Skip to main content
NCBI home page
PLOS One logoLink to PLOS One
. 2025 Jun 9;20(6):e0325046. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0325046

Reverse T3 in patients with hypothyroidism on different thyroid hormone replacement

Julian B Wilson 1, Thanh D Hoang 2, Martin L Lee 1,3, Ma’ayan Epstein 1,3, Theodore C Friedman 1,4,*
Editor: Apeksha Niraula5
PMCID: PMC12148341  PMID: 40489725

Abstract

Background

Reverse T3 (rT3) is a biologically inactive form of T3 (triiodothyronine), a thyroid hormone, that is created by peripheral 5 deiodination of T4 (thyroxine) by type 1 and type 3 deiodinase enzymes (D1 and D3 respectively) and may block T3 binding to the thyroid hormone receptor. Approximately 15% of patients on L-T4 replacement therapy with a normalized thyroid-stimulating hormone (TSH) report experience continued fatigue and other hypothyroid symptoms; therefore, efforts are needed to understand why this occurs and how it can be corrected. Decades ago, endocrinologists realized that in patients with severe illnesses, rT3 is typically high and T3 is typically low; this was termed “euthyroid sick syndrome”. More recently, functional medicine and other doctors, have argued that high rT3 is detrimental and can block T3 from binding to the thyroid hormone receptor. Due to the lack of peer-reviewed publications on this topic, functional medicine doctors continue to rely heavily on rT3 levels to treat patients that may have no other laboratory findings of hypothyroidism and often prescribe L-T3-only preparations to patients in an effort to lower rT3.

Methods

The initial rT3 measurements done by liquid chromatography/tandem mass spectrometry (LC/MS-MS) were retrospectively analyzed from the initial blood tests in 976 consecutive patients, with symptoms of fatigue and treated for hypothyroidism, in a private Endocrinology practice. TSH, free T3 and free T4 were measured by electrochemiluminescence immunoassay (ECLIA). The upper limit of normal rT3 (24.1 ng/dL) was used as a cut-off for results above the normal range.

Results

The number of patients with rT3 levels above normal range varied significantly with the type of thyroid hormone replacement prescribed. The highest rate of an elevated rT3 was 20.9% (29/139) in patients taking T4 alone. Nine% (31/345) of patients not taking thyroid hormone replacement had elevated rT3. Patients on all types of L-T4 treatment had higher rT3 levels than those not on L-T4 treatment (p < 0.00001) and they also had a higher percentage of rT3 levels above the cutoff of 24.1 ng/dL (p < 0.00001). Linear regression analysis showed rT3 levels correlated with free T4 and free T3 levels and inversely with log TSH levels.

Conclusions

This study found elevated rT3 levels in patients with symptoms of fatigue on various thyroid hormone replacements with the highest levels of rT3 in those taking L-T4 replacement alone and the lowest levels of rT3 in those on preparations that contained L-T3 alone.

1. Introduction

Under physiological conditions, T4 (thyroxine) is primarily monodeiodoniated to T3 (3,3´,5-triiodo-L-thyronine) or reverse T3 (rT3; 3,3´,5´-triiodo-L-thyronine), depending on the energy or T3 needs of the body [1]. T3 is considered the active hormone because its affinity for thyroid hormone receptors is 15 times higher than T4, while rT3 inhibits the effects of T3 and T4 without binding to nuclear thyroid hormone receptors [2–5]. The clinical significance of rT3 has been debated since the 1970s, when the newly adopted “thyroid function test” allowed endocrinologists to realize that severe illness causes a reduction in T3 and an increase in rT3 [6]. Endocrinologists termed this “euthyroid sick syndrome” and noted that it was common in many types of chronic diseases, especially in patients hospitalized in intensive care units. Whether this is an adaptive response (to conserve energy) or a pathological response (where illness leads to reduced T3 production below that what is needed, thus warranting thyroid hormone treatment) is still the subject of intense debate. Overall, it is viewed that these patients should not be treated with thyroid medication [7–9].

As for the clinical significance of rT3 in thyroidal illness, the data is sparse. In 1977, Burman et al. developed one of the first rT3 assays and demonstrated that its levels varied significantly based on a person’s thyroid status (normal, hyperthyroid, and hypothyroid), but also based on the dosage of levothyroxine that patients received [10]. In particular, they showed that patients that were hypothyroid and receiving 0.05 mg per day of levothyroxine (suboptimal dosage) had below normal rT3 levels, while patients receiving 0.4 mg per day (supraoptimal dosage) had above normal rT3 levels, suggesting that knowledge of rT3 levels could be useful in the management of hypothyroidism. However, commercial rT3 assays were not available and the measurement of rT3 was confined to research settings. In 1995, Burmeister et al. published her evaluation of 246 patients whose rT3 levels were measured while being treated in a university teaching hospital. She showed rT3 levels varied tremendously and judged its measurement to be unreliable in distinguishing between hypothyroid sick patients and the euthyroid sick patients [11]. Even though this work looked at the variance of rT3 levels in nonthyroidal illness, many in the field felt that this unreliability extended to thyroid illness, and it is currently viewed that the measurement of rT3 is of little clinical use [12,13].

