Severity of non-alcoholic steatohepatitis is not linked to testosterone concentration in patients with type 2 diabetes.

BACKGROUND: Hypogonadism is reported to occur in non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD), but earlier studies used low-sensitivity diagnostic techniques (CT, ultrasound), for NAFLD diagnosis. We hypothesized that if hypogonadism was due to NAFLD, and not solely attributable to underlying obesity/diabetes, it would be more severe in the presence of steatohepatitis (NASH). To examine the influence of liver disease on testosterone in males with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), we used gold-standard liver imaging with MR-spectroscopy (1H-MRS), and performed liver biopsies to grade/stage the NAFLD.
METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, we measured in 175 males with T2DM total and free testosterone, markers of insulin resistance, and intrahepatic triglyceride content (IHTG) by 1H-MRS. Those with NAFLD on imaging underwent a liver biopsy.
RESULTS: Total testosterone was higher in the group without NAFLD ("No-NAFLD"; n = 48) compared to isolated steatosis (IS; n = 62) or NASH (n = 65) (385 ± 116 vs. 339 ± 143 vs. 335 ± 127 ng/ml, ptrend 0.03). Testosterone was also lower in obese vs. non-obese subjects in both the No-NAFLD and IS groups (p = 0.06 and p = 0.11, respectively), but not in obese vs. non-obese patients with NASH (p = 0.81). IHTG was independently associated with total testosterone (ß = -4.8, p = 0.004). None of the liver histology characteristics were associated with lower testosterone.
CONCLUSIONS: NAFLD is linked to lower total testosterone in patients with T2DM, but likely given a common soil of insulin resistance/obesity and not from the severity of liver necroinflammation or fibrosis. Nevertheless, clinicians should consider screening patients with T2DM and NAFLD for hypogonadism.

Introduction

Nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) encompasses a spectrum of disease that ranges from isolated hepatic steatosis to its more severe form with hepatocyte ballooning, lobular inflammation and often fibrosis, also known as non-alcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH). NAFLD is estimated to affect at least 25% of the adult population [1] and will soon be the most common indication for liver transplantation in the United States [1-3]. In the type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) population, NAFLD affects 60–70% of patients [4, 5] with 50–70% of those patients demonstrating changes consistent with NASH [6, 7].

Acquired hypogonadism is commonly associated with obesity and metabolic syndrome in males [8]. Studies have also shown a strong association of T2DM and hypogonadotropic hypogonadism in males, with strong correlations of testosterone levels with obesity and insulin resistance in these studies as well [9, 10]. Though the mechanism for this is largely unknown, it is hypothesized that increased aromatization of androgens in adipose tissue to estrogens leads to feedback inhibition of gonadotropins, leading to hypogonadotropic hypogonadism through reduced testosterone synthesis in the testes [11]. Additionally, increased inflammatory cytokines from adipose tissue and elevated leptin levels in association with central nervous system leptin resistance and insulin resistance may also contribute to decreased testosterone production in obesity and T2DM [12, 13].

Nonalcoholic fatty liver disease has been strongly associated with obesity, T2DM and the metabolic syndrome [7]. The impact of having NAFLD, or even more severe liver disease, such as NASH, in terms of risk for hypogonadism remains uncertain [14]. This is important as it has significant clinical management implications. Several studies have investigated this association with mixed results. While many of these have shown an association of NAFLD with low testosterone levels, they have relied on low-sensitivity tools for the diagnosis of NAFLD, such as liver ultrasound or computed tomography (CT) [15-19]. A study by Seo and colleagues showed that NAFLD may be associated with low testosterone, but that this effect was not independent of underlying obesity and metabolic risk factors [20]. To the best of our knowledge, no prior studies have used the gold-standard (liver histology) for the diagnosis of NAFLD/NASH in this setting, to fully establish if there is an independent association between NAFLD severity and hypogonadism. To this, we aimed to investigate in-depth, using gold-standard testing, the association of testosterone levels with NAFLD and NASH in patients with T2DM.

