ArticleJournal of clinical research in pediatric endocrinology2023
Growth Hormone Dosing Estimations Based on Body Weight Versus Body Surface Area
Article in Journal of clinical research in pediatric endocrinology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pharmacokinetics and Childhood Obesity: Pathophysiological Basis and Challenges in Choosing the Ideal Body Size Descriptor.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Identification ofInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2025Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Both body weight (BW)- and body surface area (BSA)-based dosing regimens have been recommended for growth hormone (rhGH) replacement. The aim was to compare the two regimens to determine if either resulted in inadequate treatment depending on anthropometric factors. Methods: The retrospective study included children diagnosed with idiopathic isolated growth hormone deficiency. BW-based dosing in mcg/kg/day was converted to BSA in mg/m2/day to determine the equivalent amounts of the given rhGH. Those with a BW-to-BSA ratio of more than 1 were allocated to the “relatively over-dosed group”, while the remaining patients with a ratio of less than 1 were assigned to the “relatively under-dosed” group. Patients with a height gain greater than 0.5 standard deviation score (SDS) at the end of one year were classified as the height gain at goal (HAG), whereas those with a height gain of less than 0.5 SDS were assigned as the height gain not at goal (NHAG). Results: The study included 60 patients (18 girls, 30%). Thirty-six (60%) patients were classified as HAG. The ratio of dosing based on BW-to-BSA was positively correlated both with the ages and body mass index (BMI) levels of the patients, leveling off at the age of 11 at a BMI of 18 kg/m2. The relative dose estimations (over- and under-dosed groups) differed significantly between the patients classified as HAG or NHAG. Fifty-six percent of NHAG compared to 44% of HAG patients received relatively higher doses, while 79% of HAG compared to 21% of NHAG received relatively lower doses (p=0.006). When the patients were subdivided according to their pubertal status, higher doses were administrated mostly to the pubertal patients in both the NHAG and HAG groups. In the pre-pubertal age group, 73% of NHAG compared to 27% of HAG received relatively higher doses, while 25% of NHAG compared to 75% of HAG received relatively lower doses (p=0.01). Conclusion: Dosing based on BW may be preferable in both prepubertal and pubertal children who do not show adequate growth responses. In prepubertal children, relatively lower doses calculated based on BW rather than BSA provide similar efficacy at lower costs.
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.