The authors believe this conclusion should be reevaluated for several reasons. Firstly, rT3 measurements have recently become more accurate with the wide-spread use of mass-spectrometry in commercial laboratories [2] and are available at both Quest Diagnostics and Labcorp. Since rT3 inhibits the action of the biological hormone T3 at the T3 receptor, knowledge of rT3 levels is required to completely understand the effects of thyroid hormone administration [5,14]. Importantly, thyroid medication is the second most prescribed drug in the U.S. [15] and yet as many as 40–50% of patients with these medications do not take them as prescribed [16]. Furthermore, many patients turn to alternative doctors, including functional medicine doctors, for the management of thyroid illness. These doctors often measure rT3 and use it to guide patient treatment. These providers have argued that high rT3 is detrimental and can block T3 from binding to the thyroid hormone receptor. With little peer-reviewed publications [17], these functional medicine doctors rely heavily on rT3 levels to treat patients that may have no other laboratory findings of hypothyroidism and often prescribe them L-T3-only preparations to try to lower the rT3. Studies looking at rT3 with valid assays are needed to determine the role of this hormone. Functional medicine doctors have proposed risk factors for elevated rT3 levels including stress, depression, pain, inflammation, dieting and iron deficiency [17].

In this paper, we retrospectively analyzed initial rT3 measurements from 976 consecutive patients seen by TCF from 2010 to 2021 in a private Endocrinology practice. Six hundred thirty-one patients were on varying types of thyroid hormone replacement and 345 patients were not on any thyroid hormone replacement.

2. Methods

2.1 Study population and methodology

The rT3 measurements were retrospectively analyzed from initial blood tests along with other thyroid function tests from 976 consecutive patients seen by TCF from 2010 to 2021 in a private Endocrinology practice. Three hundred forty-five patients were not on thyroid hormones, 226 were on desiccated thyroid extract (DTE) (Armour thyroid, NP thyroid, Nature-throid and WP thyroid were the most common brands) and not synthetic thyroid hormones, 15 were on desiccated thyroid and L-T3, 138 were on desiccated thyroid and L-T4, 7 were on desiccated thyroid, L-T3 and L-T4, 23 were on L-T3 alone, 139 were on L-T4 alone, and 83 were on L-T3 and L-T4.

All patients had fatigue as one of their main symptoms and none had a severe chronic disease in which they would be considered “sick euthyroid.” All patients had rT3, free T3, free T4, anti-thyroid peroxidase (anti-TPO), and TSH measured, usually in the morning after their visit at either Quest Diagnostics or Labcorp. rT3 at both laboratories were done by liquid chromatography/tandem mass spectrometry (LC/MS-MS). JW and ME. performed chart review and were not able to identify free T3, free T4, anti-TPO, and TSH in several patients during their chart review. The normal range for rT3 at Labcorp was 9.1 to 24.1 ng/dL and Quest Diagnostics was 8.0 to 25.0 ng/dL. The cut-off for results above the range used the value of 24.1 ng/dL and these values were determined in euthyroid patients. TSH, free T3 and free T4 were measured by electrochemiluminescence immunoassay (ECLIA) with a range of 0.45- 4.5 miU/mL, 2.0 to 4.4 pg/mL and 0.82 − 1.77 ng/dL, respectively at Labcorp and 0.45- 4.5 miU/mL, 2.3-4.2 pg/mL and 0.8-1.8 ng/dL at Quest. Anti-TPO was done by chemiluminescense at Esoterix Laboratories (subsidiary of Labcorp) and Quest with a range of < 9.0 IU/mL at both laboratories.

2.2 Statistical analyses

Sub-analyses of the pairwise comparisons of the thyroid treatment groups, and significance of anti-TPO status within these groups were performed using Dunn’s test. The Wilcoxon rank-sum test was used to compare rT3 levels between all groups on L-T4 treatment and all groups not on L-T4 treatment. The chi-square test for homogeneity was used to compare the % of patients with rT3 above range between all groups on L-T4 treatment and all groups not on L-T4 treatment. Pearson correlations between rT3, free T3, free T4 and log TSH (to compensate for severe non-normality) levels were calculated and the significance of these (from zero) were determined by the appropriate t-test. The patients with circulating anti-TPO antibodies who had elevated rT3 levels were compared to patients without these antibodies or who did not have them tested were compared by the Fisher’s exact test.

