ArticleJournal of endocrinological investigation2026
Interpreting the GnRH stimulation test in girls with central precocious puberty: the role of age and body mass index.
Article in Journal of endocrinological investigation, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) stimulation test is the reference standard for diagnosing central precocious puberty (CPP), yet its reliability may vary with age and body mass index (BMI). This study evaluated the diagnostic performance of GnRH test parameters in girls with suspected CPP and examined the influence of age and BMI on their clinical interpretation.
methodsThis retrospective study included 98 girls who underwent GnRH stimulation testing between January 2023 and December 2025 at a tertiary pediatric endocrinology center. Auxological data, basal luteinizing hormone (LH), stimulated LH at 40 min (LH₄₀), stimulated LH/FSH ratio (sLH/FSH), bone age advancement (BAA), and pelvic ultrasonographic measurements were recorded. Final CPP diagnosis based on longitudinal follow-up served as the reference outcome. ROC analyses, age- and BMI-stratified evaluations, and multivariable logistic regression were performed.
resultsThirty-six girls (36.7%) were diagnosed with CPP, and all initiated GnRHanalogue treatment. LH₄₀ showed the highest diagnostic performance (AUC = 0.738); a cut-off of 4.65 IU/L yielded 91.2% sensitivity and 61.7% specificity. Basal LH had limited accuracy (AUC = 0.668), and ultrasonographic parameters showed poor discrimination. LH₄₀ and BAA were independently associated with CPP. Diagnostic performance varied by age, with excellent discrimination in girls < 6 years (AUC = 1.000) and moderate accuracy at 6-8 years (AUC = 0.738). Increasing BMI was associated with reduced discriminatory capacity of LH₄₀, while uterine length showed relatively higher performance in girls with obesity.
conclusionThe diagnostic performance of the GnRH stimulation test varied with age and BMI and was lower in older girls and those with obesity. LH₄₀ was the most informative hormonal parameter, but should not be interpreted in isolation. Test results should be integrated with clinical progression, auxological findings, skeletal maturation, biochemical data, and imaging when clinically indicated.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42627606What 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.