Minna Soinio1,2, Anna-Kaarina Luukkonen3, Marko Seppänen2,4, Jukka Kemppainen2,4, Janne Seppänen5, Juha-Pekka Pienimäki5, Helena Leijon6, Tiina Vesterinen6,7, Johanna Arola6, Eila Lantto8, Semi Helin2, Ilkka Tikkanen9, Saara Metso3, Tuomas Mirtti6,10, Ilkka Heiskanen11, Leena Norvio12, Mirja Tiikkainen12, Tuula Tikkanen13, Timo Sane12, Matti Välimäki12, Celso E Gomez-Sanchez14, Ilkka Pörsti3, Pirjo Nuutila1,2, Pasi I Nevalainen3, Niina Matikainen12,15. 1. Department of Endocrinology, Turku University Hospital, Turku, Finland. 2. Turku PET Centre, University of Turku, Turku, Finland. 3. Department of Internal Medicine and Tampere University, Tampere University Hospital, Faculty of Medicine and Health Technology, Tampere, Finland. 4. Department of clinical Physiology and Nuclear Medicine, Turku University Hospital, Turku, Finland. 5. Centre for Vascular Surgery and Interventional Radiology, Tampere University Hospital, Tampere, Finland. 6. Department of Pathology, University of Helsinki and HUSLAB, Helsinki University Hospital, Helsinki, Finland. 7. Institute for Molecular Medicine Finland, Helsinki Institute of Life Science, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland. 8. Medical Imaging Center, Radiology, Helsinki University Hospital, Helsinki, Finland. 9. Abdominal Center, Nephrology, University of Helsinki, and Helsinki University Hospital, and Minerva Institute for Medical Research, Helsinki, Finland. 10. Research Program in Systems Oncology (ONCOSYS), University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland. 11. Endocrine Surgery, Helsinki University Hospital and University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland. 12. Endocrinology, Helsinki University Hospital and University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland. 13. Internal Medicine Outpatient Clinics, Helsinki, Finland. 14. Department of Pharmacology, G.V. (Sonny) Montgomery VA Medical Center, University of Mississippi Medical Center, Jackson, Mississippi, USA. 15. Research Programs Unit, Clinical and Molecular Medicine, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Endocrine Society guidelines recommend adrenal venous sampling (AVS) in primary aldosteronism (PA) if adrenalectomy is considered. We tested whether functional imaging of adrenal cortex with 11C-metomidate (11C-MTO) could offer a noninvasive alternative to AVS in the subtype classification of PA. DESIGN: We prospectively recruited 58 patients with confirmed PA who were eligible for adrenal surgery. METHODS: Subjects underwent AVS and 11C-MTO-PET without dexamethasone pretreatment in random order. The lateralization of 11C-MTO-PET and adrenal CT were compared with AVS in all subjects and in a prespecified adrenalectomy subgroup in which the diagnosis was confirmed with immunohistochemical staining for CYP11B2. RESULTS: In the whole study population, the concordance of AVS and 11C-MTO-PET was 51% and did not differ from that of AVS and adrenal CT (53%). The concordance of AVS and 11C-MTO-PET was 55% in unilateral and 44% in bilateral PA. In receiver operating characteristics analysis, the maximum standardized uptake value ratio of 1.16 in 11C-MTO-PET had an AUC of 0.507 (P = n.s.) to predict allocation to adrenalectomy or medical therapy with sensitivity of 55% and specificity of 44%. In the prespecified adrenalectomy subgroup, AVS and 11C-MTO-PET were concordant in 10 of 19 subjects with CYP11B2-positive adenoma and in 6 of 10 with CYP11B2-positivity without an adenoma. CONCLUSIONS: The concordance of 11C-MTO-PET with AVS was clinically suboptimal, and did not outperform adrenal CT. In a subgroup with CYP11B2-positive adenoma, 11C-MTO-PET identified 53% of cases. 11C-MTO-PET appeared to be inferior to AVS for subtype classification of PA.
