Comparison of two immunoassays in the determination of IGF-I levels and its correlation with oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) and with clinical symptoms in acromegalic patients

Acromegaly: diagnostic challenges and individualized treatment

INTRODUCTION

Acromegaly is due in almost all cases to a GH-secreting pituitary tumor. GH and IGF-1 excesses lead to its multi-system clinical manifestations and comorbidities. Acromegaly is under-diagnosed and typically presents with advanced disease. When early or mild, clinical recognition and biochemical confirmation are especially challenging. Individualized treatment may optimize patient outcome.

AREAS COVERED

This review covers challenges to diagnosing acromegaly and reviews therapies for acromegaly with a focus on those aspects that can be individualized.

EXPERT OPINION

The first step in diagnosing acromegaly is recognizing it clinically. To improve this, increase awareness and education of the general population and healthcare professionals about the acromegaly phenotype is needed. Once suspected clinically, IGF-1 measurement is the initial step in making the biochemical diagnosis. GH may be < 1.0 µg/L after oral glucose suppression in early/mild cases. GH and IGF-1 should be considered in concert. Providers should be aware of conditions that can alter GH and IGF-1 levels and each assay's performance. An individualized treatment approach is best employed. Surgery is preferred as initial treatment and medical therapy as initial adjuvant therapy. In individualizing therapy, the advantages and disadvantages of each option and predictors of response to them should be considered.

Prognostic value of nadir GH levels for long-term biochemical remission or recurrence in surgically treated acromegaly

CONTEXT

Outcome of acromegaly surgery is assessed by IGF-1 and glucose-suppressed GH, but whether the latter provides additional clinically relevant information when IGF-1 is normal is unclear. The role of GH suppression testing after surgery requires clarification.

METHODS

We studied 97 acromegaly patients with normal IGF-1 after surgery by measuring GH after oral glucose longitudinally, initially at ≥ 3 months after surgery and repeated one or more times ≥ 1 year later. Nadir GH was categorized as normal or abnormal relative to the 97.5th percentile of nadir GH in 100 healthy subjects, which were ≤ 0.14 µg/L (DSL IRMA) or ≤ 0.15 µg/L(IDS iSYS). Signs and symptoms scores and insulin resistance were followed longitudinally.

RESULTS

Of 68 patients with initial normal GH suppression 63 (93%) remained in remission and of 29 with initial abnormal GH suppression, 9 (31%) recurred. Recurrence was more common in patients with abnormal suppression (P < 0.001). A total of 14 patients recurred, including 5 with normal GH suppression progressing to abnormal and then recurrence. Overall, serial signs and symptoms and insulin resistance assessments did not identify patients with abnormal suppression or recurrence.

CONCLUSION

Risk of recurrence after surgery is increased for patients with a normal IGF-1 level, but abnormal GH suppression. We newly find, using both our and others' cut-offs, that while normal suppression predicts long-term remission in most patients, some can progress from normal to abnormal suppression and then recurrence after many years of follow up. Nadir GH levels are of prognostic value in acromegaly patients with normal IGF-1 levels after surgery.

Biochemical investigations in diagnosis and follow up of acromegaly

Measurements of human growth hormone (GH) and insulin-like growth-factor I (IGF-I) are cornerstones in the diagnosis of acromegaly. Both hormones are also used as biochemical markers in the evaluation of disease activity during treatment. Management of acromegaly is particularly challenging in cases where discordant information is obtained from measurement of GH concentrations following oral glucose load and from measurement of IGF-I. While in some patients biological factors can explain the discrepancy, in many cases issues with the analytical methods seem to be responsible. Assays used by endocrine laboratories to determine concentrations of GH and IGF-I underwent significant changes during the last decades. While generally leading to more sensitive and reproducible methods, these changes also had considerable impact on absolute concentrations measured. This must be reflected by updated decision limits, cut-offs and reference intervals. Since different commercially available assays do not agree very well, method specific interpretation of GH and IGF-I concentrations is required. This complexity in the interpretation of hormone concentrations is not always appropriately reflected in laboratory reports, but also not in clinical guidelines reporting decision limits not related to a specific analytical method. The present review provides an overview about methodological and biological variables affecting the biochemical assessment of acromegaly in diagnosis and follow up.

Discordance between growth hormone and insulin-like growth factor-1 after pituitary surgery for acromegaly: a stepwise approach and management

INTRODUCTION

Follow-up management of patients with acromegaly after pituitary surgery is performed by conducting biochemical assays of growth hormone (GH) and insulin-like growth factor-1 (IGF1). Despite concordant results of these two tests in the majority of cases, there is increasing recognition of patients who show persistent or intermittent discordance between GH and IGF1 (normal GH and elevated IGF1 or vice versa).

METHOD

In this narrative review, the last three decades materials on the issue of discrepancy between GH and IGF1 were thoroughly assessed.

RESULTS

Various studies have obtained different discordance rates, ranging from 5.4 to 39.5%. At present, despite the use of current sensitive assays and more stringent criteria to define remission, the rate of discordance still remains high. A number of mechanisms have been proposed to explain the postoperative discordance of GH and IGF1 including; altered dynamics of the GH secretion after surgery, early postoperative hormone assay, inaccurate or less sensitive tests and laboratory errors, too high cut-off point for GH suppression in the GH assays, GH nadir values not adjusted to age, sex, and body mass index, the influence of concomitant medication, co-existing physiologic and pathologic conditions, and many other proposed reasons. Nevertheless, the underlying mechanisms are still far from clear, and the solution continues to evade complete elucidation. Similarly, the impacts of such a discrepancy over mortality and morbidity and the risk of biochemical and/or clinical recurrence are unclear.

