Karina Zanlorenzi Basso Manosso1, Carolina Labigalini Sampaio1, Leandro Kasuki2,3,4, Ximene Antunes2,3, Monica R Gadelha2,3, Cesar Luiz Boguszewski5. 1. SEMPR, Serviço de Endocrinologia e Metabologia do Hospital de Clínicas, Departamento de Clínica Médica, Universidade Federal do Paraná, Curitiba, Brazil. 2. Centro de Pesquisa em Neuroendocrinologia, Divisão de Endocrinologia, Faculdade de Medicina e Hospital Universitário Clementino Fraga Filho, Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil. 3. Serviço de Neuroendocrinologia, Instituto Estadual do Cérebro Paulo Niemeyer, Secretaria Estadual de Saúde, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil. 4. Serviço de Endocrinologia, Hospital Federal de Bonsucesso, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil. 5. SEMPR, Serviço de Endocrinologia e Metabologia do Hospital de Clínicas, Departamento de Clínica Médica, Universidade Federal do Paraná, Curitiba, Brazil. clbogus@uol.com.br.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To compare biochemical and tumor response rates between two reference centers for pituitary diseases in Brazil after primary and adjuvant therapy with somatostatin receptor ligands (SRL) in acromegaly. METHODS: Patients were classified as non-responders (NR), partial responders (PR), and full responders (FR) to 12-month SRL therapy according to: [criteria A] normal IGF-I and random GH (rGH) < 1 ng/mL (FR); ≥ 50% decrease of IGF-I and/or rGH (PR); < 50% decrease of IGF-I and rGH (NR); [criteria B] normal IGF-I (FR); ≥ 50% decrease of IGF-I (PR); < 50% decrease of IGF-I (NR). Tumor shrinkage <20% defined poor responders (tPR) and ≥ 20% good responders (tGR). RESULTS: We studied 219 acromegaly patients (59% women, age 43.1 ± 13.9 years; 73 from Center I and 146 from Center II). After SRL therapy, the proportion of FR, PR, and NR by criteria A and B was 30.2 vs 49.1%, 52.8 vs 21.2% and 17 vs 29.7%, respectively (p < 0.001). Considering criteria A or B separately, there was no difference in the proportion of FR, PR and NR between two centers. However, when comparing criteria A and B, the Center I showed a difference of 30.9% in classification of FR in relation to 13.2% observed in Center II (p = 0.006). tGR were 51.4% of patients, with no differences between the centers. CONCLUSIONS: IGF-I alone significantly increased positive response rates to SRLs, whereas the inclusion of rGH levels into therapeutic decision might lead to a significant increment on the costs of acromegaly management.
PURPOSE: To compare biochemical and tumor response rates between two reference centers for pituitary diseases in Brazil after primary and adjuvant therapy with somatostatin receptor ligands (SRL) in acromegaly. METHODS: Patients were classified as non-responders (NR), partial responders (PR), and full responders (FR) to 12-month SRL therapy according to: [criteria A] normal IGF-I and random GH (rGH) < 1 ng/mL (FR); ≥ 50% decrease of IGF-I and/or rGH (PR); < 50% decrease of IGF-I and rGH (NR); [criteria B] normal IGF-I (FR); ≥ 50% decrease of IGF-I (PR); < 50% decrease of IGF-I (NR). Tumor shrinkage <20% defined poor responders (tPR) and ≥ 20% good responders (tGR). RESULTS: We studied 219 acromegaly patients (59% women, age 43.1 ± 13.9 years; 73 from Center I and 146 from Center II). After SRL therapy, the proportion of FR, PR, and NR by criteria A and B was 30.2 vs 49.1%, 52.8 vs 21.2% and 17 vs 29.7%, respectively (p < 0.001). Considering criteria A or B separately, there was no difference in the proportion of FR, PR and NR between two centers. However, when comparing criteria A and B, the Center I showed a difference of 30.9% in classification of FR in relation to 13.2% observed in Center II (p = 0.006). tGR were 51.4% of patients, with no differences between the centers. CONCLUSIONS: IGF-I alone significantly increased positive response rates to SRLs, whereas the inclusion of rGH levels into therapeutic decision might lead to a significant increment on the costs of acromegaly management.