Methods

Subjects

Approval was obtained from the Institutional Review Boards of University of Texas H.S.C at San Antonio, Texas and the University of Florida at Gainesville, FL. Written consent was obtained from all study participants. A total of 175 male patients with a diagnosis of T2DM were recruited from the general population or hepatology and endocrinology clinics in Gainesville, Florida and San Antonio, Texas. Metformin, sulfonylureas and insulin were the only anti-hyperglycemic medications allowed. For calculations of insulin resistance (HOMA-IR, Matsuda Index and Adipo-IR), patients on insulin were excluded for the analyses. Patients were excluded if they were on pioglitazone, GLP-1 agonists, vitamin E, or any weight loss medication. Patients on testosterone replacement were also excluded from the study. Other exclusion criteria included: significant alcohol consumption (≥30g/day for men and ≥20 g/day for women) or any liver disease other than NASH (hepatitis B or C, autoimmune hepatitis, hemochromatosis, Wilson’s disease or drug-induced hepatitis). Patients were also excluded if they had type 1 diabetes mellitus or any evidence of clinically significant renal, pulmonary or heart disease.

Study design

In this cross-sectional study, all patients underwent routine laboratory tests, including fasting total and free testosterone levels. Patients underwent proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy (1H-MRS) to measure intrahepatic triglyceride content, and a 75-g oral glucose tolerance test to assess insulin secretion and action. Patients with a diagnosis of NAFLD based on 1H-MRS were offered a percutaneous liver biopsy to establish the diagnosis of NASH and to grade and stage the disease.

Measurements of intrahepatic triglyceride content

Measurement of intrahepatic triglyceride content was performed by 1H-MRS. Two or three areas with a volume of 30 × 30 × 30 mm were selected for voxel placement within the right lobe of the liver. A single experienced observer analyzed the spectra using commercial software (NUTS; Acorn NMR, Inc., Livermore, California). Intrahepatic triglyceride content was calculated as fat fraction (area under the curve [AUC] fat peak/[AUC fat peak + water peak]). Measurements were corrected for T1 and T2 relaxation using methods previously described. A liver fat content of >5.56% was considered diagnostic of NAFLD.

Analytical measurements

Total testosterone levels (normal range 250–1100 ng/mL) were measured by electro-chemiluminescence immunoassay (Cobas 602, Roche Diagnostics International Ltd, Switzerland) and free testosterone (normal range 35–155 pg/mL) by liquid chromatography tandem mass spectroscopy (Quest Diagnostics Nichols Institute, Valencia, CA). Hypogonadism was defined as total testosterone less than 250 ng/mL.

Percutaneous liver biopsy

An ultrasonography-guided liver biopsy was performed in patients with a diagnosis of NAFLD by 1H-MRS. Histological characteristics for the diagnosis of NASH were determined using standard criteria [21]. Briefly, a diagnosis of definite NASH was made based on the presence of: zone 3 accentuation of macrovesicular steatosis (any grade), hepatocellular ballooning (of any degree) and lobular inflammatory infiltrates (of any amount). The NAFLD activity score was calculated as the sum of the steatosis, inflammation and ballooning grades in the liver biopsy.

Statistical analysis

Data was expressed as percentages for categorical variables and as mean ± standard deviation for numerical variables (except when noted). Comparisons among categorical variables were performed by χ2 or Fisher Exact test. Kruskal-Wallis or oneway ANOVA were used for comparisons between numerical variables, depending on their distribution (post-hoc pairwise comparisons were performed by Steel-Dwass and Tukey-Kramer, respectively). Pearson’s correlation and multiple linear regression analyses was also used to assess the association between numerical variables. A two-tailed P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. All analysis was performed using JMP Pro 13 (SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC, USA) and Stata 11.1 (StataCorp LP).

Results

Population characteristics

Characteristics of the population are summarized in Table 1. As can be observed, although age was statistically different among groups, this difference was not clinically relevant (57 vs. 60 vs. 63 years). Groups were well-matched for diabetes control (both fasting plasma glucose and HbA1c) and for anti-hyperglycemic medication use. BMI was significantly higher in patients with NAFLD (isolated steatosis or NASH) compared to patients without NAFLD. Of note, we observed no difference in weight or BMI between patients with isolated steatosis (IS) and those with NASH. In the group without NAFLD, 42% were non-obese while 58% were obese, in patients with isolated steatosis 24% were non-obese while 76% were obese, and in the group with NASH 20% were non-obese while 80% were obese. Fasting plasma insulin and fasting insulin resistance measurements were significantly higher in patients with NAFLD, and more so in those with NASH. The Matsuda index was significantly lower in patients with IS and NASH compared to those without NAFLD. Those patients with steatosis and NASH had higher AST and ALT levels with more severe histologic findings.