2.3 IRB approval

The Charles R. Drew University of Medicine and Science (CDU) Institutional Review Board (IRB) approved this retrospective study under Exemption Category # 4 (45CFR46.104, category 4iii). The most recent approval date was January 3, 2024. The data was accessed for research purposes on January 18, 2022, and accessed again on January 1, 2024. The authors had access to information that could identify individual participants during or after data collection, however the CDU IRB approved the use of PHI as involving no more than minimal risk and did not require a waiver of consent.

2.4 Patient and public involvement

Patients and the public were not involved in the design or the interpretation of the study although patients in this study have informed the investigators about the importance of measuring rT3.

3. Results

Table 1 shows the Mean, SD, and N of rT3, free T3, free T4 and TSH in the study population. 810 patients were female and 166 were male. Overall, 107 (11.0) patients had an elevated rT3 value. The proportion of patients with above normal rT3 values was found to be significantly affected by treatment (Fig 1) with the highest rate of elevated rT3 in 20.9% (29/139) of patients taking T4 alone. Nine percent (31/345) of patients not taking thyroid hormone replacement had elevated rT3 values. In contrast, only 3.5% (8/226) of patients taking desiccated thyroid hormone had above normal rT3 values, compared to 12% (10/83) of patients taking a T3-T4 combination and 17.4% (24/138) of patients taking desiccated thyroid-T4 combination. The proportion of patients taking desiccated thyroid hormone replacement with above normal rT3 levels was found to be significantly less than all other groups except for patients taking a desiccated-T3 combination (Fig 1). Table 2 shows the P-values of pairwise comparisons of the groups using Dunn’s test.

Table 1. Mean, SD, N of rT3 (ng/dL), Free T3 (pg/mL), Free T4 (ng/dL) and TSH (µIU/mL).

rT3 FreeT3 FreeT4 TSH
Mean 16.4 3.2 1.2 2.3
SD 6.6 1.0 0.3 4.3
N 976 452 455 513
Open in a new tab

Fig 1. Box and whisker plot of patient rT3 based on the type of thyroid hormone replacement.

Fig 1

Open in a new tab

None = Not taking any thyroid hormone replacement; Des = Desiccated thyroid hormone replacement; Des/T3 = Desiccated thyroid-T3 combination; Des/T4 = Desiccated thyroid-T4 combination; Des/T3/T4 = Desiccated thyroid-T3-T4 combination; T3/T4 = T3-T4 combination. * P < 0.05 compared to none. ^ P < 0.05 compared to T4.

Table 2. P-values of pairwise comparisons of the groups using Dunn’s test.

None Des Des/T3 Des/T4 Des/T3/T4 T3 T4 T3/T4
None – 0.01 0.22 0.01 0.08 0.52 3x10 -4 0.39
Des 0.01 – 0.46 6x10 -6 1x10 -3 0.03 1x10 -7 5x10 -3
Des/T 3 0.22 0.46 – 0.08 0.03 0.14 0.05 0.16
Des/T 4 0.01 6x10 -6 0.08 – 0.45 0.61 0.46 0.29
Des/T 3 /T 4 0.08 1x10 -3 0.03 0.45 – 0.33 0.63 0.22
T 3 0.52 0.03 0.14 0.61 0.33 – 0.38 0.90
T 4 3x10 -4 1x10 -7 0.05 0.46 0.63 0.38 – 0.09
T3/T4 0.39 5x10 -3 0.16 0.29 0.22 0.90 0.09 –
Open in a new tab

None = Not taking any thyroid hormone replacement; Des = Desiccated thyroid hormone replacement; Des/T3 = Desiccated thyroid-T3 combination; Des/T4 = Desiccated thyroid-T4 combination; Des/T3/T4 = Desiccated thyroid-T3-T4 combination; T3/T4 = T3-T4 combination.

Table 3 shows that patients on all types of L-T4 treatment had higher mean rT3 levels than those not on L-T4 treatment (p < 0.0001) and a higher percentage of rT3 levels above the cutoff of 24.1 ng/dL (p < 0.0001). Linear regression analysis (Table 4) showed rT3 levels strongly correlated with free T4 and free T3 levels and inversely with log TSH levels.

Table 3. Effect of L-T4 treatment on rT3 levels.