OBJECTIVE: Endocrine Society guidelines recommend adrenal venous sampling (AVS) in primary aldosteronism (PA) if adrenalectomy is considered. We tested whether functional imaging of adrenal cortex with 11C-metomidate (11C-MTO) could offer a noninvasive alternative to AVS in the subtype classification of PA. DESIGN: We prospectively recruited 58 patients with confirmed PA who were eligible for adrenal surgery. METHODS: Subjects underwent AVS and 11C-MTO-PET without dexamethasone pretreatment in random order. The lateralization of 11C-MTO-PET and adrenal CT were compared with AVS in all subjects and in a prespecified adrenalectomy subgroup in which the diagnosis was confirmed with immunohistochemical staining for CYP11B2. RESULTS: In the whole study population, the concordance of AVS and 11C-MTO-PET was 51% and did not differ from that of AVS and adrenal CT (53%). The concordance of AVS and 11C-MTO-PET was 55% in unilateral and 44% in bilateral PA. In receiver operating characteristics analysis, the maximum standardized uptake value ratio of 1.16 in 11C-MTO-PET had an AUC of 0.507 (P = n.s.) to predict allocation to adrenalectomy or medical therapy with sensitivity of 55% and specificity of 44%. In the prespecified adrenalectomy subgroup, AVS and 11C-MTO-PET were concordant in 10 of 19 subjects with CYP11B2-positive adenoma and in 6 of 10 with CYP11B2-positivity without an adenoma. CONCLUSIONS: The concordance of 11C-MTO-PET with AVS was clinically suboptimal, and did not outperform adrenal CT. In a subgroup with CYP11B2-positive adenoma, 11C-MTO-PET identified 53% of cases. 11C-MTO-PET appeared to be inferior to AVS for subtype classification of PA.
Authors: Roland Ladurner; Sandra Sommerey; Stefan Buechner; Anna Dietz; Christoph Degenhart; Klaus Hallfeldt; Julia Gallwas Journal: Eur J Clin Invest Date: 2017-04-07 Impact factor: 4.686
Authors: Benjamin Lechner; Katharina Lechner; Daniel Alexander Heinrich; Christian Adolf; Finn Holler; Holger Schneider; Felix Beuschlein; Martin Reincke Journal: Eur J Endocrinol Date: 2019-07-01 Impact factor: 6.664
Authors: Tracy A Williams; Jacopo Burrello; Leonardo A Sechi; Carlos E Fardella; Joanna Matrozova; Christian Adolf; René Baudrand; Stella Bernardi; Felix Beuschlein; Cristiana Catena; Michalis Doumas; Francesco Fallo; Gilberta Giacchetti; Daniel A Heinrich; Gaëlle Saint-Hilary; Pieter M Jansen; Andrzej Januszewicz; Tomaz Kocjan; Tetsuo Nishikawa; Marcus Quinkler; Fumitoshi Satoh; Hironobu Umakoshi; Jiří Widimský; Stefanie Hahner; Stella Douma; Michael Stowasser; Paolo Mulatero; Martin Reincke Journal: Hypertension Date: 2018-09 Impact factor: 10.190
Authors: Lucie S Meyer; Xiao Wang; Eva Sušnik; Jacopo Burrello; Alessio Burrello; Isabella Castellano; Graeme Eisenhofer; Francesco Fallo; Gregory A Kline; Thomas Knösel; Tomaz Kocjan; Jacques W M Lenders; Paolo Mulatero; Mitsuhide Naruse; Tetsuo Nishikawa; Mirko Peitzsch; Lars C Rump; Felix Beuschlein; Stefanie Hahner; Celso E Gomez-Sanchez; Martin Reincke; Tracy Ann Williams Journal: Hypertension Date: 2018-09 Impact factor: 10.190
Authors: Tracy A Williams; Jacques W M Lenders; Paolo Mulatero; Jacopo Burrello; Marietta Rottenkolber; Christian Adolf; Fumitoshi Satoh; Laurence Amar; Marcus Quinkler; Jaap Deinum; Felix Beuschlein; Kanako K Kitamoto; Uyen Pham; Ryo Morimoto; Hironobu Umakoshi; Aleksander Prejbisz; Tomaz Kocjan; Mitsuhide Naruse; Michael Stowasser; Tetsuo Nishikawa; William F Young; Celso E Gomez-Sanchez; John W Funder; Martin Reincke Journal: Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol Date: 2017-05-30 Impact factor: 32.069
Authors: Minna Soinio; Anna-Kaarina Luukkonen; Marko Seppänen; Jukka Kemppainen; Janne Seppänen; Juha-Pekka Pienimäki; Helena Leijon; Tiina Vesterinen; Johanna Arola; Eila Lantto; Semi Helin; Ilkka Tikkanen; Saara Metso; Tuomas Mirtti; Ilkka Heiskanen; Leena Norvio; Mirja Tiikkainen; Tuula Tikkanen; Timo Sane; Matti Välimäki; Celso E Gomez-Sanchez; Ilkka Pörsti; Pirjo Nuutila; Pasi I Nevalainen; Niina Matikainen Journal: Eur J Endocrinol Date: 2021-03 Impact factor: 6.664
Authors: Kerstin Sander; Thibault Gendron; Klaudia A Cybulska; Fatih Sirindil; Junhua Zhou; Tammy L Kalber; Mark F Lythgoe; Tom R Kurzawinski; Morris J Brown; Bryan Williams; Erik Årstad Journal: J Med Chem Date: 2021-06-17 Impact factor: 7.446