Table 1

Population characteristics by liver histology.

	No NAFLD (n = 48)	Isolated Steatosis (n = 62)	NASH (n = 65)	P-value
Age, years	63 (7)	60 (8)	57 (9)*	<0.001
Ethnicity
Caucasian, %	69%	76%	59%	<0.001
Hispanic, %	8%	14%	36%
African American, %	23%	10%	5%
BMI, kg/m2	31.4 (4.5)	33.7 (4.7)*	34.5 (4.3)*	0.002
Fasting plasma glucose, mg/dl	155 (52)	154 (38)	147 (36)	0.46
HbA1c, %	7.1 (1.2)	7.0 (1.1)	7.5 (1.4)	0.099
Fasting plasma insulin, uU/ml	8.9 (6.2)	14.7 (11.2)*	21.1 (14.4)*#	<0.001
Use of diabetes medications
Metformin, %	84%	83%	70%	0.15
Sulfonylurea, %	46%	38%	45%	0.73
Insulin, %	39%	19%	24%	0.16
Cholesterol, mg/dl	150 (24)	166 (37)	174 (45)	0.13
LDL, mg/dl	83 (23)	92 (33)	94 (34)	0.37
HDL, mg/dl	43 (9)	40 (12)	36 (9)	0.057
Liver fat content, %	2.5 (1.4)	10.7 (4.9)*	16.7 (6.9)*#	<0.001
ALT, IU/L	23 (8)	36 (24)	76 (40)*#	<0.001
AST, IU/L	22 (5)	27 (13)	52 (25)*#	<0.001
Albumin, g/L	4.5 (0.2)	4.4 (0.3)	4.3 (0.4)	0.001
HOMA-IR	2.9 (2.0)	5.9 (5.4)*	6.9 (5.3)*	0.002
Adipo-IR, mmol/L. uU/ml	2.7 (1.4)	5.4 (4.3)	8.8 (6.8)*#	<0.001
Matsuda Index	4.6 (4.0)	3.3 (2.2)*	1.9 (0.8)*	<0.001
NAFLD Activity Score		2.7 (1.4)	4.8 (1.1)	<0.001
Steatosis grade		1.3 (0.7)	1.9 (0.7)	<0.001
Inflammation grade		1.4 (0.6)	1.9 (0.3)	<0.001
Ballooning grade		0.0 (0.0)	0.9 (0.4)	<0.001
Fibrosis stage		0.5 (0.6)	1.7 (1.3)	<0.001

Data are expressed as mean (SD) unless otherwise noted.

* = p<0.05 for difference from No NAFLD,

# = p <0.05 for difference from isolated steatosis.

Total and free testosterone levels across the spectrum of NAFLD

As observed in Fig 1, total testosterone levels were higher in those without NAFLD (“No NAFLD”) compared to patients with IS and NASH (385 ± 116 vs. 339 ± 143 vs. 335 ± 127 ng/ml, p for trend 0.03), but not the free testosterone concentration (ptrend = 0.97). We observed a significantly lower proportion of patients with hypogonadism (defined as total testosterone <250 ng/ml) in the No NAFLD group compared to IS and NASH groups (8.3% vs. 32.3% vs. 27.7%, p = 0.01), but not different when based on free testosterone levels (<35 pg/ml).

Fig 1

Total and free testosterone levels by liver histology in subjects with type 2 diabetes.

Data expressed as mean ± SEM. After adjustment for multiple comparisons, between-group comparisons in Fig 1 are Group 1 vs. 2: p = 0.19, Group 2 vs. 3: p = 0.99, Group 1 vs. 3: p = 0.13.

