Could Follicle-Stimulating Hormone Become a Useful Biomarker for Monitoring the Pace and Trajectory of Menopause?

Written by: Dr. Mona Fahoum, ND, ABHRT

Symphony Natural Health Science and Medical Team

Reviewed by Dr. Deanna Minich, PhD, MS, CNS, FMCP, FACN

Follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) begins rising years before the final menstrual period and is increasingly studied as a marker of endocrine aging — with associations with bone loss, body composition changes, and cognitive aging — but it is not yet validated as a standalone biomarker of longevity. Researchers currently view FSH as a promising early signal of the pace of menopausal transition, not a confirmed predictor of how long or how healthily a woman will live.

For decades, FSH has been primarily used as a clinical marker of reproductive status, particularly in assessing fertility, ovarian reserve, and menopausal status [1]. However, a growing body of research suggests that FSH may influence multiple systems throughout the body, including bone, metabolism, cardiovascular health, and brain function [2-6].

As scientists uncover these broader effects, intriguing questions have emerged: Could FSH serve as more than a marker of reproductive aging? Might it also provide insight into broader endocrine aging in women?

While the science is still developing, FSH is increasingly being explored as a potential biomarker of endocrine aging and a window into the physiological changes that occur during the menopausal transition [7,8].

Menopause as a Biological Aging Process

Menopause is often defined as the permanent cessation of menstrual cycles, but biologically, it represents a much larger transition. The years leading up to menopause involve substantial changes within the hypothalamic-pituitary-ovarian (HPO) axis, the neuroendocrine system responsible for coordinating reproductive hormones [9]. During this transition, ovarian responsiveness gradually declines, feedback signals change, and hormone patterns become increasingly variable [9,10].

Importantly, these changes extend far beyond reproduction. Menopause is accompanied by shifts in bone remodeling, body composition, lipid metabolism, vascular function, immune signaling, and brain health [11-13]. Physiological changes may occur years before the final menstrual period and reflect broader adaptations within the body's endocrine network.

As researchers continue to investigate the biology of aging in women, menopause is increasingly viewed not as a single event but as a dynamic process of endocrine recalibration [7].

“From a naturopathic perspective, healthy aging is about preserving vitality and supporting the body's innate ability to adapt. The emerging science of FSH encourages us to view menopause not as a hormone deficiency, but as a dynamic process of endocrine recalibration that influences the whole person.”

FSH as a Potential Marker of Endocrine Aging

Historically, FSH was named for its role in stimulating ovarian follicles [9,10]. That designation made sense when reproductive biology was the primary focus of investigation.

However, accumulating evidence suggests that FSH may be involved in physiological processes beyond the ovary. Studies have linked FSH signaling to bone remodeling [11], energy metabolism [12,13], body composition [3], lipid regulation and vascular health [14], neuroendocrine function [15-17], and potentially immune and stem cell regulation [18]. The identification of FSH receptors in multiple non-reproductive tissues supports the possibility that FSH is more accurately conceptualized as a pituitary-derived synchronizing signal that reflects the whole-body endocrine state.

This does not mean that FSH directly causes aging. Rather, it suggests that FSH may reflect and potentially participate in the broader endocrine adaptations and in some respects decline occurring during midlife and beyond

The Bigger Story: FSH Is Part of an Endocrine Network

FSH as an Early Endocrine Signal

One reason FSH has attracted interest as a potential aging biomarker is its timing. Unlike estradiol, which often fluctuates substantially throughout perimenopause, FSH typically begins rising years before the final menstrual period [10,14,15]. Research suggests that elevations in FSH may occur six or more years before menopause, making it one of the earliest measurable endocrine changes associated with reproductive aging [10,15].

This rise is not simply a consequence of declining estrogen. Early increases in FSH are largely driven by reductions in inhibin B, a hormone produced by ovarian follicles that normally suppresses pituitary FSH secretion [10,16,17]. As ovarian reserve diminishes, inhibin B declines and FSH begins to increase, even when estradiol remains within a normal range.

Because of this early and progressive rise, FSH may provide a useful window into the pace of endocrine aging before more obvious menopausal changes occur.

Table: FSH as an Early Endocrine Signal

Potential Influence of FSH on Endocrine Aging

Traditionally, elevated FSH has been viewed as a marker of declining ovarian function. However, research over the past two decades has identified follicle-stimulating hormone receptors (FSHRs) in a variety of tissues outside the reproductive system, including bone (osteoclasts), adipose tissue, vascular tissue, liver, and the brain [18-21].

