PURPOSE: Pituitary adenomas give rise to physical and psychological symptoms, which may persist after biochemical cure. Growing attention has been paid to quality of life (QoL) in these patients. We aimed to systematically analyze QoL assessment methods and QoL outcome in these patients. METHODS: We conducted a systematic literature search up to January 2014 in PubMed, Web of Knowledge, PsycInfo and EMBASE. RESULTS: 102 papers assessing QoL in patients with a pituitary adenoma were included. In clinical (original) studies in which QoL was the primary outcome parameter (n = 54), 19 studies combined a generic questionnaire with a disease-specific questionnaire. QoL was found to be impaired in patients with active disease relative to controls, and generally improved during biochemical cure. However, no normalization occurred, with patients with remitted Cushing's disease demonstrating the smallest improvement. Somatic factors (e.g., hypopituitarism, sleep characteristics), psychological factors (illness perceptions) and health care environment (rural vs. urban) were identified as influencing factors. Intervention studies (predominantly evaluating medical interventions) have been found to improve QoL. CONCLUSIONS: The growing number of studies assessing QoL generally described the negative impact of pituitary adenomas. QoL research in this patient group could be further elaborated by the development of disease-specific questionnaires for prolactinoma and non-functioning adenoma, consequent use of generic and disease-specific questionnaires and using a long-term (longitudinal) follow-up. Surgical and pharmacological interventions improve but not normalize QoL. We postulate that there might be margin for further improvement of QoL, for instance by using psychosocial interventions, in addition to optimal medical treatment.
PURPOSE:Pituitary adenomas give rise to physical and psychological symptoms, which may persist after biochemical cure. Growing attention has been paid to quality of life (QoL) in these patients. We aimed to systematically analyze QoL assessment methods and QoL outcome in these patients. METHODS: We conducted a systematic literature search up to January 2014 in PubMed, Web of Knowledge, PsycInfo and EMBASE. RESULTS: 102 papers assessing QoL in patients with a pituitary adenoma were included. In clinical (original) studies in which QoL was the primary outcome parameter (n = 54), 19 studies combined a generic questionnaire with a disease-specific questionnaire. QoL was found to be impaired in patients with active disease relative to controls, and generally improved during biochemical cure. However, no normalization occurred, with patients with remitted Cushing's disease demonstrating the smallest improvement. Somatic factors (e.g., hypopituitarism, sleep characteristics), psychological factors (illness perceptions) and health care environment (rural vs. urban) were identified as influencing factors. Intervention studies (predominantly evaluating medical interventions) have been found to improve QoL. CONCLUSIONS: The growing number of studies assessing QoL generally described the negative impact of pituitary adenomas. QoL research in this patient group could be further elaborated by the development of disease-specific questionnaires for prolactinoma and non-functioning adenoma, consequent use of generic and disease-specific questionnaires and using a long-term (longitudinal) follow-up. Surgical and pharmacological interventions improve but not normalize QoL. We postulate that there might be margin for further improvement of QoL, for instance by using psychosocial interventions, in addition to optimal medical treatment.
Authors: Cornelie D Andela; Nicolasine D Niemeijer; Margreet Scharloo; Jitske Tiemensma; Shaaji Kanagasabapathy; Alberto M Pereira; Noëlle G A Kamminga; Ad A Kaptein; Nienke R Biermasz Journal: Pituitary Date: 2015-02 Impact factor: 4.107
Authors: Ulla Feldt-Rasmussen; Roger Abs; Bengt-Ake Bengtsson; Helge Bennmarker; Margareta Bramnert; Elizabeth Hernberg-Ståhl; John P Monson; Björn Westberg; Patrick Wilton; Christian Wüster Journal: Eur J Endocrinol Date: 2002-01 Impact factor: 6.664
Authors: W M Hopman; T Towheed; T Anastassiades; A Tenenhouse; S Poliquin; C Berger; L Joseph; J P Brown; T M Murray; J D Adachi; D A Hanley; E Papadimitropoulos Journal: CMAJ Date: 2000-08-08 Impact factor: 8.262
Authors: José Leon-Carrion; Juan Francisco Martin-Rodriguez; Ainara Madrazo-Atutxa; Alfonso Soto-Moreno; Eva Venegas-Moreno; Elena Torres-Vela; Pedro Benito-López; Maria Angeles Gálvez; Francisco J Tinahones; Alfonso Leal-Cerro Journal: J Clin Endocrinol Metab Date: 2010-06-16 Impact factor: 5.958
Authors: S Cannavò; R Condurso; M Ragonese; F Ferraù; A Alibrandi; I Aricò; G Romanello; S Squadrito; F Trimarchi; R Silvestri Journal: Pituitary Date: 2011-12 Impact factor: 4.107
Authors: Wouter R van Furth; Amir H Zamanipoor Najafabadi; Merel van der Meulen; Marco J T Verstegen; Daniel J Lobatto; Maarten C Kleijwegt; Alberto M Pereira; Nienke R Biermasz Journal: Pituitary Date: 2022-01-10 Impact factor: 4.107
Authors: Karol Piotr Sagan; Elżbieta Andrysiak-Mamos; Ernest Tyburski; Leszek Michał Sagan; Anhelli Syrenicz Journal: J Clin Med Date: 2021-04-26 Impact factor: 4.241