All groups on L-T4 treatment All groups not on L-T4 treatment p-value
rT3 (Mean ± SD) 18.4 ± 7.1 15.2 ± 6.0 <0.00001*
% with rT3 > 24.1 65/367 (17.7%) 42/609 (6.9%) p = 1.63 x 10−7^
Open in a new tab
*

Wilcoxon rank-sum test, ^chi-square test for homogeneity

Table 4. Correlations between rT3 levels and other hormones.

FreeT3 FreeT4 Log TSH
Pearson correlation 0.184 0.624 −0.298
p 0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0001
Open in a new tab

The presence of anti-TPO antibodies was assessed in 712 of these patients with 212 patients having anti-TPO antibodies above the range and 500 patients not having elevated levels. For the patients not on thyroid hormone replacement, 41 of 345 patients had anti-TPO antibodies and 304 patients did not have antibodies or were not assessed. For the patients on thyroid hormone replacement, 170 of 631 patients had anti-TPO antibodies and 461 patients did not have antibodies or were not assessed. For most thyroid treatment regimens, the proportion of patients with above normal rT3 levels did not vary significantly with TPO antibody status, except for patients taking desiccated thyroid hormone replacement. For this group, 0% (0/67) of the patients with circulating anti-TPO antibodies had elevated rT3 levels, while 7% (6/88) of patients without these antibodies or who did not have them tested had elevated rT3 levels (p = 0.037). For those taking thyroid hormone preparations besides DTE, 20 of 103 had anti-TPO antibodies and 49 of 270 did not have antibodies or were not assessed (p = NS).

4. Discussion

The initial rT3 measurements were retrospectively analyzed from 976 consecutive patients before management by TCF. Patients with hypothyroidism generally sought out TCF due to dissatisfaction with their current management, including persistent fatigue despite being on what their previous provider considered adequate treatment. We did not track what type of providers treated these patients but posit that it included primary care providers, other Endocrinologists, functional medicine doctors, mid-level health care providers (i.e., physician assistants, nurse practitioners, etc.), and holistic doctors. The high prevalence of patients treated with thyroid preparations other than L-T4 reflects the heterogeneity of providers as well as the dissatisfaction with conventional treatment among this group of patients. We found that the proportion of patients with above normal rT3 values varied significantly depending on the type of thyroid medication they were taking. This proportion was higher in patients taking preparations containing L-T4 but was lower in patients taking desiccated thyroid or L-T3 preparations. Groups that took preparations containing desiccated thyroid and/or L-T3 with L-T4 had a larger proportion of patients with above normal rT3 values than groups that took the same preparations without L-T4. The group taking L-T4 alone had the highest percentage of elevated rT3 values at 20.9%. Our results are consistent with previous findings that in short-term settings, L-T4 can raise rT3 levels [18] and L-T3 can lower rT3 levels [19], although these effects need to be verified prospectively in larger, newer studies.

Although the majority of patients do have a satisfactory response on L-T4 therapy, up to 15% of properly treated hypothyroid patients fail to achieve a sense of well-being on levothyroxine and continue to have hypothyroid symptoms despite normalized thyrotropin levels. The causes of patients’ lack of well-being have been discussed including by the American Thyroid Association Task Force on Thyroid Hormone Replacement [20] and include decreased serum T3/T4 ratio and alterations in the inherited DIO2 polymorphism [20,21]. Combination therapy with L-T4 plus L-T3 has been found to be helpful in some, but not all studies [22]. One review proposed that some patients likely have a compounding condition that increases the likelihood of developing symptoms [21]. Could this be elevated rT3 levels?

It is estimated that about 10–29% of patients with hypothyroidism use DTE as their primary thyroid hormone replacement medication in the US [23–25] despite concerns about the potential risk of thyrotoxicosis associated with DTE use [26,27]. Toleza et al. surveyed the content of online posts from three popular hypothyroidism forums from patients currently taking DTE and found the most frequently described benefits associated with DTE use were an improvement in symptoms (56%) and a change in overall well-being (34%) [25].

A 2013 crossover study by Hoang and colleagues compared levothyroxine to a DTE preparation (Armour Thyroid) [28]. They used 70 patients that were enrolled in a military healthcare system, were on a stable dose of levothyroxine, and had a normal TSH before the study started. During the study, patients lost an average of three pounds during once-a-day Armour Thyroid therapy, and at the conclusion of the study, they found that 49% (34/70) preferred Armour Thyroid, 19% (13/70) preferred levothyroxine, and 33% (23/70) had no preference. Importantly, patients had thyroid function tests performed at the beginning of the study and they compared the patients’ initial rT3 levels to ultimate preference for thyroid medication. The baseline (on L-T4) rT3 level was 32.3 ± 12.9 ng/dL that stayed elevated at 31.4 ± 12.1 ng/dL after receiving L-T4 but decreased to 21.1 ± 10.9 ng/dL (p < 0.001) following DTE treatment. rT3 was measured by RIA at Radim in Pomezia, Italy with the range not given. This prospective cross-over study supports that DTE lowers rT3 levels and is preferred by the majority of patients, although causality between rT3 levels and patient preference for DTE was not established and needs to be examined in larger studies.

