SynthesisFrontiers in endocrinology2024
Accuracy of the 10 μg desmopressin test for differential diagnosis of Cushing syndrome: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Frontiers in endocrinology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Measuring cortisol in Cushing syndrome: diagnosis, monitoring, and cortisol circadian rhythm improvement.The Journal of clinical endocrinology and metabolism · 2026Review
- Consensus on the diagnosis of Cushing's disease: a collaborative statement from the Korean Endocrine Society and Japan Endocrine Society.Endocrine journal · 2026Article
- Differential diagnosis between Cushing's syndrome and non-neoplastic hypercortisolism: are we getting there?Pituitary · 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
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We evaluated the accuracy of the 10 μg desmopressin test in differentiating Cushing disease (CD) from non-neoplastic hypercortisolism (NNH) and ectopic ACTH syndrome (EAS). A systematic review of studies on diagnostic test accuracy in patients with CD, NNH, or EAS subjected to the desmopressin test obtained from LILACS, PubMed, EMBASE, and CENTRAL databases was performed. Two reviewers independently selected the studies, assessed the risk of bias, and extracted the data. Hierarchical and bivariate models on Stata software were used for meta-analytical summaries. The certainty of evidence was measured using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation Working Group) approach. In total, 14 studies were included: 3 studies on differentiated CD versus NNH and 11 studies on differentiated CD versus EAS. Considering ΔACTH in 8 studies involving 429 patients, the pooled sensitivity for distinguishing CD from EAS was 0.85 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.80-0.89, I2 = 17.6%) and specificity was 0.64 (95% CI: 0.49-0.76, I2 = 9.46%). Regarding Δcortisol in 6 studies involving 233 participants, the sensitivity for distinguishing CD from EAS was 0.81 (95% CI: 0.74-0.87, I2 = 7.98%) and specificity was 0.80 (95% CI: 0.61-0.91, I2 = 12.89%). The sensitivity and specificity of the combination of ΔACTH > 35% and Δcortisol > 20% in 5 studies involving 511 participants were 0.88 (95% CI: 0.79-0.93, I2 = 35%) and 0.74 (95% CI: 0.55-0.87, I2 = 27%), respectively. The pooled sensitivity for distinguishing CD from NNH in 3 studies involving 170 participants was 0.88 (95% CI: 0.79-0.93) and the specificity was 0.94 (95% CI: 0.86-0.97). Based on the desmopressin test for differentiating CD from EAS, considering ΔACTH, Δcortisol, or both percent increments, 15%, 19%, or 20% of patients with CD, respectively, would be incorrectly classified as having EAS. For CD versus NNH, 11% of patients with CD would be falsely diagnosed as having NNH, whereas 7% of patients with NNH would be falsely diagnosed as having CD. However, in all hierarchical plots, the prediction intervals were considerably wider than the confidence intervals. This indicates low confidence in the estimated accuracy, and the true accuracy is likely to be different. Systematic review registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=85634, identifier CRD42018085634; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=68317, identifier CRD42017068317.
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.