This discovery has led researchers to investigate whether FSH may actively participate in physiological changes associated with aging rather than simply reflecting them [11,22].

Although much remains to be learned, elevated FSH has been associated with:

• Increased bone turnover and accelerated bone changes during perimenopause [23,24]
• Changes in body composition and fat distribution [25]
• Alterations in lipid metabolism [5]
• Vascular and inflammatory signaling [26]
• Cognitive and neuroendocrine changes associated with brain aging [12,27]

Collectively, these findings suggest that FSH may function as part of a broader endocrine network linking reproductive aging to systemic physiology.

FSH, Frailty, and Functional Aging

One of the most important goals in longevity science is identifying biomarkers that reflect functional aging rather than chronological age.

Chronological age tells us how long someone has lived. Functional aging reflects daily life changes in physical and psychosocial function–or, put simply, the ability to maintain function with age [28,29]. Researchers are increasingly interested in whether FSH could contribute to age-related functional decline.

The menopausal transition is associated with several changes commonly linked to aging and frailty, including changes in bone density and strength, muscle mass and strength, cognition, and metabolic health, all of which may impact someone’s ability to live functionally and independently [11,13]. Many of these changes occur during the same period in which FSH levels rise most dramatically [15].

The most robust area of FSH research pertains to bone health. Studies consistently demonstrate associations between higher FSH concentrations and lower measures of bone mineral density, increased bone turnover markers, and greater fracture risk [3,23,30]. Some investigations suggest that FSH may predict bone changes more effectively than estradiol during certain stages of perimenopause [24,31].

Whether FSH directly contributes to these changes or simply reflects underlying endocrine aging remains an area of active investigation. Regardless, its associations with skeletal health make it an attractive candidate for monitoring age-related changes that may influence functional aging.

Healthspan Versus Lifespan

When discussing longevity, it is important to distinguish between lifespan and healthspan.

Lifespan refers to the number of years a person lives. Healthspan refers to the years lived in good health, maintaining physical function, cognitive performance, independence, and quality of life [32]. For many women, the goal is not simply to live longer but to preserve vitality and resilience throughout the second half of life.

FSH may prove particularly relevant in this context because it appears to intersect with several systems that influence healthspan, including bone integrity, metabolic function, cardiovascular health, and cognitive aging [3,12,27].

While no evidence currently suggests that FSH directly determines lifespan, it may eventually help clinicians identify women at increased risk for age-related changes that affect long-term function and quality of life [33,34].

"As naturopathic physicians, our goal is to recognize physiological change early and support the body's innate capacity for adaptation. While FSH is not yet a validated longevity biomarker, researchers are beginning to see its potential. Following its trajectory alongside nutrition, sleep, movement, stress resilience, and other metabolic markers may help us develop more personalized strategies to promote healthspan throughout midlife and beyond."

The Importance of Trends Rather Than Single Measurements

One of the challenges in using FSH clinically is that levels fluctuate considerably throughout the menopausal transition [35,36].

A single measurement provides only a snapshot of a dynamic process. In contrast, repeated measurements over time may offer greater insight into how an individual's endocrine system is adapting during midlife

Researchers are increasingly interested not only in absolute FSH levels but also in FSH trajectories—the rate, timing, and pattern of change across the menopausal transition [37,38]

Emerging evidence suggests that women with steeper increases in FSH may experience different physiological outcomes than those with more gradual changes. For example, women with higher FSH trajectories during perimenopause experienced greater rates of bone density decline than those with lower trajectories [37]. Although this research remains preliminary, it highlights the possibility that endocrine aging may be characterized by patterns rather than fixed thresholds.

Could FSH Become Part of Longevity Medicine?

Longevity medicine increasingly seeks biomarkers that provide early insight into physiological aging.

Today, clinicians use a variety of tools to assess biological aging, including metabolic markers, inflammatory response markers, cardiovascular risk factors, body composition measurements, and emerging epigenetic assessments. FSH may eventually become part of this broader toolkit.

Future applications could include:

• Helping personalize preventive strategies during midlife [41]
• Identifying women entering the menopausal transition earlier than expected [39]
• Monitoring the pace of endocrine aging [40]
• Improving prediction of bone changes and fracture risk [31,30]
• Providing additional context for cognitive and metabolic health assessments [27,12]

Researchers are also investigating whether genetic variations in FSH signaling pathways may contribute to differences in reproductive lifespan, menopausal timing, and age-related health outcomes [42].