CONCLUSION

As a challenging clinical problem, a stepwise evaluation and management of these patients appears to be more rational.

Reevaluation of Acromegalic Patients in Long-Term Remission according to Newly Proposed Consensus Criteria for Control of Disease

Acromegaly guidelines updated in 2010 revisited criteria of disease control: if applied, it is likely that a percentage of patients previously considered as cured might present postglucose GH nadir levels not adequately suppressed, with potential implications on management. This study explored GH secretion, as well as hormonal, clinical, neuroradiological, metabolic, and comorbid profile in a cohort of 40 acromegalic patients considered cured on the basis of the previous guidelines after a mean follow-up period of 17.2 years from remission, in order to assess the impact of the current criteria. At the last follow-up visit, in the presence of normal IGF-I concentrations, postglucose GH nadir was over 0.4 μg/L in 11 patients (Group A) and below 0.4 μg/L in 29 patients (Group B); moreover, Group A showed higher basal GH levels than Group B, whereas a significant decline of both GH and postglucose GH nadir levels during the follow-up was observed in Group B only. No differences in other evaluated parameters were found. These results seem to suggest that acromegalic patients considered cured on the basis of previous guidelines do not need a more intensive monitoring than patients who met the current criteria of disease control, supporting instead that the cut-off of 0.4 mcg/L might be too low for the currently used GH assay.

Discordant growth hormone and IGF-1 levels post pituitary surgery in patients with acromegaly naïve to medical therapy and radiation: what to follow, GH or IGF-1 values?

New criteria that define acromegaly remission are more stringent: normal (age/sex-adjusted) insulin-like growth factor type 1 (IGF-1), growth hormone (GH) random (GHr) <1 μg/L, and a GH nadir (GHn) during oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) of <0.4 μg/L. Discordance between GH and IGF-1 values is often attributed to somatostatin receptor ligands (SRLs) or radiation. The purpose of this study was to evaluate rates of discordant IGF-1 and GH levels in patients with GH secreting adenomas (after pituitary surgery), who were naïve to any other treatment. We retrospectively analyzed data over a 5 year time period (2006-2010), in post-surgery acromegaly patients who had elevated IGF-1 but normal GH levels (per the new cure criteria). Symptoms of acromegaly were scored according to a 4-point scale. Fifty-four patients had post-operative GHr and IGF-1 measurements, 28 patients had GHn during OGTT, and 16 patients had 5-point 2-h GH day curve tests. Thirteen of 54 (24%) patients were found to have intermittent persistent discordant values; high IGF-1 and normal GH at final evaluation (77% of these patients were women). Patients had a median number of IGF-1 evaluations of 7.5 (range: 2-15) over a median of 22 months (range: 3-47 months). Mean elevated IGF-1 in the discordant population was 1.25 × upper limit of normal (ULN) ± 0.17 (range: 1.01-1.6 × ULN). Twelve of the 13 (92%) patients had macroadenomas; 10 of the 13 (69%) patients had mammosomatotroph, mixed lacto/somatotroph tumors or prolactin staining. No patient in the discordant population was on estrogen replacement therapy or had overt cardiac disease. When the relatively asymptomatic discordant population was compared with 35 patients from the concordant population (six were excluded because of preoperative medical treatment for acromegaly), no significant difference between age, gender distribution, body mass index (BMI), presence of diabetes mellitus (DM) or glucose intolerance and adrenal insufficiency between groups was noted. In our study of postoperative patients with acromegaly naïve to both SRLs and radiation, using new GH cut-off levels, 24% had intermittent or persistent discordant values. Our results highlight that relying on IGF-1 or GH measurements alone is not adequate for assessing disease control in surgically treated acromegaly patients. Management of such patients needs to be individualized and long-term studies evaluating morbidity and mortality incorporated into treatment decisions. Further studies with larger patient populations and longer follow-up are required to determine the long-term implications of discordant GH and IGF-1 value patterns.

Management options for persistent postoperative acromegaly

This article presents management options for the patient with acromegaly after noncurative surgery. The current evidence for repeat surgery, adjuvant medical therapy with somatostatin analogues, dopamine agonists, the growth hormone receptor antagonist pegvisomant, combination medical therapy, and radiotherapy in the context of persistent postoperative disease are summarized. The relative advantages and disadvantages of each of these treatment modalities are explored, and a general treatment algorithm that integrates these modalities is proposed.

Medical therapy of acromegaly

This paper outlines the present status of medical therapy of acromegaly. Indications for permanent postoperative treatment, postirradiation treamtent to bridge the interval until remission as well as primary medical therapy are elaborated. Therapeutic efficacy of the different available drugs-somatostatin receptor ligands (SRLs), dopamine agonists, and the GH antagonist Pegvisomant-is discussed, as are the indications for and efficacy of their respective combinations. Information on their mechanism of action, and some pharmakokinetic data are included. Special emphasis is given to the difficulties to define remission criteria of acromegaly due to technical assay problems. An algorithm for medical therapy in acromegaly is provided.