Fact check: What are the potential side effects of using anti-lysyl-oxidase for penis lengthening?

1. What the researchers actually claimed and measured — clear, focused outcomes

The central claim across the available reports is that anti-lysyl-oxidase therapy combined with mechanical vacuum traction produced penile lengthening in adult rats, with reported increases around 10.8% for drug alone and up to 17.4% when combined with vacuum, measured by length parameters stated in the studies ^{[1] [2]}. The investigators reported no deterioration in erectile function by the assays used, and emphasized structural remodeling of the tunica albuginea as the likely anatomical substrate. These outcomes are presented as statistically significant within the preclinical experiments described ^{[1] [2] [3]}.

2. How the experiments were conducted — animal model, interventions, and endpoints

The work was performed in adult rat models using a pharmacologic inhibitor of LOX and a standardized vacuum device application; endpoints included penile length measurements, histological assessment of the tunica albuginea, biochemical assays for collagen crosslinks (pyridinoline), and erectile function testing as reported in the available full-text PDF and journal publication ^{[1] [3]}. The combination approach evaluated additive effects of mechanical stretch plus biochemical inhibition of crosslinking enzymes to produce remodeling, and the reporting emphasizes both morphologic and functional endpoints within the same study populations ^{[1] [2]}.

3. Proposed mechanism — why blocking LOX might change tissue geometry

The studies attribute the lengthening effect to reduced LOX activity leading to diminished pyridinoline crosslinks, which likely lowered collagen fiber stiffness in the tunica albuginea and permitted remodeling under mechanical load from the vacuum device ^[2]. This biochemical explanation connects enzyme inhibition to extracellular matrix plasticity and structural reorganization, offering a plausible mechanistic pathway for observed length changes; the researchers present LOX inhibition as a mediator between biochemical alteration and macroscopic anatomical change ^{[2] [3]}.

4. Safety signals reported — what was observed in the rats

Authors report no measurable negative impact on erectile function in the assays they used, and no immediate adverse events highlighted in the published results ^{[1] [3]}. The reporting focuses on erectile function as a primary functional safety endpoint and on histology for overt tissue damage, but does not present broader toxicology or systemic safety data. Within the scope disclosed, the animal data show efficacy with no detected functional compromise, yet the narrow safety assessment leaves many potential harms unexplored ^{[1] [3]}.

5. Key limitations the studies themselves leave open — gaps that matter for humans

All available material is preclinical in rats; there is no human safety, dosing, pharmacokinetic, or long-term outcome data presented. The reports do not address potential systemic effects of LOX inhibition—such as effects on vascular integrity, wound healing, or connective tissues elsewhere—nor do they present reproductive or fertility endpoints, immunogenicity of the agent, or multi‑dose chronic toxicity investigations ^{[1] [2]}. These omissions critically limit translation to clinical practice and mean claims about human efficacy or safety are not supported by the current data ^{[1] [2] [3]}.

6. Comparing the three available sources — consistency and publication context

The three sources provided are consistent: a 2019 PDF posted on ResearchGate and journal abstracts or versions reported in 2019 and a 2025 item referencing the Asian Journal of Andrology article; all describe the same experimental findings of length gains and tunica remodeling ^{[1] [2] [3]}. Publication dates range from 2019 (initial PDF and reporting) to a 2024–2025 restatement or indexing of the article, reflecting the original study timeline and later citations or database indexing. The uniformity across these items strengthens confidence in the reported animal results but does not expand the evidence base beyond the single experimental program ^{[1] [2] [3]}.

7. What remains unknown and what would be needed before human consideration

Critical unknowns include species differences in tunica biology, systemic consequences of LOX inhibition, optimal dosing and delivery (local vs systemic), reversibility, long-term durability of length changes, and comprehensive toxicology. Acceptable translation would require staged studies: replication in larger animal models, GLP toxicology, pharmacokinetics, targeted local-delivery safety data, and carefully controlled human trials with robust functional and systemic safety endpoints. The current literature provides a mechanistic signal but lacks the data necessary to assess human risk-benefit ^{[1] [2] [3]}.

8. Bottom line for clinicians and the public — cautious interpretation is required

The animal research presents proof-of-concept that LOX inhibition can remodel penile tunica and increase length in rats without detected erectile harm, but it does not establish human safety or recommend clinical use. Translational gaps and unmeasured systemic risks mean any clinical application would be experimental and potentially hazardous without extensive further study. Stakeholders should treat the findings as an early preclinical signal that warrants rigorous follow-up rather than evidence supporting current therapeutic use ^{[1] [2] [3]}.