In order to determine whether the association between testosterone levels and severity of liver disease was independent of obesity, patients were stratified by presence or absence of obesity. The results of this analysis are represented in Fig 2. As can be observed, in patients without NAFLD and those with isolated steatosis, total testosterone levels were higher in non-obese vs. obese subjects (p = 0.06 and p = 0.11, respectively). However, there were no differences in total testosterone between non-obese and obese patients in the NASH group (p = 0.81). A similar trend was observed with plasma free testosterone levels among the groups comparing non-obese to obese individuals (No NAFLD: 63.7 ± 5.8 vs. 56.2 ± 3.8 pg/ml, p = 0.27; Isolated steatosis: 66.6 ± 8.7 vs. 54.7 ± 3.5 pg/ml, p = 0.14; and NASH: 60.4 ± 4.7 vs. 59.4 ± 3.6 pg/ml, p = 0.89).

Fig 2

Total testosterone levels by liver histology in non-obese (No) vs obese (Ob) subjects with Type 2 diabetes.

Data expressed as mean ± SEM.

To further investigate this association of liver fat with total and free testosterone levels, we analyzed the correlations between testosterone levels and intrahepatic triglyceride content measured by 1H-MRS. As seen in Fig 3B, there is a downward trend in testosterone levels as degree of hepatic steatosis increases. A similar downward trend in testosterone was also seen with increasing BMI and worsening insulin resistance as measured by HOMA-IR (Fig 3A and 3C). In order to assess whether the association between total plasma testosterone and intrahepatic triglyceride content was independent of other metabolic factors, we performed a multiple linear regression analysis (Table 2). Intrahepatic triglyceride content was independently associated with total testosterone levels (ß = -4.8, p = 0.004). Body mass index (ß = -9.6, p<0.001) and HbA1c (ß = -19.8, p = 0.02) were also independently associated with total testosterone in the multiple linear regression.

Fig 3

Total testosterone levels by BMI (A), liver fat on 1H-MRS (B) and HOMA-IR (C).

Table 2

Results of multiple linear regression analysis for variables associated with total testosterone.

	Coefficient	p	95% confidence interval
Liver fat content	-4.8	0.004	-7.9	-1.6
HbA1c	-19.8	0.024	-37.0	-2.7
BMI	-9.6	<0.001	-13.8	-5.3
ALT	0.8	0.016	0.2	1.5

HDL, TG, Age, FPG, AST were also tested but were not independently associated with total testosterone.

In order to determine the relationship between the severity of liver histology and testosterone levels, we analyzed total testosterone levels by each individual histological parameter. As described in Fig 4, there were no significant differences in total testosterone levels by steatosis, inflammation, or ballooning grade (panels A-C), or fibrosis stage (panel D). A similar pattern was observed with free testosterone levels.

Fig 4

Analysis of total testosterone levels by histology characteristics (panels A-D).

Data expressed as mean ± SEM. Fig 4A. After adjustment for multiple comparisons, between-group comparisons are Steatosis grade 1 vs. 2: p = 0.003, Steatosis grade 2 vs. 3: p = 0.99, Steatosis grade 1 vs. 3: p = 0.37. Fig 4D. After adjustment for multiple comparisons, between-stage groups comparisons are Stage 0 vs. 1: 0.56, Stage 1 vs. 2: 0.99, Stage 0 vs. 2: 0.65, Stage 0 vs. 3: 0.99, Stage 2 vs. 3: 0.99.

Discussion

There is ongoing debate regarding the relationship of NAFLD to hypogonadism. Previous research has shown an association of NAFLD with hypogonadism [14, 22]. However, studies have been conflicting regarding whether these associations are due solely to the confounding factor of obesity, or if there may be an underlying role of liver fat and inflammation on testosterone levels independent of the effects of obesity [14, 22]. While several studies have attempted to answer this question, they have relied on lower sensitivity techniques for NAFLD diagnosis. Our study was unique in its use of biopsy-proven NASH to evaluate for the underlying relationship between NAFLD and testosterone levels. We found no association between testosterone levels and any of the liver histology characteristics of NASH (inflammation, ballooning or fibrosis). This crucial finding adds to our knowledge of the underlying mechanisms for testosterone deficiency in patients with NAFLD. As increasing NASH severity was not associated with lower testosterone levels, it follows that another factor is driving the progressive hypogonadism as hepatic steatosis worsens. The most likely relationship lies in the link between hepatic steatosis and insulin resistance, and in concordance with this, there was a close association of hepatic steatosis with insulin resistance in our study.