This study was confirmed by Shakir and colleagues [29] who randomized patients to L-T4, L-T4 + L-T3, or DTE for 22 weeks. They found quality of life outcomes were similar among hypothyroid patients taking DTE vs L-T4 + L-T3 or L-T4. However, those patients that were most symptomatic on L-T4 preferred and responded positively to therapy with L-T4 + L-T3 or DTE. In support of our data, rT3 levels were highest in L-T4 treatment, lowest in DTE-treated patients and in the middle for those on L-T4 + L-T3 (p < 0.001). They did not find any difference between the rT3 levels in autoimmune and non-autoimmune patients and did not analyze if the rT3 levels correlated with symptoms.

The strengths of our study include a large number of subjects taking different types of thyroid preparations, similar to what many patients are taking in real world settings. Another strength is the measurement of rT3 levels with an accurate mass-spectrometry methodology. The limitations of the study include a potential bias of subjects more inclined to taking L-T4 + L-T3 and DTE preparations than would be seen in a typical Endocrinology clinic. However, our findings of the highest rT3 levels in those on L-T4 alone would favor higher rT3 levels in a typical Endocrinology clinic in which most patients are on L-T4 alone. Other limitations include the retrospective nature of the study, lack of objective measurements of fatigue and quality of life (QOL), and the lack of a causal relationship between rT3 levels and fatigue and QOL symptoms, a limitation that should be addressed in future studies.

5. Conclusions and future studies

In conclusion, our study found elevated rT3 levels in patients with symptoms of fatigue on various thyroid hormone replacements with the highest levels seen in patients on L-T4 replacement alone and the lowest levels seen in those on preparations that contain L-T3, including DTE. It would be premature to conclude that elevated rT3 levels are the cause of the symptoms in approximately 15% of patients on L-T4 replacement, and further studies are needed to understand the relationship better. Nine percent of patients not taking thyroid hormone replacement in our study had elevated rT3 values.

Further studies are needed to understand the implications of elevated rT3 values in patients both on and off thyroid hormone replacement and whether its measurement will be useful in clinical practice to guide thyroid hormone replacement. Randomized control studies are needed to determine if treatment with DTE or L-T3 in patients with elevated rT3 values will both lower elevated rT3 values and improve measurements of fatigue and QOL. Additional further studies are needed to determine what factors raise rT3 values and if correcting them improves hypothyroid symptoms. Overall, our study will open new avenues of thyroid disease research that could lead to improvement in clinical outcomes in patients with hypothyroidism.

Acknowledgments

We thank Robin Faria of the CTSI Grants Submission Unit of the UCLA Clinical and Translational Science Institute (grant number UL1TR001881) for editing this manuscript.

Raw data used for the findings is available in the following public repository:

https://www.ebi.ac.uk/biostudies/studies/S-BSST1973

Data Availability

The data used for the findings is available from the BioStudies repository at https://www.ebi.ac.uk/biostudies/studies/S-BSST1973 (DOI: 10.6019/S-BSST1973).

Funding Statement

This research was funded by the National Institute of Drug Abuse in the form of NIDA grants, R25DA050723 and R25DA057713 to TCF, and MIMHD S21 MD000103 to Charles R. Drew University. The funders had no role in study design, data collection, and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

