PURPOSE: Exon 3-deleted GH receptor variant (d3-GHR) is associated with increased responsiveness to exogenous GH. The aim of this study was to determine the effect of d3-GHR polymorphism on the GH/IGF-1 relationship, clinical parameters, and comorbidity in acromegalic patients. METHODS: The study included 118 acromegalic patients (61 female and 57 male; mean age: 50.3 ± 12.2 years) and 108 healthy controls (94 female and 14 male: mean age: 41.1 ± 11.1 years). The prevalence of GHR genotypes was evaluated via PCR. RESULTS: In all, 71 (60.2%) patients had the fl/fl-GHR genotype, 40 (33.9%) were heterozygous for the fl/d3-GHR genotype, and 7 (5.9%) were homozygous for the d3/d3-GHR genotype. The prevalence of fl/fl-GHR, fl/d3-GHR, and d3/d3-GHR genotypes in the control group was 57.4, 29.6, and 13.0%, respectively-similar prevalences as in the patient group. Patients that were heterozygous and homozygous for the d3 allele were subgrouped (d3-GHR subgroup), and were compared to those with the fl/fl-GHR genotype (fl/fl-GHR subgroup). Anthropometric measures, features of pituitary adenoma, and baseline GH and IGF-1 levels were similar in both subgroups. The prevalence of coronary artery disease, hypertension, hyperlipidemia, type 2 diabetes mellitus, and multinodular goiter did not differ between patient subgroups. In total, 24 (20.3%) of the patients had cancer and the prevalence of cancer was similar in the d3-GHR (14.9%) and fl/fl-GHR (23.9%) subgroups (P = 0.23). More of the acromegalic patients that were d3 carriers had discordant GH and IGF-1 levels at baseline and post surgery, but the difference was not significant. A significant correlation between basal GH and IGF-1 levels was observed only in the patients with the fl/fl-GHR genotype (R(2) = 0.227, P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: The d3-GHR variant genotype did not have an effect on clinical features or comorbidity in acromegalic patients, but it might play a role in GH/IGF-1 level discordance in acromegaly.
PURPOSE: Exon 3-deleted GH receptor variant (d3-GHR) is associated with increased responsiveness to exogenous GH. The aim of this study was to determine the effect of d3-GHR polymorphism on the GH/IGF-1 relationship, clinical parameters, and comorbidity in acromegalicpatients. METHODS: The study included 118 acromegalicpatients (61 female and 57 male; mean age: 50.3 ± 12.2 years) and 108 healthy controls (94 female and 14 male: mean age: 41.1 ± 11.1 years). The prevalence of GHR genotypes was evaluated via PCR. RESULTS: In all, 71 (60.2%) patients had the fl/fl-GHR genotype, 40 (33.9%) were heterozygous for the fl/d3-GHR genotype, and 7 (5.9%) were homozygous for the d3/d3-GHR genotype. The prevalence of fl/fl-GHR, fl/d3-GHR, and d3/d3-GHR genotypes in the control group was 57.4, 29.6, and 13.0%, respectively-similar prevalences as in the patient group. Patients that were heterozygous and homozygous for the d3 allele were subgrouped (d3-GHR subgroup), and were compared to those with the fl/fl-GHR genotype (fl/fl-GHR subgroup). Anthropometric measures, features of pituitary adenoma, and baseline GH and IGF-1 levels were similar in both subgroups. The prevalence of coronary artery disease, hypertension, hyperlipidemia, type 2 diabetes mellitus, and multinodular goiter did not differ between patient subgroups. In total, 24 (20.3%) of the patients had cancer and the prevalence of cancer was similar in the d3-GHR (14.9%) and fl/fl-GHR (23.9%) subgroups (P = 0.23). More of the acromegalicpatients that were d3 carriers had discordant GH and IGF-1 levels at baseline and post surgery, but the difference was not significant. A significant correlation between basal GH and IGF-1 levels was observed only in the patients with the fl/fl-GHR genotype (R(2) = 0.227, P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: The d3-GHR variant genotype did not have an effect on clinical features or comorbidity in acromegalicpatients, but it might play a role in GH/IGF-1 level discordance in acromegaly.
Authors: M Filopanti; L Olgiati; G Mantovani; S Corbetta; M Arosio; V Gasco; L De Marinis; C Martini; F Bogazzi; S Cannavò; A Colao; D Ferone; G Arnaldi; F Pigliaru; A Peri; G Angeletti; M L Jaffrain-Rea; A G Lania; A Spada Journal: J Clin Endocrinol Metab Date: 2011-12-07 Impact factor: 5.958
Authors: Alexander A L Jorge; Frederico G Marchisotti; Luciana R Montenegro; Luciani R Carvalho; Berenice B Mendonca; Ivo J P Arnhold Journal: J Clin Endocrinol Metab Date: 2005-11-15 Impact factor: 5.958
Authors: Laura Montefusco; Marcello Filopanti; Cristina L Ronchi; Luca Olgiati; Carmen La-Porta; Marco Losa; Paolo Epaminonda; Francesca Coletti; Paolo Beck-Peccoz; Anna Spada; Andrea G Lania; Maura Arosio Journal: Clin Endocrinol (Oxf) Date: 2010-05 Impact factor: 3.478
Authors: Edna J L Barbosa; Jenny Palming; Camilla A M Glad; Helena Filipsson; Josef Koranyi; Bengt-Ake Bengtsson; Lena M S Carlsson; Cesar L Boguszewski; Gudmundur Johannsson Journal: J Clin Endocrinol Metab Date: 2008-12-02 Impact factor: 5.958
Authors: Peter Kamenicky; Christine Dos Santos; Consuelo Espinosa; Sylvie Salenave; Françoise Galland; Yves Le Bouc; Patrick Maison; Pierre Bougnères; Philippe Chanson Journal: Eur J Endocrinol Date: 2009-05-13 Impact factor: 6.664
Authors: Ericka B Trarbach; Alexander A Jorge; Felipe H Duarte; Marcello D Bronstein; Raquel S Jallad Journal: Pituitary Date: 2017-06 Impact factor: 4.107
Authors: J Pontes; M Madeira; C H A Lima; L L Ogino; F de Paula Paranhos Neto; L M C de Mendonça; M L F Farias; L Kasuki; M R Gadelha Journal: J Endocrinol Invest Date: 2019-08-07 Impact factor: 4.256
Authors: Sanne E Franck; Linda Broer; Aart Jan van der Lely; Peter Kamenicky; Ignacio Bernabéu; Elena Malchiodi; Patric J D Delhanty; Fernando Rivadeneira; Sebastian J C M M Neggers Journal: Neuroendocrinology Date: 2016-08-12 Impact factor: 4.914