Furthermore, there is also a question of whether obesity alone may be the driver for hypogonadism in patients with NAFLD. Previous studies found that insulin resistance may play a role in hypogonadism, with conflicting evidence on whether obesity is the underlying driver of this relationship [23, 24]. Our results demonstrated that liver fat serves as a strong predictor of total testosterone levels, and this effect occurs independent of the presence of obesity. This further supports that the most likely driver for low testosterone in patients with NAFLD remains insulin resistance, as these two diseases are inextricably linked.

In addition, this study goes beyond previous investigations in that we employed state-of-the-art techniques for NAFLD diagnosis, including the gold standard of liver biopsy as well as 1H-MRS. Several previous studies using ultrasound as a diagnostic marker for NAFLD showed an independent association of total and free testosterone levels with NAFLD [15-19]. However, liver ultrasound has low sensitivity for the diagnosis of NAFLD. In contrast, 1H-MRS results have been well correlated with liver biopsy, and have shown superior performance to hepatic ultrasound [25].

Our study had several limitations. We included only patients with type 2 diabetes, which may decrease the generalizability of our findings. However, NAFLD and type 2 diabetes are strongly linked, with up to 70% of patients with type 2 diabetes demonstrating presence of NAFLD [4]. Thus, it can be presumed that a majority of patients with type 2 diabetes would be at risk for hypogonadism related to their underlying hepatic steatosis and insulin resistance. Furthermore, there are inherent flaws in the total testosterone assay, as it is affected by sex hormone binding globulin (SHBG) and albumin levels and can be influenced by multiple underlying factors. Previous studies have indicated an association of NAFLD with total testosterone levels that is attenuated or absent when controlled for SHBG or when assessing free testosterone levels [20, 26]. Obesity and advancing age are associated with lower levels of total testosterone and SHBG [27]. Studies have shown an increase in SHBG levels and a reduced hepatic clearance of estradiol in patients with cirrhosis, producing variable effects on total testosterone levels [28]. While we did not measure SHBG levels, we assessed free testosterone, where the prevalence of hypogonadism was not different among groups. However, findings were consistent with total testosterone regarding the lack of association between testosterone levels and histology. Future studies may benefit from using bioavailable testosterone or free testosterone by equilibrium dialysis [13, 29].

In summary, our results suggest that the prevalence of low total testosterone in T2DM is higher in patients with NAFLD compared to those without NAFLD. This is likely related to the amount of intrahepatic triglyceride content and associated insulin resistance, as opposed to liver inflammation or fibrosis. Current Endocrine Society guidelines do not recommend routine screening of men for hypogonadism, unless associated with symptoms [29]. However, our study suggests that testing for hypogonadism in patients with known NAFLD may be warranted as these patients are a very high-risk group. Further, recent studies suggest treatment of hypogonadism in men with type 2 diabetes may lead to reduced mortality [30]. Future research is needed to determine if patients with NAFLD and hypogonadism may stand to benefit from reduced mortality after treatment.

Database used for all data analysis.

(CSV)

Click here for additional data file.

26 Mar 2021

PONE-D-21-02015

Severity of Non-alcoholic Steatohepatitis is Not Linked to Testosterone Concentration in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes

PLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Cusi,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

Please submit your revised manuscript by Apr 29 2021 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Massimo Federici, M.D.

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments:

comments from reviewer 1

I read with interest the manuscript of Dayton et al regarding the influence of liver disease on testosterone in males withT2DM. In this cross-sectional study of 175 males with T2DM, NAFLD was linked to lower total testosterone in patients with T2DM, but likely given a

common soil of insulin resistance/obesity and not from the severity of liver

necroinflammation or fibrosis.

The manuscript is interesting and well written. I have some points:

- In figure 1, could you perform also a test to evaluate intra-group differences?

- In figure 4, could you perform also a test to evaluate intra-group differences for panel A and D?

- In Figure 3, were the variables logaritimically transformed? Based on Table 1, they seems not normally distribuited

- In page 12 the authors wrote: “In order to assess whether the association between total plasma testosterone and intrahepatic triglyceride content was independent of other metabolic factors, we performed a multiple linear regression analysis. Intrahepatic triglyceride content was independently associated with total testosterone levels (ß=-4.8, p=0.004). Body mass index (ß=-9.6, p<0.001) and HbA1c (ß=-19.8, p=0.02) were also independently associated with total testosterone in the multiple linear regression”. Please, could you report a table with these data?

