A September 2026 FDA workshop examined potential regulatory pathways for female testosterone therapy while clarifying evidence gaps regarding body composition.
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration held a public workshop on September 17, 2026, to discuss testosterone use in menopausal women. The meeting examined clinical practice and potential regulatory pathways for future drug development.
Before this public discussion, the medical landscape for female testosterone use relied heavily on off-label prescribing and international guidelines. There is currently no FDA-approved testosterone product specifically indicated for women in the United States. Clinicians typically prescribe products approved for men or utilize compounded creams, gels, injectables and pellets. This fragmented approach lacks standardized dosing guidance, consistent labeling and long-term safety monitoring.
The established medical consensus has remained narrow and highly specific for several years. The 2019 Global Consensus Position Statement, endorsed by 11 major medical societies, concluded that the only evidence-based indication for testosterone therapy in women is hypoactive sexual desire disorder. This applies specifically to postmenopausal women experiencing HSDD. The consensus recommendations apply strictly to physiologic dosing rather than supraphysiologic exposure. They do not support unverified claims about fatigue, cognitive concerns or musculoskeletal decline.
Without a formally approved product, off-label use has grown rapidly across the country. Holland & Knight reports that off-label prescribing of testosterone for women nearing or past menopause has tripled over the past five years. Even with this significant increase, fewer than 0.36 percent of menopausal women receive these prescriptions. This stark gap between rising consumer interest and the lack of an approved domestic product defines the current clinical reality.
Internationally, regulatory bodies have already recognized specific therapeutic uses for this demographic. Testosterone is approved for HSDD in postmenopausal women in Australia, New Zealand, the United Kingdom and South Africa. This global experience offers valuable data for future domestic regulatory discussions. The FDA stated that foreign data cannot simply be transferred into a United States approval without rigorous regulatory review.
The wellness and hormone-optimization movement has deeply influenced how these treatments are marketed to women. Treatment claims in this consumer market frequently extend beyond sexual health to target fatigue, cognition, body composition, strength and general optimization. This aggressive marketing environment complicates how patients understand their physical changes during midlife. Workshop presenters clearly cautioned that supporting clinical data for several of these broad uses do not yet exist.
Navigating this complex landscape requires clear communication between patients and qualified clinicians. When evaluating treatment options, it is helpful to consult clear midlife health resources that separate proven indications from unproven marketing claims. Low libido, sleep disruption, fatigue, changes in strength and altered body composition often occur together during midlife. These interconnected experiences do not necessarily share one simple hormonal cause.
The September workshop was jointly hosted by the FDA’s Office of Women’s Health and the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research. The comprehensive meeting covered testosterone physiology, measurement and clinical practice. Presentations also examined patient perspectives, safety concerns, efficacy data and possible regulatory pathways. The diverse group of participants included endocrinologists, urologists and gynecologists. Patient advocates, practicing clinicians, patients and FDA officials also attended the meetings.
The workshop followed an August 18, 2026, Federal Register notice identified as 91 FR 53417. Following this notice, the agency opened a public comment period running through October 19, 2026. Holland & Knight reported that more than 1,320 comments had been submitted by the time their article was published. The robust discussions provided critical updates on safety observations and the concrete evidence required for any future approval.
The FDA highlighted specific gaps in the current research data regarding physical health. The agency concluded that available information remains inadequate to assess the cardiovascular risks of long-term testosterone use in women. Existing clinical studies face severe limitations from short durations and a distinct lack of randomization. Longer studies are fundamentally needed before the long-term safety profile can be considered comprehensive.
Breast cancer risks also require further extensive investigation before broad prescribing guidelines can be established. Breast cancer was described as the most common cancer in postmenopausal women and the second most common cause of death in that population. Current evidence concerning the effect of testosterone on breast-cancer risk was characterized as entirely inconclusive. The 2019 consensus statement similarly noted that safety data beyond 24 months remain limited for both cardiovascular and breast-cancer risks.
The workshop provided clear parameters for how future clinical evaluations must proceed:
Safety observations from previous regulatory reviews were also a major focal point. The FDA conducted a comprehensive review of testosterone data approximately 20 years ago. That initial review identified several androgenic adverse effects, including acne, alopecia and mood changes. It also observed distinct metabolic effects, which included weight gain and notable changes in body composition.
These metabolic observations hold particular relevance for women working to maintain their strength and resting metabolism during midlife. The FDA’s reference to altered body composition should be understood as a safety and metabolic observation. It absolutely does not establish testosterone as a weight-loss treatment or a muscle-building therapy for menopausal women. Presenters specifically cautioned that evidence is not yet established for metabolic, cognitive, cardiovascular or bone-health uses.