However, it is important to recognize that these applications remain investigational. At present, FSH should not be viewed as a standalone longevity biomarker or predictor of healthy aging.

Looking Ahead

The traditional view of FSH as merely a reproductive hormone is rapidly expanding. Although many questions remain unanswered, growing evidence suggests that FSH may reflect—and potentially influence—physiological processes that extend far beyond the ovary [11,22]. IIts associations with bone health, metabolism, brain aging, and systemic endocrine function have prompted researchers to reconsider whether FSH may represent a broader signal of biological aging in women [7].
For now, FSH is best understood as an important marker of reproductive and endocrine aging rather than a validated marker of longevity. Yet its unique position at the intersection of menopause and whole-body physiology makes it one of the most intriguing hormones in women's health research today.
As the science continues to evolve, FSH may ultimately help clinicians move beyond simply identifying menopause and toward a deeper understanding of how women age—and how to support healthy aging throughout the lifespan.

Dr. Mona Fahoum, ND, ABHRT

Symphony Natural Health Science and Medical Team

Naturopathic physician focused on preventive primary care, women's health, hormones, and digestive health across life stages. BS in Cellular and Molecular Biology, University of Washington; Doctorate in Naturopathic Medicine, Bastyr University. Director of Clinical Services at the Bastyr Center for Natural Health, the teaching clinic where naturopathic physicians complete residency. Adjunct faculty, Bastyr University. Past President, Washington Association of Naturopathic Physicians; member, American Association of Naturopathic Physicians.

