Reassessing Free-Testosterone Calculation by Liquid Chromatography-Tandem Mass Spectrometry Direct Equilibrium Dialysis
Overview
Affiliations
Context: Assessment of free testosterone (FT) might help evaluate androgen status in patients with borderline total testosterone (T) and/or altered sex hormone-binding globulin (SHBG) levels. However, the validity of different methods to measure FT is debatable.
Methods: Serum from 183 women and 146 men was analyzed using equilibrium dialysis (ED), with FT directly measured by liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry. FT calculation was re-evaluated for the mass action law-based equation according to Vermeulen (cFT-V), empirical equations according to Ly (cFT-L), and a proposed calculation based on a multistep, dynamic, allosteric model according to Zakharov (cFT-Z).
Results: FT level analyzed by ED [median,13 pmol/L (1.2% of T) in women; 248 pmol/L (1.5% of T) in men] was strongly inversely correlated to SHBG level, significantly to albumin level in women, and only weakly to SHBG level in men. The median [percentile (p) range, 2.5 to 97.5] ratios of calculated FT (cFT) over ED-FT (from European Male Aging Study samples) were 1.19 (0.9 to 1.47), 1.00 (0.69 to 1.42), and 2.05 (1.26 to 3.26) for cFT-V, cFT-L, and cFT-Z, respectively. The ratio for cFT-V was not significantly affected by SHBG, T, or albumin levels (ρ range, 0.17 to -0.01); ratios for cFT-L and cFT-Z were affected (P < 0.05 and P < 0.001, respectively) and strongly correlated with SHBG levels (ρ = 0.72 and 0.75, respectively). Rank correlations between cFT% and ED-FT% (for men) were 0.62, 0.74, and 0.89 for cFT-Z, cFT-L, and cFT-V, respectively.
Conclusion: FT results by direct ED confirm prior FT data from indirect ED and ultrafiltration methodologies. Calculations have inherent limitations, with clinically important differences among evaluated equations: cFT-V, although overestimating FT level, appears the most robust approximation, largely independent of SHBG, albumin, and T levels.
Multiomics unravels the complexity of male obesity: a prospective observational study.
Papadakis G, Favre L, Zouaghi Y, Vionnet N, Niederlander N, Adamo M J Transl Med. 2025; 23(1):138.
PMID: 39885510 PMC: 11783726. DOI: 10.1186/s12967-024-06040-7.
Zhang J, Yu H, Shen Y, Yang X, Wang Y Molecules. 2024; 29(21).
PMID: 39519647 PMC: 11547523. DOI: 10.3390/molecules29215007.
Hynes M, Watling C, Dunneram Y, Key T, Perez-Cornago A Int J Obes (Lond). 2024; 48(12):1809-1817.
PMID: 39433891 PMC: 11584381. DOI: 10.1038/s41366-024-01633-0.
Zhu Z, Lin X, Wang C, Zhu S, Zhou X Int J Endocrinol. 2024; 2024:4306797.
PMID: 39224565 PMC: 11368549. DOI: 10.1155/2024/4306797.
Management of male obesity-related secondary hypogonadism: A clinical update.
Shenoy M, Mondal S, Fernandez C, Pappachan J World J Exp Med. 2024; 14(2):93689.
PMID: 38948417 PMC: 11212738. DOI: 10.5493/wjem.v14.i2.93689.