The Case Against Scheduling Testosterone Replacement Therapy: Dr. Mohit Khera’s Argument for Keeping TRT Unschedule

Breaking: TRT Should Not Be Classified as Schedule III, Health Experts Argue

Testosterone replacement therapy, commonly known as TRT, is at the center of a policy debate that could change how patients access essential care. Medical advocates insist that placing TRT under Schedule III control would hinder timely treatment for men with clinically diagnosed low testosterone and fail to address real risks through better monitoring and education.

TRT is prescribed to treat hypogonadism and related conditions when blood tests confirm low testosterone levels. Proponents say that safeguards can be strengthened through clear guidelines, regular follow-ups, and patient education rather than broad federal scheduling that restricts legitimate medical use.

Regulators are weighing potential changes as advocacy groups, clinicians, and patient communities mobilize.The discussion mirrors a wider effort to curb misuse of controlled substances while preserving access to therapies that are medically necessary for some patients.

Why the push to preserve access to TRT matters

Medical experts argue that a Schedule III designation could create barriers to care, delay diagnosis, and increase administrative hurdles for clinicians and patients alike.They note that misuses of testosterone exist, but emphasize that misuse can be addressed with targeted oversight rather than broad scheduling that affects legitimate treatment now.

Healthcare providers stress that effective management relies on individualized assessment, ongoing monitoring, and patient education. They caution that blanket restrictions could push some patients toward untreated deficiency or seek therapies outside formal medical channels.

regulatory context and practical implications

Under a Schedule III framework, prescribing and dispensing TRT could trigger stricter record-keeping, heightened prescription monitoring, and more stringent supply controls. Advocates say these measures may not proportionately improve safety and could increase costs and access obstacles for patients who genuinely need therapy.

Opponents of Schedule III classification emphasize that careful clinical oversight, not Schedule-level control, is a more precise tool to mitigate risks. They point to accomplished management in other therapeutic areas where monitoring and guidelines, rather than scheduling, achieve safety goals.

Key considerations for readers

the question centers on balancing patient access with safeguards against misuse. The debate also touches on the broader role of regulators in ensuring that medical therapies remain available, affordable, and properly supervised.

At-a-glance comparison

Aspect	Current TRT Practise	What Schedule III Classification Could Mean
Access for patients	Prescribing under standard medical guidelines with clinician oversight	Possibly reduced access and added administrative burden
Prescribing logistics	Routine medical workflows with monitoring requirements	increased restrictions on dispensing and record-keeping
Safety and monitoring	Lab tests and follow-ups guided by clinicians	Overarching controls may not replace needed clinical oversight
Misuse risk	Managed through targeted education and oversight	Broad scheduling could shift patterns of misuse, not eliminate them
Cost and access barriers	Standard patient costs with insurance coverage where applicable	Possible increases in cost and insurance hurdles for patients

For readers seeking context, regulatory and safety perspectives are available from official health and law enforcement sources. See resources from the U.S.Drug Enforcement Governance, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, and MedlinePlus for reference on scheduling and medication safety.

DEA • FDA • MedlinePlus

What do you think? Should TRT remain readily accessible under medical supervision,or should it be more tightly controlled to curb potential misuse? Do you believe safeguards are sufficient without Schedule III classification?

Two quick questions for readers: Would tighter controls on TRT affect your ability to access care if you needed it? How should policymakers balance patient safety with the need for timely,evidence-based treatment?

Disclaimer: This article covers medical policy considerations. Always consult healthcare professionals for medical advice, diagnosis, and treatment decisions.

Share your thoughts in the comments or through social media to join the policy conversation.

Understanding Testosterone Replacement Therapy (TRT) and the Current Regulatory Landscape

Testosterone replacement therapy is the primary medical approach for men diagnosed with clinically significant hypogonadism. Guidelines from the Endocrine Society (2022) and the American Urological Association (2023) stress that TRT should be prescribed only after a thorough evaluation that includes serum testosterone measurement, symptom assessment, and exclusion of contraindications such as prostate cancer or uncontrolled sleep apnea.

In the united States, TRT remains an unscheduled prescription medication, but several state legislatures have introduced bills to classify it as a controlled substance (Schedule V). Dr. Mohit Khera, a board‑certified endocrinologist, argues that such scheduling would create unnecessary barriers to care without improving patient safety.

---

Dr. Mohit Khera’s Core Argument: Why Scheduling TRT Is Counterproductive

1. Patient Access and Quality of Care

• Immediate need: Men with symptomatic low testosterone often experience fatigue, depression, reduced libido, and loss of muscle mass. Delays in therapy can exacerbate these issues and increase comorbidity risk.
• Geographic disparity: Rural and underserved areas rely heavily on telemedicine for endocrine care. A scheduled status would impose prior‑authorization hurdles that telehealth platforms cannot easily navigate.

2. Risk of an Unregulated Black Market

• Illicit sourcing: Ancient data from the DEA show an uptick in underground sales of hormones when access becomes restricted (DEA Report, 2021).
• Compromised quality: Unregulated products lack potency assurance, leading to dosing errors, adverse cardiovascular events, and endocrine disruption.

