ArticlePloS one2022
Prolactin at moderately increased levels confers a neuroprotective effect in non-secreting pituitary macroadenomas.
Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Neuroretinal damage associated with pituitary macroadenoma: endocrine and radiological predictors and correlation with optical coherence tomography-derived biomarkers.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2026Observational
- Resolution of Hyperprolactinemia Caused by Pituitary Stalk Compression After Transsphenoidal Surgery for Pituitary Tumors.Brain tumor research and treatment · 2025Article
- Investigating the relationship between cognitive impairment and brain white matter tracts using diffusion tensor imaging in patients with prolactinoma.Journal of endocrinological investigation · 2025Article
- Effects of Prolactin on Brain Neurons under Hypoxia.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
contextProlactin, a hormone synthesized by the anterior pituitary gland demonstrates promise as a neuroprotective agent, however, its role in humans and in vivo during injury is not fully understood.
objectiveTo investigate whether elevated levels of prolactin attenuate injury to the retinal nerve fiber layer (RNFL) following compression of the optic chiasm in patients with a prolactin secreting pituitary macroadenoma (i.e., prolactinoma). DESIGN SETTING AND
participantsA retrospective cross-sectional study of all pituitary macroadenoma patients treated at a single institution between 2009 and 2019. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Primary outcome measures included RNFL thickness, mean deviation, and prolactin levels for both prolactin-secreting and non-secreting pituitary macroadenoma patients.
resultsSixty-six patients met inclusion criteria for this study (14 prolactin-secreting and 52 non-secreting macroadenoma patients). Of 52 non-secreting macroadenoma patients, 12 had moderate elevation of prolactin secondary to stalk effect. Patients with moderate elevation in prolactin demonstrated increased RNFL thickness compared to patients with normal prolactin levels (p < 0.01). Additionally, a significant positive relation between increasing levels of prolactin and RNFL thickness was identified in patients with moderate prolactin elevation (R = 0.51, p-value = 0.035). No significant difference was identified between prolactinoma patients and those with normal prolactin levels.
conclusionsModerately increased serum prolactin is associated with increased RNFL thickness when compared to controls. These associations are lost when serum prolactin is < 30 ng/ml or elevated in prolactinomas. This suggests a neuroprotective effect of prolactin at moderately increased levels in preserving retinal function during optic chiasm compression.
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.