ReviewPituitary2014
A practical approach to acromegaly management in Latin America.
Review in Pituitary, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Prescription patterns of somatostatin analogs in patients with acromegaly and neuroendocrine tumors.Journal of endocrinological investigation · 2023Article
- Let's focus more on regional diversity of acromegaly.Annals of translational medicine · 2022Article
- Efficacy and safety of fractionated conformal radiation therapy in acromegaly: a long-term follow-up study.Endocrine · 2019Article
- Daily life reflections of acromegaly guidelines.Journal of endocrinological investigation · 2017Article
- Prescription patterns of long-acting somatostatin analogues.SAGE open medicine · 2017Article
- Combined treatment with octreotide LAR and pegvisomant in patients with pituitary gigantism: clinical evaluation and genetic screening.Pituitary · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 5 institutions in 5 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionEvidence-based treatment guidelines have undoubtedly advanced medical practice and supported optimal management of acromegaly, but their application may be hampered by limited access to the latest treatment options.
methodsIn this retrospective, narrative review, the authors revisited existing treatment guidelines for acromegaly in Latin America. These were considered in conjunction with published evidence chosen at the authors' discretion.
findingsIn a socially and economically diverse region, such as Latin America, any regional practice guidelines need to appreciate that recommended treatment options, such as surgery by expert pituitary surgical teams and drug therapies, especially somatostatin analogs, are often not available due to limited resources. In these instances, physicians may be obliged to apply less effective therapeutic options.
conclusionsThe current article looks at the practical aspects of acromegaly management in Latin America and discusses this in the context of existing guidelines. Furthermore, we consider potential strategies to make better use of resources through combination and multimodal approaches to treatment.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.