↓ Skip to main content

How Sex Hormones Promote Skeletal Muscle Regeneration

Overview of attention for article published in Sports Medicine, July 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (93rd percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
26 X users
patent
1 patent
facebook
1 Facebook page
video
6 YouTube creators

Citations

dimensions_citation
90 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
236 Mendeley
Title
How Sex Hormones Promote Skeletal Muscle Regeneration
Published in
Sports Medicine, July 2013
DOI 10.1007/s40279-013-0081-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Martina Velders, Patrick Diel

Abstract

Skeletal muscle regeneration efficiency declines with age for both men and women. This decline impacts on functional capabilities in the elderly and limits their ability to engage in regular physical activity and to maintain independence. Aging is associated with a decline in sex hormone production. Therefore, elucidating the effects of sex hormone substitution on skeletal muscle homeostasis and regeneration after injury or disuse is highly relevant for the aging population, where sarcopenia affects more than 30 % of individuals over 60 years of age. While the anabolic effects of androgens are well known, the effects of estrogens on skeletal muscle anabolism have only been uncovered in recent times. Hence, the purpose of this review is to provide a mechanistic insight into the regulation of skeletal muscle regenerative processes by both androgens and estrogens. Animal studies using estrogen receptor (ER) antagonists and receptor subtype selective agonists have revealed that estrogens act through both genomic and non-genomic pathways to reduce leukocyte invasion and increase satellite cell numbers in regenerating skeletal muscle tissue. Although animal studies have been more conclusive than human studies in establishing a role for sex hormones in the attenuation of muscle damage, data from a number of recent well controlled human studies is presented to support the notion that hormonal therapies and exercise induce added positive effects on functional measures and lean tissue mass. Based on the fact that aging human skeletal muscle retains the ability to adapt to exercise with enhanced satellite cell activation, combining sex hormone therapies with exercise may induce additive effects on satellite cell accretion. There is evidence to suggest that there is a 'window of opportunity' after the onset of a hypogonadal state such as menopause, to initiate a hormonal therapy in order to achieve maximal benefits for skeletal muscle health. Novel receptor subtype selective ligands and selective estrogen and androgen receptor modulators (SERMs, SARMs) promise to reduce health risks associated with classical hormonal therapies, whilst maintaining the positive effects on muscle repair. Dietary supplements containing compounds with structural similarity to estrogens (phytoestrogens) are increasingly used as alternatives to classical hormone-replacement therapies (HRT), but the effects on skeletal muscle are currently largely unknown. Research has started to investigate the combined effects of exercise and alternative HRTs, such as soy isoflavones, on skeletal muscle regenerative processes to provide safer and more efficient therapies to promote muscle regeneration and maintenance of muscle mass and strength in the aging population.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 26 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 236 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 2 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Unknown 232 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 39 17%
Student > Master 38 16%
Student > Bachelor 37 16%
Researcher 19 8%
Other 13 6%
Other 41 17%
Unknown 49 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Sports and Recreations 43 18%
Medicine and Dentistry 42 18%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 27 11%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 19 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 16 7%
Other 36 15%
Unknown 53 22%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 23. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 21 September 2023.
All research outputs
#1,660,013
of 25,713,737 outputs
Outputs from Sports Medicine
#1,250
of 2,893 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#13,882
of 210,634 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Sports Medicine
#17
of 29 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,713,737 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,893 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 57.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 56% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 210,634 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 29 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.