ArticlePituitary2025
From misclassified AIP variant to carney complex: a case report and retrospective evaluation of PRKAR1A in pituitary tumor predisposition.
Article in Pituitary, 2025. 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.
- Genetic testing in pituitary adenomas: a Pituitary Society International Consensus Statement.Nature reviews. Endocrinology · 2026Review
- Proteoformics-driven new concept of human growth hormone in clinical endocrinology.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
contextCarney Complex (CNC) is a rare multiple endocrine neoplasia syndrome, due to PRKAR1A mutation, that causes GH-secreting pituitary adenomas (PA) in 10% of patients. PRKAR1A is not currently analyzed in patients with isolated sporadic or familial PA, in contrast to MEN1 or AIP.
objectiveWe report the case of a young man diagnosed with a PA at age 21 during melanoma follow-up, with a family history of PA. He was initially misdiagnosed with FIPA due to a misclassified AIP mutation, before a final diagnosis of CNC was established. We subsequently retrospectively analysed PRKAR1A in a cohort of patients with PA to assess the relevance of includingPRKAR1A in PA predisposition gene panels.
methodsAfter AIP variant reclassification and whole genome analysis of the patient, we performed a retrospective analysis of the genetic and clinical data of patients who underwent germline genetic testing for hereditary predisposition to PA.
resultsTwo hundred and twenty patients were included, of whom 16 (7.3%) had a family history of PA, 162 (72.7%) had macro-PA, and 54 (24.6%) had GH- or GH/PRL-secreting PA. Four patients (1.8%) carried pathogenic variants in AIP or MEN1, but none in PRKAR1A.
conclusionThis case underscores the importance of periodically reassessing genetic variants, as reclassification can significantly impact patient management. It also highlights the clinical variability of CNC and the need to screen for CNC features in young patients with acromegaly. Further research is warranted to determine the value ofPRKAR1A testing in isolated GH- and GH/PRL-secreting PA.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41364279What 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.