Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26897383›Full record

Trial reportPituitary2016

Revised GH and cortisol cut-points for the glucagon stimulation test in the evaluation of GH and hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axes in adults: results from a prospective randomized multicenter study.

Amir H Hamrahian, Kevin C J Yuen, Murray B Gordon, Karen J Pulaski-Liebert, James Bena, Beverly M K Biller

Registry-linked trialAbstract readMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Pituitary, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05206149 (Stimulation Test With Intranasal Glucagon for Corticotroph, Somatotroph and Antidiuretic Axes), which is not on this map. Cited by 30 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

NCT05206149 phase4completednot on this mapstarted 2021, after this paper: background citation

Stimulation Test With Intranasal Glucagon for Corticotroph, Somatotroph and Antidiuretic Axes

TypeinterventionalSponsorA.O.U. Città della Salute e della ScienzaRan2021 to 2021Enrolled10ConditionsHypopituitarismArmsIntranasal glugagon, Intranasal placebo
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

30 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Adrenal insufficiency.Nature reviews. Disease primers · 2021
    Review
  19. Current concepts of the diagnosis of adult growth hormone deficiency.Reviews in endocrine & metabolic disorders · 2021
    Review
  20. Article
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

6 authors.

Amir H HamrahianDepartment of Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, 44022, USA. hamraha@clevelandclinicabudhabi.ae.
Kevin C J YuenSwedish Pituitary Center, Swedish Neuroscience Institute, Seattle, WA, 98122, USA.
Murray B GordonDepartment of Medicine and Neurosurgery, Allegheny Neuroendocrinology Center, Allegheny General Hospital, Pittsburgh, PA, 15212, USA.
Karen J Pulaski-LiebertNeuroendocrine Unit, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, 02114, USA.
James BenaQuantitatve Health Sciences, Lerner Research Institute, Cleveland, OH, 44195, USA.
Beverly M K BillerNeuroendocrine Unit, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, 02114, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

contextRecent studies suggest using lower GH cut-points for the glucagon stimulation test (GST) in diagnosing adult GH deficiency (GHD), especially in obese patients. There are limited data on evaluating GH and hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) axes using weight-based dosing for the GST.

objectiveTo define GH and cortisol cut-points to diagnose adult GHD and secondary adrenal insufficiency (SAI) using the GST, and to compare fixed-dose (FD: 1 or 1.5 mg in patients >90 kg) with weight-based dosing (WB: 0.03 mg/kg). Response to the insulin tolerance test (ITT) was considered the gold standard, using GH and cortisol cut-points of ≥3 ng/ml and ≥18 µg/dL, respectively.

design28 Patients with hypothalamic-pituitary disease and 1-2 (n = 14) or ≥3 (n = 14) pituitary hormone deficiencies, and 14 control subjects matched for age, sex, estrogen status and body mass index (BMI) underwent the ITT, FD- and WB-GST in random order.

resultsAge, sex ratio and BMI were comparable between the three groups. The best GH cut-point for diagnosis of GHD was 1.0 (92 % sensitivity, 100 % specificity) and 2.0 ng/mL (96 % sensitivity and 100 % specificity) for FD- and WB-GST, respectively. Age negatively correlated with peak GH during FD-GST (r = -0.32, P = 0.04), but not WB-GST. The best cortisol cut-point for diagnosis of SAI was 8.8 µg/dL (92 % sensitivity, 100 % specificity) and 11.2 µg/dL (92 % sensitivity and 100 % specificity) for FD-GST and WB-GST, respectively. Nausea was the most common side effect, and one patient had a seizure during the FD-GST.

conclusionThe GST correctly classified GHD using GH cut-points of 1 ng/ml for FD-GST and 2 ng/ml for WB-GST, hence using 3 ng/ml as the GH cut-point will misclassify some GH-sufficient adults. The GST may also be an acceptable alternative to the ITT for evaluating the HPA axis utilizing cortisol cut-points of 9 µg/dL for FD-GST and 11 µg/dL for WB-GST.

Indexed as

GlucagonHormonesAdenomaAdrenal InsufficiencyAdultAgedBlood GlucoseBody WeightCase-Control StudiesCentral Nervous System CystsCosyntropinCraniopharyngiomaDose-Response Relationship, DrugFemaleHuman Growth HormoneHumansBlood GlucoseCosyntropinGlucagonHormonesHuman Growth HormoneHydrocortisoneHypoglycemic AgentsInsulinAdrenal insufficiencyAdult growth hormone deficiencyDiagnosisGlucagon stimulation testWeight based

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

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.