ReviewJournal of endocrinological investigation2024
Once upon a time: the glucagon stimulation test in diagnosing adult GH deficiency.
Review in Journal of endocrinological investigation, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Trial
- GH Stimulation testing is unnecessary in patients with hypothalamic-pituitary disease, preserved pituitary function, and IGF-I SDS ≥ 0.Pituitary · 2026Article
- Growth hormone retesting for idiopathic isolated growth hormone deficiency during and after puberty: a systematic review.Journal of the Endocrine Society · 2026Review
- GH Response to Glucagon in Transition: Role of Body Mass Index and Etiology in Childhood-onset GH Deficiency.The Journal of clinical endocrinology and metabolism · 2026Article
- Article
- The history of an effective, specific and sensitive diagnostic test: the GHRH test in clinical practice.Reviews in endocrine & metabolic disorders · 2025Review
- Accuracy of Glucagon Testing Across Transition in Young Adults With Childhood-Onset GH Deficiency.The Journal of clinical endocrinology and metabolism · 2024Article
- A 2024 Update on Growth Hormone Deficiency Syndrome in Adults: From Guidelines to Real Life.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
- Determination of glucose cut-off points for optimal performance of glucagon stimulation test.Frontiers in endocrinology · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe clinical features of adult GH deficiency (GHD) are nonspecific, and its diagnosis is established through GH stimulation testing, which is often complex, expensive, time-consuming and may be associated with adverse side effects. Moreover, diagnosing adult GHD can be challenging due to the influence of age, gender, and body mass index on GH peak at each test. The insulin tolerance test (ITT), GHRH + arginine test, glucagon stimulation test (GST), and, more recently, testing with macimorelin are all recognized as useful in diagnosing adult GHD. To date GST is still little used, but due to the unavailability of the GHRH all over the world and the high cost of macimorelin, in the next future it will probably become the most widely used test when ITT is contraindicated. The aim of the present review is to describe the current knowledge on GST.
methodsNarrative review.
resultsIn the last years several studies have suggested some changes in the original GST protocol and have questioned its diagnostic accuracy when the classic GH cut-point of 3 μg/L is used, suggesting to use a lower GH cut-point to improve its sensitivity and specificity in overweight/obese patients and in those with lower pretest GHD probability.
conclusionThis document provides an update on the utility of GST, summarizes how to perform the test, shows which cut-points should be used in interpreting the results, and discusses its drawbacks and caveats referring to the most recent studies.
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.