References

  • 1.Friedman TC. The thyroid gland. In: Benjamin IB, Griggs RC, Wing EJ, Fitz JG, editors. Andreoli and Carpenter’s Cecil Essentials of Medicine. Philadelphia: Saunders Elsevier. 2015. [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Halsall DJ, Oddy S. Clinical and laboratory aspects of 3,3’,5’-triiodothyronine (reverse T3). Ann Clin Biochem. 2021;58(1):29–37. doi: 10.1177/0004563220969150 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Wiersinga WM, Chopra IJ, Solomon DH. Specific nuclear binding sites of triiodothyronine and reverse triiodothyronine in rat and pork liver: similarities and discrepancies. Endocrinology. 1982;110(6):2052–8. doi: 10.1210/endo-110-6-2052 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Cheng S-Y, Leonard JL, Davis PJ. Molecular aspects of thyroid hormone actions. Endocr Rev. 2010;31(2):139–70. doi: 10.1210/er.2009-0007 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Huang CJ, Geller HM, Green WL, Craelius W. Acute effects of thyroid hormone analogs on sodium currents in neonatal rat myocytes. J Mol Cell Cardiol. 1999;31(4):881–93. doi: 10.1006/jmcc.1998.0930 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Chopra IJ, Solomon DH, Hepner GW, Morgenstein AA. Misleadingly low free thyroxine index and usefulness of reverse triiodothyronine measurement in nonthyroidal illnesses. Ann Intern Med. 1979;90(6):905–12. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-90-6-905 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.De Groot LJ. Dangerous dogmas in medicine: the nonthyroidal illness syndrome. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 1999;84(1):151–64. doi: 10.1210/jcem.84.1.5364 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Glinoer D. Comment on dangerous dogmas in medicine--the nonthyroidal illness syndrome. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 1999;84(6):2262–3. doi: 10.1210/jcem.84.6.5809-7 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Caplan RH. Comment on dangerous dogmas in medicine: the nonthyroidal illness syndrome. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 1999;84(6):2261–2; author reply 2262-3. doi: 10.1210/jcem.84.6.5809-5 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Burman KD, Dimond RC, Wright FD, Earll JM, Bruton J, Wartofsky L. A radioimmunoassay for 3,3’,5’-L-triiodothyronine (reverse T3): assessment of thyroid gland content and serum measurements in conditions of normal and altered thyroidal economy and following administration of thyrotropin releasing hormone (TRH) and thyrotropin (TSH). J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 1977;44(4):660–72. doi: 10.1210/jcem-44-4-660 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Burmeister LA. Reverse T3 does not reliably differentiate hypothyroid sick syndrome from euthyroid sick syndrome. Thyroid. 1995;5(6):435–41. doi: 10.1089/thy.1995.5.435 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Gomes-Lima C, Wartofsky L, Burman K. Can reverse T3 assay be employed to guide T4 vs. T4/T3 therapy in hypothyroidism? Front Endocrinol (Lausanne). 2019;10:856. doi: 10.3389/fendo.2019.00856 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Garnett ER, Pagaduan JV, Devaraj S. Trust your endocrinologist - report and recommendations on the ordering of reverse T3 testing. Ann Clin Lab Sci. 2020;50(3):383–5. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Lynch MA, Andrews JF, Moore RE. Inhibition of metabolism by reverse T3 (3, 3′, 5′-triiodothyronine) in the lamb. Contributions to thermal physiology. Elsevier. 1981. p. 337–9. [Google Scholar]
  • 15.The Top 50 Drugs Prescribed in the United States 2023 [January 10, 2024]. Available from: https://www.healthgrades.com/right-care/patient-advocate/the-top-50-drugs-prescribed-in-the-united-states. [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Hepp Z, Wyne K, Manthena SR, Wang S, Gossain V. Adherence to thyroid hormone replacement therapy: a retrospective, claims database analysis. Curr Med Res Opin. 2018;34(9):1673–8. doi: 10.1080/03007995.2018.1486293 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Schwartz E, Holtorf K. Hormone replacement therapy in the geriatric patient: current state of the evidence and questions for the future. Estrogen, progesterone, testosterone, and thyroid hormone augmentation in geriatric clinical practice: part 1. Clin Geriatr Med. 2011;27(4):541–59. doi: 10.1016/j.cger.2011.07.013 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Brent GA, Hershman JM. Thyroxine therapy in patients with severe nonthyroidal illnesses and low serum thyroxine concentration. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 1986;63(1):1–8. doi: 10.1210/jcem-63-1-1 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Límanová Z, Sonka J, Kratochvíl O, Wilczek H, Marek J. Effects of total fasting in obese women. IV. Response of serum triiodothyronine (T3) and reverse triiodothyronine (rT3) to administered T3. Endokrinologie. 1981;77(1):70–8. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Jonklaas J, Bianco AC, Bauer AJ, Burman KD, Cappola AR, Celi FS, et al. Guidelines for the treatment of hypothyroidism: prepared by the american thyroid association task force on thyroid hormone replacement. Thyroid. 2014;24(12):1670–751. doi: 10.1089/thy.2014.0028 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Ettleson MD, Bianco AC. Individualized Therapy for Hypothyroidism: Is T4 Enough for Everyone? J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2020;105(9):e3090–104. doi: 10.1210/clinem/dgaa430 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Jonklaas J, Bianco AC, Cappola AR, Celi FS, Fliers E, Heuer H, et al. Evidence-based use of levothyroxine/liothyronine combinations in treating hypothyroidism: a consensus document. Eur Thyroid J. 2021;10(1):10–38. doi: 10.1159/000512970 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Hennessey JV. Historical and current perspective in the use of thyroid extracts for the treatment of hypothyroidism. Endocr Pract. 2015;21(10):1161–70. doi: 10.4158/EP14477.RA [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Peterson SJ, Cappola AR, Castro MR, Dayan CM, Farwell AP, Hennessey JV, et al. An online survey of hypothyroid patients demonstrates prominent dissatisfaction. Thyroid. 2018;28(6):707–21. doi: 10.1089/thy.2017.0681 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Toloza FJK, Espinoza Suarez NR, El Kawkgi O, Golembiewski EH, Ponce OJ, Yao L, et al. Patient experiences and perceptions associated with the use of desiccated thyroid extract. Medicina (Kaunas). 2020;56(4):161. doi: 10.3390/medicina56040161 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Lev-Ran A. Part-of-the-day hypertriiodothyroninemia caused by desiccated thyroid. JAMA. 1983;250(20):2790–1. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.McAninch EA, Bianco AC. The swinging pendulum in treatment for hypothyroidism: from (and toward?) combination therapy. Front Endocrinol (Lausanne). 2019;10:446. doi: 10.3389/fendo.2019.00446 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Hoang TD, Olsen CH, Mai VQ, Clyde PW, Shakir MKM. Desiccated thyroid extract compared with levothyroxine in the treatment of hypothyroidism: a randomized, double-blind, crossover study. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2013;98(5):1982–90. doi: 10.1210/jc.2012-4107 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Shakir MKM, Brooks DI, McAninch EA, Fonseca TL, Mai VQ, Bianco AC, et al. Comparative effectiveness of levothyroxine, desiccated thyroid extract, and levothyroxine+liothyronine in hypothyroidism. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2021;106(11):e4400–13. doi: 10.1210/clinem/dgab478 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Decision Letter 0

