Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37189516›Full record

ReviewDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland)2023

Pitfalls in the Diagnosis and Management of Hypercortisolism (Cushing Syndrome) in Humans; A Review of the Laboratory Medicine Perspective.

Kade C Flowers, Kate E Shipman

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 12% of its field
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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
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

2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Kade C FlowersDepartment of Clinical Chemistry, University Hospitals Sussex NHS Trust, Worthing BN11 2DH, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-0140-9997
Kate E ShipmanDepartment of Clinical Chemistry, University Hospitals Sussex NHS Trust, Worthing BN11 2DH, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-6043-3532
Brighton and Sussex Medical School · GBUniversity Hospitals Sussex NHS Foundation Trust · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Biochemical confirmation of a diagnosis of hypercortisolism (Cushing syndrome) is vital to direct further investigations, especially given the overlap with non-autonomous conditions, such as pseudo-Cushing, and the morbidity associated with missed diagnoses. A limited narrative review was performed focusing on the laboratory perspective of the pitfalls of making a biochemical diagnosis of hypercortisolism in those presenting with presumed Cushing syndrome. Although analytically less specific, immunoassays remain cheap, quick, and reliable in most situations. Understanding cortisol metabolism can help with patient preparation, specimen selection (e.g., consideration of urine or saliva for those with possible elevations of cortisol binding globulin concentration), and method selection (e.g., mass spectrometry if there is a high risk of abnormal metabolites). Although more specific methods may be less sensitive, this can be managed. The reduction in cost and increasing ease of use makes techniques such as urine steroid profiles and salivary cortisone of interest in future pathway development. In conclusion, the limitations of current assays, particularly if well understood, do not impede diagnosis in most cases. However, in complex or borderline cases, there are other techniques to consider to aid in the confirmation of hypercortisolism.

Indexed as

analyticalCushing syndromedexamethasonehypercortisolismimmunoassaymass spectrometryspurious

Identifiers

PMID37189516
PMCPMC10137494
OpenAlexW4365509391

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.