3. Clinical Flexibility and Personalized Dosing

• dynamic dosing: TRT regimens range from transdermal gels (daily) to intramuscular injections (every 2-4 weeks). Scheduling would force standardized dosing intervals,limiting physicians’ ability to tailor therapy based on patient response and side‑effect profile.
• Monitoring variance: Individual labs (LH, FSH, estradiol) and symptom tracking dictate dosing adjustments.A rigid schedule undermines evidence‑based titration.

---

Evidence Supporting an Unschedule Approach

Study / Source	Key Findings	Relevance to Scheduling
Endocrine Society Clinical Practise Guideline (2022)	TRT improves quality of life when monitored quarterly; adverse events remain low (<2% major CV events).	Demonstrates safety without controlled‑substance framework.
NHANES 2021 Analysis	3.5 % of men over 40 were on TRT; 87 % reported adherence when therapy was easily accessible.	Highlights the importance of access in treatment continuity.
Khera et al., “Real‑World Outcomes of Unschedule TRT in a Multicenter Practice” (J. Clin. Endocrinol.,2024)	1,254 patients treated over 3 years; 92 % achieved target testosterone levels; no increase in illicit hormone use.	Direct empirical support for unscheduled prescription.

Real‑World Example: Dr. Khera’s Practice Outcomes

• Patient cohort: 842 men with confirmed hypogonadism (average age 49).
• Protocol: Initial labs,symptom questionnaire,followed by personalized gel or injection regimen.
• Results (24‑month follow‑up):

1. 88 % reported >30 % improvement in Energy‑Fatigue scale.
2. Only 1.2 % required therapy discontinuation due to adverse events.
3. No documented cases of patients seeking non‑prescribed testosterone.

These outcomes counter the premise that scheduling would “protect” patients; instead, they show that comprehensive clinical oversight already ensures safety.

---

Potential Risks of Scheduling TRT

1. Administrative Burden

• Prior‑authorizations increase provider workload by an average of 45 minutes per prescription (American Medical Association, 2023).
• Small clinics may lack dedicated staff to manage scheduling paperwork, leading to treatment delays.

2. Delays in Diagnosis & Treatment

• A scheduled status often requires additional documentation, extending the time from initial visit to first dose by 2-4 weeks.
• Early intervention is critical for preventing bone density loss and mood disorders.

3. impact on Telehealth & Remote Monitoring

• Telemedicine visits, which have grown 38 % since 2020, rely on electronic prescribing. Scheduling would necessitate in‑person verification, undermining the convenience and reach of virtual endocrine care.

---

Practical Tips for Clinicians Navigating an Unschedule TRT Environment

Comprehensive Assessment checklist

1. Confirm low serum testosterone on two seperate mornings (≥300 ng/dL threshold).
2. Conduct validated symptom inventory (e.g., ADAM questionnaire).
3. exclude contraindications: prostate cancer, PSA > 4 ng/mL, untreated sleep apnea.

Monitoring protocol

• Baseline labs: Total testosterone, free testosterone, LH, FSH, estradiol, CBC, lipid panel, liver function.
• Follow‑up schedule:
• month 0‑3: Re‑measure total testosterone; adjust dose if <400 ng/dL.
• Month 6: PSA, hematocrit, lipid profile.
• Annually: Prostate exam, bone mineral density if indicated.

Documentation Best Practices

• Use structured EMR templates to capture symptom scores and lab trends.
• Record shared decision‑making notes, highlighting patient preferences for formulation and dosing frequency.

---

Patient‑Centric Benefits of Keeping TRT Unschedule

• Faster symptom relief: Average time to therapeutic testosterone levels <4 weeks when no scheduling delays exist.
• Lower out‑of‑pocket cost: insurance plans typically waive prior‑authorization fees for unscheduled drugs, reducing administrative expenses for patients.
• Empowered shared decision‑making: Patients can choose between gels, patches, or injections based on lifestyle, fostering adherence and satisfaction.

---

Policy Recommendations from Dr. Khera

1. Advocacy Strategies

• Engage professional societies (Endocrine Society, AUA) to lobby against state‑level scheduling bills.
• Submit evidence‑based testimony during legislative hearings, citing real‑world outcome data.

2. Suggested Regulatory Language

• “testosterone products shall remain prescription‑only medications, exempt from controlled‑substance scheduling, provided that prescribers adhere to established endocrine guidelines and monitoring protocols.”

3. Collaboration with Stakeholders

• Partner with pharmacies to implement pharmacist‑managed continuation protocols, reducing the need for frequent physician visits while maintaining safety.
• Promote telehealth integration within state Medicaid programs to preserve access for low‑income patients.

---

References

1. Endocrine Society. “Testosterone Therapy in Men with Hypogonadism.” J Clin endocrinol Metab, 2022.
2. American Urological Association. “Guidelines for the Management of Testosterone Deficiency.” 2023.
3. DEA. “Illicit Hormone Market Trends.” 2021.
4. Khera M., et al. “Real‑World Outcomes of Unschedule TRT in a Multicenter Practice.” J Clin Endocrinol,2024.
5. American Medical Association. “Prior Authorization Burden Survey.” 2023.
6. NHANES. “National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey: Hormone Use.” 2021.