Apeksha Niraula

24 Mar 2025

Dear Dr. Friedman,

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 May 08 2025 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.

  • 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: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols . Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at https://plos.org/protocols?utm_medium=editorial-email&utm_source=authorletters&utm_campaign=protocols .

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Apeksha Niraula, M.D.

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal Requirements:

1. When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements.-->--> -->-->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. In the online submission form, you indicated that The data underlying the results presented in the study are available from the corresponding author.-->--> -->-->All PLOS journals now require all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript to be freely available to other researchers, either a. In a public repository, b. Within the manuscript itself, or c. Uploaded as supplementary information.-->-->This policy applies to all data except where public deposition would breach compliance with the protocol approved by your research ethics board. If your data cannot be made publicly available for ethical or legal reasons (e.g., public availability would compromise patient privacy), please explain your reasons on resubmission and your exemption request will be escalated for approval.-->?>

[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?

Reviewer #1: Partly

**********

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

Reviewer #1: I Don't Know

**********

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

The PLOS Data policy

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

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

Reviewer #1: No

**********

Reviewer #1:  1. Do not start sentence with digit and write single digit in a words.

2.Revise the abstract: Background: Check these sentence "Decades ago, endocrinologists realized that in severe illnesses" and

"Without peer-reviewed publications, these functional medicine doctors rely heavily on rT3 levels to treat patients that may have no other laboratory findings".

3. Background ended with objective of the study

4. Kindly elaborate the methods (In abstract): sample collection, which sample was used, which methods were used to measure fT3, fT4 and TSH.

5. Results (in abstract): Revise and mention the major findings only

6. Rewrite your conclusion (in abstract) based on the objective and findings of the study and remove the recommendation/suggestions from conclusion section.

7. The first paragraph of the result section includes the subgroup of the study population. It is better to mention it in the materials and methods.

8. Kindly mentioned the name statistical tests applied in the result section to test the significance.

9. Kindly revise the result section with appropriate table and figure. Are same data presented in table 2 and figure 1? Kindly explained it.

9. Write the conclusion in a separate section.

**********

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.

PLoS One. 2025 Jun 9;20(6):e0325046. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0325046.r003

Author response to Decision Letter 1

18 Apr 2025

___________________________________________________________

Department of Internal Medicine

April 3, 2025

Apeksha Niraula, M.D.

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

RE: PONE-D-24-59271

Reverse T3 in patients with hypothyroidism on different thyroid hormone replacement

Dear Dr. Niraula. We thank you and the reviewer for his/her helpful comments on our manuscript entitled “Reverse T3 in patients with hypothyroidism on different thyroid hormone replacement”. Our point-by-point response to the reviewer’s comments are below with our response in italics.