Dosing levels and delivery methods present additional, significant safety concerns. Holland & Knight cites testosterone levels above 500 ng/dL as a clear example of supraphysiologic exposure. Such high levels raise serious concerns about unknown long-term effects, increased estradiol and inadequate informed-consent practices.
Pellet implants were discussed as a particular area of clinical concern regarding elevated hormone levels. Pellets may produce supraphysiologic exposure and cannot be removed easily if adverse effects occur. While not every testosterone prescription causes these issues, the workshop reinforced that dose, delivery method, monitoring and patient selection matter significantly.
Accurate measurement of hormone levels remains a fundamental challenge in daily clinical practice. Testosterone does not fall dramatically during menopause, unlike estrogen. Existing laboratory assays lack the sensitivity and standardization required to accurately measure the lower testosterone concentrations found naturally in women.
This measurement difficulty severely complicates the fragmented landscape of compounded products. Major medical societies broadly discourage compounded formulations, which typically lack insurance coverage and effective adverse-event reporting mechanisms. Inconsistent absorption, varying application sites and differing dispensing practices create substantial barriers to consistent treatment and clear evidence generation.
Women considering testosterone for fat loss or body recomposition should not assume the FDA workshop validated those physical goals. The meeting reinforced that metabolic and body-composition effects remain a vital part of a complex safety discussion. A change in body composition is not necessarily equivalent to beneficial muscle gain or desirable fat loss. Building sustainable physical resilience requires a comprehensive approach rather than relying solely on off-label hormone prescriptions.
A practical conversation with a healthcare provider should prioritize evidence-based lifestyle strategies first. Strength training, adequate protein intake, careful energy balance and targeted sleep support remain foundational elements for maintaining muscle mass. Addressing specific underlying medical conditions and individualizing lifestyle factors offer a more reliable path for women seeking physical strength.
Before pursuing any off-label hormone prescription, patients should ask their clinicians highly specific questions about safety and ongoing monitoring. It is critical to clarify the precise symptom or medical diagnosis being treated. Patients must verify whether the proposed use is actually supported by clinical evidence for that specific indication. They should also ask their provider whether the intended dose is physiologic or supraphysiologic.
Monitoring plans must be established clearly before beginning any unapproved medical treatment. Patients and clinicians should discuss exactly how hormone levels and potential androgenic effects will be tracked over time. A clear, actionable plan must be in place to address potential adverse effects, such as persistent acne, hair loss or sudden mood changes. Patients should fully understand what is known and unknown about longer-term cardiovascular and breast-health risks.
An approved domestic product could eventually improve consistency in formulation, dosing guidance, labeling and safety monitoring. This potential future benefit should not be confused with a near-term drug approval. The regulatory agency has identified substantial evidence requirements that drug developers must meet before any product reaches the open market. These requirements firmly include better dosing research, much clearer clinical endpoints and robust longer-term safety data.
Testosterone should not be dismissed simply because its current domestic use remains largely off-label. The 2019 consensus statement explicitly recognized HSDD as a valid, evidence-based medical indication. Several global countries have successfully approved testosterone products for this highly specific use. Evidence supporting one specific indication cannot automatically be generalized to another symptom or physical concern.
Data supporting the treatment of postmenopausal HSDD does not establish testosterone as a remedy for weight loss, improved body composition, daily fatigue or bone health. The workshop's discussion of weight gain and altered body composition requires very careful interpretation by both clinicians and patients. These specific metabolic effects were reported strictly as safety observations during earlier regulatory reviews. They do not constitute a medical claim that testosterone inevitably causes weight gain or that all observed body-composition changes are physically harmful.
The workshop signaled a genuine willingness from regulators to evaluate new clinical treatments for the symptoms of perimenopause and menopause. The agency clearly stated it “stands ready to have discussions with drug sponsors” regarding future development programs. Regulators explicitly expressed a strong desire to “bring these products to American women.” While no final approvals were granted, the FDA closed the public meeting with the statement: “Menopause is inevitable, but women should not have to suffer.”
This regulatory openness suggests that future clinical practice will likely shift from fragmented off-label prescribing toward standardized, indication-specific treatments supported by rigorous safety data.
When evaluating off-label hormone prescriptions and defining realistic physical goals, navigating the actual clinical evidence requires a clear perspective. Refemina addresses confusion about which midlife changes are hormonal and which have multiple causes, helping readers implement effective physical strategies without relying on unproven claims. Explore Resources
Follow Refemina for research-led insights on menopause, strength, metabolism, nutrition, skin, intimacy and confidence through midlife. New articles turn complex topics into clear, useful context.
Keep learning about the changes that shape energy, strength, confidence and wellbeing through midlife.
Explore Resources