Search PubMed⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search PubMed

Search Search PubMed

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

2 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2026

Effects of testosterone-augmented multimodal exercise intervention in spinal cord injury: a randomized controlled trial.

CONTEXT: Spinal cord injury (SCI) leads to profound muscle atrophy, aerobic deconditioning, and metabolic dysfunction. Exercise-based interventions alone produce modest benefits. Whether testosterone can augment physiologic responses to exercise in this population remains untested. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate efficacy and safety of home-based intervention combining functional electrical stimulation-assisted leg cycling (FES-LC), arm ergometry (AE), and testosterone compared with FES-LC, AE plus placebo in adults with SCI. METHODS: This randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial enrolled 84 adults (76 males and 8 females) aged 19-70 years with SCI (neurologic levels C4-T12; AIS grades A-D). Participants were randomized to multimodality intervention (home-based FES-LC, AE and intramuscular testosterone undecanoate) (n = 38) or control intervention (FES-LC, AE plus placebo) (n = 46) for 16 weeks. The primary outcome was change in aerobic capacity (peak VO2) during AE cardiopulmonary exercise testing. Secondary outcomes included lean mass, hemoglobin, cardiometabolic markers, and safety. RESULTS: Mean (SD) age was 44 (13) years and time since injury was 13.9 (13) years). Between-group changes in peak VO2 were not statistically significant. Within-group improvements were larger in multimodality (∼19% increase; 0.10 L/min; 95% CI, 0.02-0.18 L/min) compared to controls (∼6% increase; 0.06 L/min; 95% CI, -0.01-0.13). The multimodality group gained significantly more lean mass (whole-body:1.84 kg, 95% CI: 0.52-3.16, P = .007; lower extremity 0.92 kg, 95% CI: 0.38-1.45, P = .001), and anemia was corrected in a greater proportion of participants. Adverse event rates were similar between groups. CONCLUSION: A home-based multimodality intervention combining FES-LC, AE, and testosterone was safe and associated with greater improvements in lean mass and hemoglobin. Although between-group differences in aerobic capacity were not statistically significant, greater within-group increases were observed in the multimodality group. These findings may inform future studies of testosterone-augmented exercise interventions for individuals living with SCI.

Humans↗
PubMed2026

Resistance versus concurrent training with three assigned protein targets in middle-aged and older women: a randomized 2 × 3 factorial trial.

BACKGROUND: Evidence is limited regarding whether assigned protein targets modify responses to resistance training (RT) alone or to the same RT program plus cycling (concurrent training [CT]) in middle-aged and older women. This randomized 2&#x2009;&#xd7;&#x2009;3 factorial trial examined bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA)-derived skeletal muscle mass (SMM; primary outcome), other body composition outcomes, muscular and functional performance, and cycle-derived estimated VO&#x2082;max. METHODS: In this randomized 2&#x2009;&#xd7;&#x2009;3 factorial trial, 108 women aged 40-77 years were assigned to 12 weeks of supervised RT or CT (identical RT followed by cycling) and protein targets of 0.8, 1.6, or 2.2 g&#xb7;kg-1&#xb7;d-1. Baseline-adjusted ANCOVA tested training&#x2009;&#xd7;&#x2009;protein interactions and marginal training and protein effects. Complete-case analyses included 83 participants. RESULTS: For SMM, no training-condition&#x2009;&#xd7;&#x2009;protein-target interaction (p&#x2009;=&#x2009;0.856), marginal protein-target effect (p&#x2009;=&#x2009;0.726), or marginal training-condition effect (p&#x2009;=&#x2009;0.273) was detected. CT had a lower baseline-adjusted week-12 BFP than RT (adjusted difference, -2.04 percentage points; 95% CI, -2.94 to -1.14; p&#x2009;<&#x2009;0.001). RT had a higher baseline-adjusted week-12 leg-press estimated 1-RM than CT (CT - RT: -6.68 kg; 95% CI, -8.32 to -5.04; p&#x2009;<&#x2009;0.001), whereas CT had a higher baseline-adjusted week-12 cycle-derived estimated VO&#x2082;max (adjusted difference, 4.53 mL&#xb7;kg-1&#xb7;min-1; 95% CI, 3.80 to 5.25; p&#x2009;<&#x2009;0.001). No detectable marginal protein-target effects or training-condition&#x2009;&#xd7;&#x2009;protein-target interactions were observed for the key secondary outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: No detectable differences in SMM or key secondary outcomes were attributable to assigned protein target. Compared with RT, CT favored estimated aerobic fitness and BFP, whereas RT favored leg-press strength. Because CT included additional cycling and greater exercise exposure, these differences cannot be attributed solely to training modality. Null protein findings do not establish equivalence among doses.

Humans↗