We have included the following items in our revised submission:

1. A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s) labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

2. A marked-up copy of our manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

3) An unmarked version of our revised paper without tracked changes labeled 'Manuscript'.

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

We carefully reviewed the manuscript and can state that our manuscript a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Our experiments have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes.

2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously? Reviewer #1: I Don't Know

Our statistician, Martin l. Lee, PhD has reviewed the statistical portions of the manuscript and concludes that the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously.

3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available? Reviewer #1: Yes

Thank you.

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: No

We had a professional grant writer review the manuscript and have included her corrections in the new version.

5. Review Comments to the Author

Reviewer #1:

1. Do not start sentence with digit and write single digit in a words. We have changed that.

2. Revise the abstract: Background: Check these sentence "Decades ago, endocrinologists realized that in severe illnesses" and

"Without peer-reviewed publications, these functional medicine doctors rely heavily on rT3 levels to treat patients that may have no other laboratory findings". We have changed these sentences.

3. Background ended with objective of the study. We checked and the background in the abstract did not include the objective of the study

4. Kindly elaborate the methods (In abstract): sample collection, which sample was used, which methods were used to measure fT3, fT4 and TSH. This information has been added to the Methods section of the Abstract.

5. Results (in abstract): Revise and mention the major findings only. We have revised the Results section of the Abstract to only include major findings.

6. Rewrite your conclusion (in abstract) based on the objective and findings of the study and

remove the recommendation/suggestions from conclusion section. We have removed the last sentence of the Conclusions section.

7. The first paragraph of the result section includes the subgroup of the study population. It is better to mention it in the materials and methods. We have moved the subgroup of the study population to the Methods section.

8. Kindly mentioned the name statistical tests applied in the result section to test the significance. The statistical tests are described in the 2.2 Statistical Analyses. We have moved the mention of the Fisher’s exact test to the Methods section.

9. Kindly revise the result section with appropriate table and figure. We have removed Table 2 and renumbered the remaining table numbers. Are same data presented in table 2 and figure 1? We agree that Table 2 and Figure 1 are duplications and have removed Table 2.

10. Write the conclusion in a separate section. We have added a Conclusions and Future Studies Section.

We look forward to hearing from you after the re-review process.

Sincerely yours,

Theodore C. Friedman, M.D., Ph.D.

Chairman, Department of Internal Medicine

Chief, Division of Endocrinology, Metabolism and Molecular Medicine

Professor of Medicine-Charles R. Drew University of Medicine & Science

1731 E. 120th St. Los Angeles, CA 90059

Professor of Medicine UCLA

theodorefriedman@cdrewu.edu

phone (323) 539-8020

fax (310) 564-2786

Attachment

Submitted filename: response to reviewers.docx

pone.0325046.s002.docx (31.2KB, docx)

Decision Letter 1

Apeksha Niraula

7 May 2025

Reverse T3 in patients with hypothyroidism on different thyroid hormone replacement

PONE-D-24-59271R1

Dear Dr. Friedman,

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 will be generated when your article is formally accepted. Please note, if your institution has a publishing partnership with PLOS and your article meets the relevant criteria, all or part of your publication costs will be covered. Please make sure your user information is up-to-date by logging into Editorial Manager at Editorial Manager®  and clicking the ‘Update My Information' link at the top of the page. If you have any questions relating to publication charges, 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,

Apeksha Niraula, M.D.

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

Reviewers' comments:

Acceptance letter

Apeksha Niraula

PONE-D-24-59271R1

PLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Friedman,

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

At this stage, our production department will prepare your paper for publication. This includes ensuring the following:

* All references, tables, and figures are properly cited

* All relevant supporting information is included in the manuscript submission,

* There are no issues that prevent the paper from being properly typeset

You will receive further instructions from the production team, including instructions on how to review your proof when it is ready. Please keep in mind that we are working through a large volume of accepted articles, so please give us a few days to review your paper and let you know the next and final steps.

Lastly, 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 customercare@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

Dr. Apeksha Niraula

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Associated Data

    This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

    Supplementary Materials

    Attachment

    Submitted filename: response to reviewers.docx

    pone.0325046.s002.docx (31.2KB, docx)

    Data Availability Statement

    The data used for the findings is available from the BioStudies repository at https://www.ebi.ac.uk/biostudies/studies/S-BSST1973 (DOI: 10.6019/S-BSST1973).

    Articles from PLOS One are provided here courtesy of PLOS

    RESOURCES