Kevin C J Yuen1, Beverly M K Biller, Mark E Molitch, David M Cook. 1. Division of Endocrinology, Diabetes and Clinical Nutrition, Oregon Health and Science University, 3181 SW Sam Jackson Park Road, Portland, OR 97239-3098, USA. yuenk@ohsu.edu
Abstract
CONTEXT: The use of the combined GHRH and arginine (GHRH-ARG) test has gained increasing acceptance in the United States as a reliable alternative test to the insulin tolerance test (ITT) for diagnosing adult GH deficiency (GHD). In July 2008, the only manufacturer of recombinant GHRH in the United States, EMD Serono, Inc., announced the discontinuation of Geref, thus raising the question of which reliable alternative GH stimulation test should practicing endocrinologists be considering in place of the GHRH-ARG test. In this article, we review the existing published data and consensus guidelines and provide recommendations for alternative stimulation tests to the GHRH-ARG test. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: The major source of data acquisition included PubMed search strategies and personal experience of the authors from clinical experience. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Previous consensus guidelines and previous data assessing the reliability and discriminatory value of the GHRH-ARG, glucagon, ARG, and GH secretagogues on assessing GH reserve are discussed. Our recommendations for performing the glucagon stimulation test, potential drawbacks in conducting this test, and caveats in interpreting this test are also discussed. CONCLUSIONS: The ITT should remain the test of choice in diagnosing adult GHD. However, when the ITT is not desirable and recombinant GHRH remains unavailable in the United States, we recommend the alternative to the GHRH-ARG test to be the glucagon stimulation test, based on its reliability and availability. Nevertheless, further studies into alternative GH stimulation tests that are available in the United States, comparable, and simpler to perform than the ITT in diagnosing adult GHD are still needed.
CONTEXT: The use of the combined GHRH and arginine (GHRH-ARG) test has gained increasing acceptance in the United States as a reliable alternative test to the insulin tolerance test (ITT) for diagnosing adult GH deficiency (GHD). In July 2008, the only manufacturer of recombinant GHRH in the United States, EMD Serono, Inc., announced the discontinuation of Geref, thus raising the question of which reliable alternative GH stimulation test should practicing endocrinologists be considering in place of the GHRH-ARG test. In this article, we review the existing published data and consensus guidelines and provide recommendations for alternative stimulation tests to the GHRH-ARG test. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: The major source of data acquisition included PubMed search strategies and personal experience of the authors from clinical experience. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Previous consensus guidelines and previous data assessing the reliability and discriminatory value of the GHRH-ARG, glucagon, ARG, and GH secretagogues on assessing GH reserve are discussed. Our recommendations for performing the glucagon stimulation test, potential drawbacks in conducting this test, and caveats in interpreting this test are also discussed. CONCLUSIONS: The ITT should remain the test of choice in diagnosing adult GHD. However, when the ITT is not desirable and recombinant GHRH remains unavailable in the United States, we recommend the alternative to the GHRH-ARG test to be the glucagon stimulation test, based on its reliability and availability. Nevertheless, further studies into alternative GH stimulation tests that are available in the United States, comparable, and simpler to perform than the ITT in diagnosing adult GHD are still needed.
Authors: G Aimaretti; R Attanasio; S Cannavò; M C Nicoletti; R Castello; C Di Somma; P Garofalo; L Iughetti; S Loche; M Maghnie; L Mazzanti; G Saggese; M Salerno; G Tonini; V Toscano; S Zucchini; M Cappa Journal: J Endocrinol Invest Date: 2014-11-02 Impact factor: 4.256
Authors: Kevin C J Yuen; Beverly M K Biller; Laurence Katznelson; Sharon A Rhoads; Michelle H Gurel; Olivia Chu; Valentina Corazzini; Kellie Spiller; Murray B Gordon; Roberto Salvatori; David M Cook Journal: Pituitary Date: 2013-06 Impact factor: 4.107
Authors: Walter M High; Maria Briones-Galang; Jessica A Clark; Charles Gilkison; Kurt A Mossberg; Dennis J Zgaljardic; Brent E Masel; Randall J Urban Journal: J Neurotrauma Date: 2010-09 Impact factor: 5.269
Authors: Anna Petryk; K Scott Baker; Brigitte Frohnert; Antoinette Moran; Lisa Chow; Alan R Sinaiko; Lyn M Steffen; Joanna L Perkins; Lei Zhang; James S Hodges; Julia Steinberger Journal: Pediatr Blood Cancer Date: 2012-09-21 Impact factor: 3.167
Authors: Ana Beatriz Winter Tavares; Ignácio Antônio Seixas-da-Silva; Diego H S Silvestre; Maria Fernanda Castelar Pinheiro; Mario Vaisman; Flávia Lucia Conceição Journal: Endocrine Date: 2017-03-11 Impact factor: 3.633