Journal Requirements:

When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements.

1. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf

2. Thank you for stating the following in the Acknowledgments Section of your manuscript:

"Grant support for this study was provided by the Burroughs Wellcome Fund (K. C.), the

American Diabetes Association (1-08-CR-08 [K. C.]), and a VA Merit Award (1 I01 CX000167-01 [K. C.])."

We note that you have provided funding information that is not currently declared in your Funding Statement. However, funding information should not appear in the Acknowledgments section or other areas of your manuscript. We will only publish funding information present in the Funding Statement section of the online submission form.

Please remove any funding-related text from the manuscript and let us know how you would like to update your Funding Statement. Currently, your Funding Statement reads as follows:

"American Diabetes Association (1-08-CR-08 [K. C.]) https://www.diabetes.org/

VA Merit Award (1 I01 CX000167-01 [K. C.]), https://www.research.va.gov/funding/

The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript."

Please include your amended statements within your cover letter; we will change the online submission form on your behalf.

3. Please include captions for your Supporting Information files at the end of your manuscript, and update any in-text citations to match accordingly. Please see our Supporting Information guidelines for more information: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/supporting-information.

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Partly

**********

2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: N/A

**********

3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

5. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: I read with interest the manuscript of Dayton et al regarding the influence of liver disease on testosterone in males withT2DM. In this cross-sectional study of 175 males with T2DM, NAFLD was linked to lower total testosterone in patients with T2DM, but likely given a

common soil of insulin resistance/obesity and not from the severity of liver

necroinflammation or fibrosis.

The manuscript is interesting and well written. I have some points:

- In figure 1, could you perform also a test to evaluate intra-group differences?

- In figure 4, could you perform also a test to evaluate intra-group differences for panel A and D?

- In Figure 3, were the variables logaritimically transformed? Based on Table 1, they seems not normally distribuited

- In page 12 the authors wrote: “In order to assess whether the association between total plasma testosterone and intrahepatic triglyceride content was independent of other metabolic factors, we performed a multiple linear regression analysis. Intrahepatic triglyceride content was independently associated with total testosterone levels (ß=-4.8, p=0.004). Body mass index (ß=-9.6, p<0.001) and HbA1c (ß=-19.8, p=0.02) were also independently associated with total testosterone in the multiple linear regression”. Please, could you report a table with these data?

**********

6. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

9 Apr 2021

(letter has been attached earlier)

Massimo Federici, M.D.

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE March 26th, 2021

RE: PLOS ONE Resubmission of manuscript PONE-D-21-02015.

Dear Dr. Federici,

We are resubmitting for publication in PLOS One our revised version of the manuscript titled entitled “Severity of NASH is Not Linked to Testosterone Concentration in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes” by Dayton et al.

We appreciate the kind words of support by the editors and reviewers, as well as their excellent suggestions to enhance our manuscript. We include below a point-by-point response to the issues raised.

We hope that the referees and editorial board will find this improved version to meet the high standards of your prestigious Journal.

Best regards,

Kenneth Cusi, M.D., F.A.C.P., F.A.C.E.

Professor of Medicine

Response to referee

Referee #1: I read with interest the manuscript of Dayton et al regarding the influence of liver disease on testosterone in males withT2DM. In this cross-sectional study of 175 males with T2DM, NAFLD was linked to lower total testosterone in patients with T2DM, but likely given a common soil of insulin resistance/obesity and not from the severity of liver necroinflammation or fibrosis.

Thank you for your support.

The manuscript is interesting and well written. I have some points:

Q1. In figure 1, could you perform also a test to evaluate intra-group differences?

After adjustment for multiple comparisons, between-group comparisons in Figure 1 are:

Group 1 vs. 2: p = 0.19

Group 2 vs. 3: p = 0.99

Group 1 vs. 3: p = 0.13

(The p we used was a p for trend so it makes sense that comparisons between groups are NS)

Data included in the legend (page 10).

Q2. In figure 4, could you perform also a test to evaluate intra-group differences for panel A and D?

