ReviewReviews in endocrine & metabolic disorders2024
Pitfalls in the lab assessment of hypopituitarism.
Review in Reviews in endocrine & metabolic disorders, 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, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Old and new pituitary biomarkers: evidence for sex-specificity.Pituitary · 2026Review
- Use of Heterophilic Blocking Tubes in Suspected Heterophile Antibody Interference Among Pubertal Patients.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026Article
- An Update on Advances in Hypopituitarism: Etiology, Diagnosis, and Current Management.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The diagnostic approach to hypopituitarism involves many disciplines. Clinical symptoms rarely are specific. Imaging techniques are helpful but cannot prove the specific functional defects. Therefore, the definitive diagnosis of pituitary insufficiency is largely based on laboratory tests. However, also laboratory methods come with inherent limitations, and it is essential for the clinician to know and recognize typical pitfalls. Most factors potentially impairing the quality of hormone measurements are introduced in the preanalytical phase, i.e. before the hormones are measured by the laboratory. For example, the timing of blood drawing with respect to circadian rhythm, stress, and medication can have an influence on hormone concentrations. During the actual analysis of the hormones, cross-reactions with molecules present in the sample presenting the same or similar epitopes than the intended analyte may affect immunoassays. Interference can also come from heterophilic or human anti-animal antibodies. Unexpected problems can also be due to popular nutritional supplements which interfere with the measurement procedures. An important example in this respect is the interference from biotin. It became only clinically visible when the use of this vitamin became popular among patients. The extreme serum concentrations reached when patients take it as a supplement can lead to incorrect measurements in immunoassays employing the biotin-streptavidin system. To some extent, hormone analyses using liquid chromatography mass spectrometry (LCMS) can overcome problems, although availability and cost-effectiveness of this method still imposes restrictions. In the post-analytical phase, appropriateness of reference intervals and cut-offs with respect to the specific analytical method used is of outmost importance. Furthermore, for interpretation, additional biological and pharmacological factors like BMI, age and concomitant diseases must be considered to avoid misinterpretation of the measured concentrations. It is important for the clinician and the laboratory to recognize when one or more laboratory values do not match the clinical picture. In an interdisciplinary approach, the search for the underlying cause should be initiated.
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.