Ian P Hughes1, Catherine Choong2, Shoshana Rath3, Helen Atkinson3, Andrew Cotterill4, Wayne Cutfield5, Paul Hofman5, Mark Harris4. 1. Mater Research, University of Queensland Institute, OZGROW - APEG, South Brisbane, QLD, Australia. Electronic address: i.hughes@uq.edu.au. 2. Princess Margaret Hospital for Children, Endocrinology, Subiaco, WA, Australia; The University of Western Australia, School of Paediatrics and Child Health Crawley, WA, Australia. 3. The University of Western Australia, School of Paediatrics and Child Health Crawley, WA, Australia. 4. Lady Cilento Children's Hospital, Endocrinology, South Brisbane, QLD, Australia. 5. Liggins Institute, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To investigate growth hormone (GH) treatment and treatment cessation with respect to efficacy and efficiency. To identify factors that best classify or predict cessation type: completed treatment (CT), early cessation (EC), or non-response (NR). DESIGN: Observational study (1990-2013) of the Australian GH Program comparing CT, EC, and NR groups with respect to demographic, clinical, and response criteria. All patients treated for GH deficiency (GHD; 909), short stature and slow growth (SSSG; 2144), and Turner Syndrome (TS; 626) were included. Information was retrieved from the OZGROW database. RESULTS: 51.9% of patients were EC, 40.7% CT and 7.4% NR.Median treatment durations for NR patients were often longer than patients who completed treatment. EC and NR groups were both associated with poor growth response with males overrepresented.Socioeconomic status differentiated NR (higher) and EC (lower) groups. CONCLUSIONS: EC was observed at very high rates and appears, generally, to be a little-recognised but frequent problem in GH therapy.EC and delayed recognition of NR may be interrelated being differentiated by the decision to cease or continue treatment following poor response.Poor treatment compliance is likely a major causal factor in EC.Strategies to address poor response and compliance have been developed, however, given the scale of these problems, it may be that long acting GH formulations or individualized treatment need consideration.
OBJECTIVE: To investigate growth hormone (GH) treatment and treatment cessation with respect to efficacy and efficiency. To identify factors that best classify or predict cessation type: completed treatment (CT), early cessation (EC), or non-response (NR). DESIGN: Observational study (1990-2013) of the Australian GH Program comparing CT, EC, and NR groups with respect to demographic, clinical, and response criteria. All patients treated for GH deficiency (GHD; 909), short stature and slow growth (SSSG; 2144), and Turner Syndrome (TS; 626) were included. Information was retrieved from the OZGROW database. RESULTS: 51.9% of patients were EC, 40.7% CT and 7.4% NR.Median treatment durations for NR patients were often longer than patients who completed treatment. EC and NR groups were both associated with poor growth response with males overrepresented.Socioeconomic status differentiated NR (higher) and EC (lower) groups. CONCLUSIONS:EC was observed at very high rates and appears, generally, to be a little-recognised but frequent problem in GH therapy.EC and delayed recognition of NR may be interrelated being differentiated by the decision to cease or continue treatment following poor response.Poor treatment compliance is likely a major causal factor in EC.Strategies to address poor response and compliance have been developed, however, given the scale of these problems, it may be that long acting GH formulations or individualized treatment need consideration.
Authors: Mary B Abraham; Dong Li; Dave Tang; Susan M O'Connell; Fiona McKenzie; Ee Mun Lim; Hakon Hakonarson; Michael A Levine; Catherine S Choong Journal: Int J Pediatr Endocrinol Date: 2017-01-25
Authors: Christian J Strasburger; Peter Vanuga; Juraj Payer; Marija Pfeifer; Vera Popovic; László Bajnok; Miklós Góth; Veˇra Olšovská; L'udmila Trejbalová; Janos Vadasz; Eyal Fima; Ronit Koren; Leanne Amitzi; Martin Bidlingmaier; Oren Hershkovitz; Gili Hart; Beverly M K Biller Journal: Eur J Endocrinol Date: 2016-12-08 Impact factor: 6.664
Authors: Kevin C J Yuen; Bradley S Miller; Cesar L Boguszewski; Andrew R Hoffman Journal: Front Endocrinol (Lausanne) Date: 2021-02-24 Impact factor: 5.555
Authors: Cheri L Deal; Joel Steelman; Elpis Vlachopapadopoulou; Renata Stawerska; Lawrence A Silverman; Moshe Phillip; Ho-Seong Kim; CheolWoo Ko; Oleg Malievskiy; Jose F Cara; Carl L Roland; Carrie Turich Taylor; Srinivas Rao Valluri; Michael P Wajnrajch; Aleksandra Pastrak; Bradley S Miller Journal: J Clin Endocrinol Metab Date: 2022-06-16 Impact factor: 6.134
Authors: Aristides K Maniatis; Mauri Carakushansky; Sonya Galcheva; Gnanagurudasan Prakasam; Larry A Fox; Adriana Dankovcikova; Jane Loftus; Andrew A Palladino; Maria de Los Angeles Resa; Carrie Turich Taylor; Mehul T Dattani; Jan Lebl Journal: J Endocr Soc Date: 2022-09-10
Authors: Mohamad Maghnie; José I Labarta; Ekaterina Koledova; Tilman R Rohrer Journal: Front Endocrinol (Lausanne) Date: 2018-01-11 Impact factor: 5.555