References

1. Orlowski M, Sarao MS. Treasure Island (FL): StatPearls Publishing; May 1, 2023.
2. Spicer J, Malaspina D, Blank SV, Goosens KA. Psychiatry Res. 2025;345:116239. doi:10.1016/j.psychres.2024.116239
3. Li L, Pi YZ, Zhang H, et al. J Clin Lab Anal. 2023;37(9-10):e24899. doi:10.1002/jcla.24899
4. Lee SW, Hwang IS, Jung G, Kang HJ, Chung YH. Medicine (Baltimore). 2022;101(18):e29216. Published 2022 May 6. doi:10.1097/MD.0000000000029216
5. Wang Z, Yao H. Int J Womens Health. 2026;18:571490. Published 2026 Mar 13. doi:10.2147/IJWH.S571490
6. Oh DJ, Baek KH, Kang DW, Hong YJ, Jeong C. Korean Med Sci. 2025;40(10):e15. Published 2025 Mar 17. doi:10.3346/jkms.2025.40.e15
7. Lizneva D, Rahimova A, Kim SM, et al. Front Endocrinol (Lausanne). 2019;10:136. Published 2019 Mar 19. doi:10.3389/fendo.2019.00136
8. Taneja C, Gera S, Kim SM, Iqbal J, Yuen T, Zaidi M. J Mol Endocrinol. 2019;63(3):R73-R80. doi:10.1530/JME-19-0152
9. Harlow SD, Gass M, Hall JE, et al. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2012;97(4):1159-1168. doi:10.1210/jc.2011-3362
10. Delamater L, Santoro N. Clin Obstet Gynecol. 2018;61(3):419-432. doi:10.1097/GRF.0000000000000389
11. Korkmaz F, Gimenez-Roig J, Sultana F, et al. Trends Mol Med. 2025;31(11):1021-1031. doi:10.1016/j.molmed.2025.05.001
12. Xue Y, Zuo S, Wang F, Qi X. Front Aging Neurosci. 2025;17:1578439. Published 2025 Jun 16. doi:10.3389/fnagi.2025.1578439
13. Kim SM, Sultana F, Sims S, et al. J Endocrinol. 2024;262(1):e230377. Published 2024 May 16. doi:10.1530/JOE-23-0377
14. Tepper PG, Randolph JF Jr, McConnell DS, et al. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2012;97(8):2872-2880. doi:10.1210/jc.2012-1422
15. Randolph JF Jr, Zheng H, Sowers MR, et al. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2011;96(3):746-754. doi:10.1210/jc.2010-1746
16. Burger HG, Dudley EC, Robertson DM, Dennerstein L. Recent Prog Horm Res. 2002;57:257-275. doi:10.1210/rp.57.1.257
17. Welt CK, McNicholl DJ, Taylor AE, Hall JE. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 1999;84(1):105-111. doi:10.1210/jcem.84.1.5381
18. Chrusciel M, Ponikwicka-Tyszko D, Wolczynski S, Huhtaniemi I, Rahman NA. Front Endocrinol (Lausanne). 2019;10:32. Published 2019 Feb 4. doi:10.3389/fendo.2019.00032
19. Robinson LJ, Tourkova I, Wang Y, et al. Biochem Biophys Res Commun. 2010;394(1):12-17. doi:10.1016/j.bbrc.2010.02.112
20. Song Y, Wang ES, Xing LL, et al. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2016;101(1):254-263. doi:10.1210/jc.2015-2724
21. Ryu V, Gumerova A, Korkmaz F, et al. Elife. 2022;11:e79612. Published 2022 Sep 2. doi:10.7554/eLife.79612
22. Barbagallo F, Cavallaro A, Cannarella R, et al. Gynecol Endocrinol. 2025;41(1):2562195. doi:10.1080/09513590.2025.2562195
23. Sowers MR, Finkelstein JS, Ettinger B, et al. Osteoporos Int. 2003;14(1):44-52. doi:10.1007/s00198-002-1307-x
24. Jugulytė N, Bartkevičienė D. Endocrines. 2025; 6(4):54. https://doi.org/10.3390/endocrines6040054
25. Liu XM, Chan HC, Ding GL, et al. Aging Cell. 2015;14(3):409-420. doi:10.1111/acel.12331
26. Ghinea N, Liehn EA, Grommes J, Delattre DD, Olesen TK. Sci Rep. 2024;14(1):10176. Published 2024 May 3. doi:10.1038/s41598-024-60962-2
27. Wang SM, Jeong C, Um YH, et al. Front Aging Neurosci. 2026;17:1697255. Published 2026 Jan 6. doi:10.3389/fnagi.2025.1697255
28. Kok AAL, Huisman M, Giltay EJ, Lunansky G. Lancet Healthy Longev. 2025;6(3):100673. doi:10.1016/j.lanhl.2024.100673
29. Frangos E, Graf C, Samaras N. Curr Gerontol Geriatr Res. 2023;2023:9409918. Published 2023 Jan 28. doi:10.1155/2023/9409918
30. Koh EH, Ewing SK, Sigurdsson S, et al. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2025;110(7):1888-1895. doi:10.1210/clinem/dgae690
31. Shieh A, Greendale GA, Cauley JA, Karvonen-Gutierrez C, Crandall CJ, Karlamangla AS. Bone Miner Res. 2019;34(12):2246-2253. doi:10.1002/jbmr.3856
32. Jugran D. J Glob Health. 2025;15:03022. Published 2025 May 12. doi:10.7189/jogh.15.03022
33. Bartke A. Aging Cell. 2017;16(5):916-917. doi:10.1111/acel.12663
34. Zaidi M, Lizneva D, Kim SM, et al. Endocrinology. 2018;159(10):3503-3514. doi:10.1210/en.2018-00601
35. Burger HG, Cahir N, Robertson DM, et al. Clin Endocrinol (Oxf). 1998;48(6):809-813. doi:10.1046/j.1365-2265.1998.00482.x
36. Santoro N. Am J Med. 2005;118 Suppl 12B:8-13. doi:10.1016/j.amjmed.2005.09.008
37. Puranda JL, Weber VMR, Doucet É, Adamo KB. Bone. 2026;205:117805. doi:10.1016/j.bone.2026.117805
38. Lima SM, Yue Y, Bea JW, et al. Menopause. 2026;33(1):3-11. Published 2026 Jan 1. doi:10.1097/GME.0000000000002631
39. Bochynska S, García-Pérez MÁ, Tarín JJ, Szeliga A, Meczekalski B, Cano A. J Clin Med. 2025;14(16):5834. Published 2025 Aug 18. doi:10.3390/jcm14165834
40. Ahmed Ebbiary NA, Lenton EA, Cooke ID. Clin Endocrinol (Oxf). 1994;41(2):199-206. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2265.1994.tb02530.x
41. Pernoud LE, Gardiner PA, Dean MM, Noll JL, Schaumburg MA. medRxiv. 2026.03.25.26349141; doi:https://doi.org/10.64898/2026.03.25.26349141
42. Kordes GP, Busch AS. Reproduction. 2026;171(2):xaag008. doi:10.1093/reprod/xaag008