Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19897672›Full record

ArticleThe Journal of clinical endocrinology and metabolism2010

Low sensitivity of glucagon provocative testing for diagnosis of pheochromocytoma.

Jacques W M Lenders, Karel Pacak, Thanh-Truc Huynh, Yehonatan Sharabi, Massimo Mannelli, Gennady Bratslavsky, David S Goldstein, Stefan R Bornstein, Graeme Eisenhofer

Open access · bronzeAbstract readControlled Clinical TrialMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in The Journal of clinical endocrinology and metabolism, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
2.9field-weighted citation impact, top 9% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 32 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Guideline
  2. Pooled it
  3. Multidisciplinary practice guidelines for the diagnosis, genetic counseling and treatment of pheochromocytomas and paragangliomas.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2021
    Guideline
  4. Pheochromocytoma in MEN2.Recent results in cancer research. Fortschritte der Krebsforschung. Progres dans les recherches sur le cancer · 2025
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Pheochromocytoma and paraganglioma.Progress in brain research · 2010
    Article
  9. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 6 institutions in 5 countries.

Jacques W M LendersDepartment of Internal Medicine, Division of General Internal Medicine, Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Center, Geert Grooteplein Zuid 8, 6525GA Nijmegen, The Netherlands. j.lenders@aig.umcn.nl
Karel Pacak
Thanh-Truc Huynh
Yehonatan Sharabi
Massimo Mannelli
Gennady Bratslavsky
David S Goldstein
Stefan R Bornstein
Graeme Eisenhofer
National Institutes of Health · USCenter for Cancer Research · USNational Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke · USSheba Medical Center · ILUniversity Hospital Carl Gustav Carus · DEUniversity of Florence · IT

Funding

Diagnosis, Pathophysiology And Molecular Biology of Pheochromocytoma and ParagangliomaZIAHD008735 · NICHD · EUNICE KENNEDY SHRIVER NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF CHILD HEALTH & HUMAN DEVELOPMENT · PI PACAK, KAREL · 2009 to 2024
$28.4M
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

contextPheochromocytomas can usually be confirmed or excluded using currently available biochemical tests of catecholamine excess. Follow-up tests are, nevertheless, often required to distinguish false-positive from true-positive results. The glucagon stimulation test represents one such test; its diagnostic utility is, however, unclear.

objectiveThe aim of the study was to determine the diagnostic power of the glucagon test to exclude or confirm pheochromocytoma. DESIGN, SETTING, AND SUBJECTS: Glucagon stimulation tests were carried out at three specialist referral centers in 64 patients with pheochromocytoma, 38 patients in whom the tumor was excluded, and in a reference group of 36 healthy volunteers.

main outcome measuresPlasma concentrations of norepinephrine and epinephrine were measured before and after glucagon administration. Several absolute and relative test criteria were used for calculating diagnostic sensitivity and specificity. Expression of the glucagon receptor was examined in pheochromocytoma tumor tissue from a subset of patients.

resultsLarger than 3-fold increases in plasma norepinephrine after glucagon strongly predicted the presence of a pheochromocytoma (100% specificity and positive predictive value). However, irrespective of the various criteria examined, glucagon-provoked increases in plasma catecholamines revealed the presence of the tumor in less than 50% of affected patients. Diagnostic sensitivity was particularly low in patients with pheochromocytomas due to von Hippel-Lindau syndrome. Tumors from these patients showed no significant expression of the glucagon receptor.

conclusionThe glucagon stimulation test offers insufficient diagnostic sensitivity for reliable exclusion or confirmation of pheochromocytoma. Because of this and the risk of hypertensive complications, the test should be abandoned in routine clinical practice.

Indexed as

GlucagonAdrenal Gland NeoplasmsAdultCatecholaminesFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPheochromocytomaPituitary-Adrenal Function TestsPredictive Value of TestsYoung AdultCatecholaminesGlucagon

Identifiers

PMID19897672
PMCPMC2805477
OpenAlexW2165170659

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.