Fig 4 A. After adjustment for multiple comparisons, between-group comparisons are:

Steatosis grade 1 vs. 2: p = 0.003

Steatosis grade 2 vs. 3: p = 0.99

Steatosis grade 1 vs. 3: p = 0.37

Fig4 D. After adjustment for multiple comparisons, between-stage groups comparisons are:

Stage 0 vs. 1: 0.56

Stage 1 vs. 2: 0.99

Stage 0 vs. 2: 0.65

Stage 0 vs. 3: 0.99

Stage 2 vs. 3: 0.99

Data included in the legend (page 12).

Q3. In Figure 3, were the variables logarithmically transformed? Based on Table 1, they seem not normally distributed.

We appreciate this important question from the reviewer. In Figure 3 variables were not logarithmically transformed because only liver fat and HOMA were not normally distributed based on Shapiro-Wilk normality tests. Testing these variables after logarithmic transformation, produced similar correlations to those reported in Fig. 3:

Total testosterone and liver fat: -0.28, p=0.002.

Total testosterone and HOMA: -0.30, p<0.001.

Due to the fact that the relationships were similar, for simplicity of interpretation for the readers, we decided to present the data without log transformation.

Q4. In page 12 the authors wrote: “In order to assess whether the association between total plasma testosterone and intrahepatic triglyceride content was independent of other metabolic factors, we performed a multiple linear regression analysis. Intrahepatic triglyceride content was independently associated with total testosterone levels (ß=-4.8, p=0.004). Body mass index (ß=-9.6, p<0.001) and HbA1c (ß=-19.8, p=0.02) were also independently associated with total testosterone in the multiple linear regression”. Please, could you report a table with these data?

This is a great suggestion and will add to the scientific merit of the paper. The table (below) was created and added to the manuscript as well.

Coefficient p 95% confidence interval

Liver fat content -4.8 0.004 -7.9 -1.6

HbA1c -19.8 0.024 -37.0 -2.7

BMI -9.6 <0.001 -13.8 -5.3

ALT 0.8 0.016 0.2 1.5

Table 2: Results of multiple linear regression analysis for variables associated with total testosterone. HDL, TG, Age, FPG, AST were also tested but were not independently associated with total testosterone.

Submitted filename: Response_to_reviewers.docx

Click here for additional data file.

27 Apr 2021

Severity of Non-alcoholic Steatohepatitis is not Linked to Testosterone Concentration in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes

PONE-D-21-02015R1

Dear Dr. Cusi,

We’re pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been judged scientifically suitable for publication and will be formally accepted for publication once it meets all outstanding technical requirements.

Within one week, you’ll receive an e-mail detailing the required amendments. When these have been addressed, you’ll receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will be scheduled for publication.

An invoice for payment will follow shortly after the formal acceptance. To ensure an efficient process, please log into Editorial Manager at http://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/, click the 'Update My Information' link at the top of the page, and double check that your user information is up-to-date. If you have any billing related questions, please contact our Author Billing department directly at authorbilling@plos.org.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to help maximize its impact. If they’ll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team as soon as possible -- no later than 48 hours after receiving the formal acceptance. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org.

Kind regards,

Massimo Federici, M.D.

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. If the authors have adequately addressed your comments raised in a previous round of review and you feel that this manuscript is now acceptable for publication, you may indicate that here to bypass the “Comments to the Author” section, enter your conflict of interest statement in the “Confidential to Editor” section, and submit your "Accept" recommendation.

Reviewer #1: All comments have been addressed

**********

2. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

3. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

4. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

5. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

6. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: Thank you very much for addressing my points. The maunuscript has been improved. No further comment.

**********

7. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

21 May 2021

PONE-D-21-02015R1

Severity of Non-alcoholic Steatohepatitis is not Linked to Testosterone Concentration in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes

Dear Dr. Cusi:

I'm pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been deemed suitable for publication in PLOS ONE. Congratulations! Your manuscript is now with our production department.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please let them know about your upcoming paper now to help maximize its impact. If they'll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team within the next 48 hours. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information please contact onepress@plos.org.

If we can help with anything else, please email us at plosone@plos.org.

Thank you for submitting your work to PLOS ONE and supporting open access.

Kind regards,

PLOS ONE Editorial Office Staff

on behalf of

Prof. Massimo Federici

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE