Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33074402›Full record

ArticlePituitary2021

Clinical, biological, radiological, and pathological comparison of sparsely and densely granulated somatotroph adenomas: a single center experience from a cohort of 131 patients with acromegaly.

Amy A Swanson, Dana Erickson, Diane Mary Donegan, Sarah M Jenkins, Jamie J Van Gompel, John L D Atkinson, Bradley J Erickson, Caterina Giannini

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Pituitary, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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.

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

26 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Can acromegaly be controlled in all cases?Journal of neuroendocrinology · 2026
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Adenoma receptors and histologic characteristics determining management outcomes.The Journal of clinical endocrinology and metabolism · 2026
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. 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

8 authors.

Amy A SwansonDivision of Anatomic Pathology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.
Dana EricksonDivision of Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.
Diane Mary DoneganDivision of Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.
Sarah M JenkinsDepartment of Health Sciences Research, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.
Jamie J Van GompelDivision of Neurologic Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.
John L D AtkinsonDivision of Neurologic Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.
Bradley J EricksonDepartment of Diagnostic Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.
Caterina GianniniDivision of Anatomic Pathology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA. Giannini.Caterina@mayo.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2757-6782

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeGrowth hormone-producing pituitary adenomas are divided into two clinically relevant histologic subtypes, densely (DG-A) and sparsely (SG-A) granulated. Histologic subtype was evaluated in a large cohort of patients with acromegaly, separating DG-A and SG-A, and correlated with clinicopathological characteristics.

methodsPatients with acromegaly undergoing surgery as initial therapy between 1995 and 2015 were identified. Histologic subtype was determined by keratin expression pattern with CAM5.2 and correlated with clinical and imaging parameters, somatostatin receptor subtype 2 (SST2) expression, post-surgical remission rate, and application of a prognostic scoring system incorporating proliferation and invasiveness.

resultsOne hundred thirty-one patients were included. Tumors were classified as DG-A (75, 57.3%), SG-A (29, 22.1%), intermediate (I-A) (9, 6.9%), and unclassified (18, 13.7%) when CAM5.2 was negative. DG-A and I-A were combined for analysis (DG/I-A) and compared to SG-A. Age, gender, proliferation, and post-surgical remission did not differ. SG-A were larger [2 vs. 1.5 cm (median), p = 0.03], more frequently invasive [65.5% vs. 32.9%, p = 0.004], associated with higher MRI T2-weighted signal ratio [1.01 vs. 0.82 (median), p = 0.01], showed lower SST2 expression (p < 0.0001), and scored higher in the prognostic classification (p = 0.004). Surgical remission occurred in 41.7% DG/I-A and 41.4% SG-A (p = 1.0). On multivariate analysis, absence of invasion (p = 0.009) and lower pre-operative IGF-1 index (p = 0.0002) were associated with post-surgical remission.

conclusionCAM5.2 allowed distinction between DG/I-A and SG-A in most but not all cases. Histologic subtype did not predict surgical outcome. Absence of invasion and lower pre-operative IGF-1 index were the only significant predictors of post-surgical remission in this cohort.

Indexed as

AcromegalyAdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overBiomarkersChildCohort StudiesFemaleGrowth Hormone-Secreting Pituitary AdenomaHumansKeratinsMaleMiddle AgedYoung AdultBiomarkersCAM 5.2 antigenKeratinsAcromegalyDensely granulatedGrowth hormone-producing pituitary adenomaSomatotroph adenomaSparsely granulated

Identifiers

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.