for at least 80% of the time over a minimum period of 6 months were analyzed. The AB delivery was evaluated in relation to different AIT and glucose target settings. Glycemic outcomes, including time in range (TIR 70-180 mg/dL), were assessed.
RESULTS
Automatic correction boluses accounted for 33.1% of bolus insulin and 18.3% of the total daily insulin dose (TDD). Active insulin time settings significantly influenced AB delivery: individuals using a 2-hour AIT showed higher percentages of ABs relative to both TDD and bolus insulin, as well as higher AB doses expressed in IU/kg/day. Shorter AIT settings were also associated with improved TIR. In contrast, glucose target settings ranging from 100 to 120 mg/dL did not significantly affect AB delivery or TIR.
CONCLUSION
Active insulin time is a key modifiable parameter influencing AB delivery and glycemic outcomes. Shorter AIT settings were associated with increased AB administration and improved TIR, whereas glucose target settings had no significant impact on these outcomes.
Giuseppe Papa, R. Cannarella, C. Gusmano et al.· Journal of Diabetes Science...· 0 citations