| Literature DB >> 36187106 |
Agnieszka Tomasik1, Maria Stelmachowska-Banaś1, Maria Maksymowicz2, Izabella Czajka-Oraniec1, Dorota Raczkiewicz3, Grzegorz Zieliński4, Jacek Kunicki5, Wojciech Zgliczyński1.
Abstract
Background: Transsphenoidal adenomectomy (TSS) of somatotroph pituitary neuroendocrine tumor (PitNET) is the first-line treatment of acromegaly. Pharmacological treatment is recommended if surgery is contraindicated or did not lead to disease remission. The choice of treatment best fitting each patient should be based on thorough investigation of patients' characteristics. The current analysis attempts to create a tool for personalized treatment planning. Aim: This study aimed to assess whether clinical, biochemical, imaging and pathological characteristics can predict surgical remission and response to first-generation somatostatin receptor ligands (SRLs) and pasireotide-LAR in acromegaly. Patients and methods: A retrospective study of 153 acromegaly patients, treated in the Department of Endocrinology in Bielanski Hospital in Warsaw, Poland was performed. Data on demographics, hormonal and imaging results, pathological evaluation, and treatment outcome was extracted from the Polish Acromegaly Registry collecting information from 11 endocrinology centers in Poland and analyzed.Entities:
Keywords: acromegaly; pathological results; response to somatostatin receptor ligands; somatotroph tumors; surgical remission; treatment outcome
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 36187106 PMCID: PMC9523725 DOI: 10.3389/fendo.2022.957301
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Endocrinol (Lausanne) ISSN: 1664-2392 Impact factor: 6.055
Figure 1Flowchart of patients cohorts.
Figure 2Densely granulated somatotroph pituitary adenoma (PitNET). (A) Histology of densely granulated somatotroph PitNET (HE), (B) Immunopositive staining for growth hormone (GH), (C) Immunopositive staining for PIT1, (D) Ultrastructural features of densely granulated somatotroph PitNET.
Figure 3Sparsely granulated somatotroph pituitary adenoma (PitNET). (A) Histology of sparsely granulated somatotroph PitNET (HE), (B) Immunopositive staining for growth hormone (GH), (C) Immunopositive staining for Cam5.2, (D) Immunopositive staining for PIT1, (E) Immunopositive staining for Ki-67, (F) Ultrastructural features of sparsely granulated somatotroph PitNET.
Clinical presentation of the study cohort.
| Variable, parameter | Unit or category | Total | Surgical remission | Response to first-generation SRLs | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yes | No | p | Good | Poor | p | ||||||||
| N | Results | N | Results | N | Results | N | Results | N | Results | ||||
| Age, M ± SD | years | 153 | 53.5 ± 12.5 | 63 | 56.8 ± 11.0 | 83 | 50.6 ± 13.1 | 36 | 51.5 ± 12.2 | 37 | 49.8 ± 13.9 | 0.577 | |
| Sex, n (%) | Males | 153 | 65 (42.5) | 63 | 28 (44.4) | 83 | 34 (41.0) | 0.673 | 36 | 20 (55.6) | 37 | 11 (29.7) | |
| Females | 88 (57.5) | 35 (55.6) | 49 (59.0) | 16 (44.4) | 26 (70.3) | ||||||||
| Age at diagnosis, M ± SD | years | 153 | 43.8 ± 12.7 | 63 | 48.9 ± 11.0 | 83 | 39.0 ± 12.1 | 36 | 39.8 ± 11.4 | 37 | 38.6 ± 12.7 | 0.677 | |
| Diagnostic delay, Median [IQR] | years | 145 | 8 [4-18] | 58 | 9 [4-20] | 80 | 8 [3-18] | 0.658 | 35 | 8 [4-20] | 35 | 5 [3-18] | 0.417 |
| Fasting GH at diagnosis, Median [IQR] | µg/L | 132 | 11.9 [4.3-26.0] | 55 | 5.5[3.1-16.0] | 70 | 19.9 [9.8-42.4] | 29 | 17.2 [6.2-29.0] | 32 | 23.8 [11.2-49.5] | ||
| IGF-1 at diagnosis, M ± SD | ng/mL | 131 | 874.7 ± 321.3 | 57 | 751.2 ± 285.7 | 68 | 994.0 ± 314.0 | 28 | 1006.8 ± 362.3 | 33 | 992.2 ± 298.6 | 0.863 | |
| IGF-1 at diagnosis, M ± SD | x ULN | 130 | 3.4 ± 1.2 | 57 | 3.1 ± 1.2 | 67 | 3.7 ± 1.2 | 28 | 3.8 ± 1.2 | 32 | 3.7 ± 1.2 | 0.771 | |
| PRL at diagnosis, Median [IQR] | ng/mL | 105 | 13.7 [8.8-27.7] | 44 | 11.1[9.2-15.0] | 55 | 19.7 [7.8-38.8] | 20 | 20.1 [8.8-48.9] | 28 | 21.3 [7.5-32.3] | 0.714 | |
| Hyperprolactinaemia at diagnosis, n (%) | yes | 105 | 33 (31.4) | 44 | 7 (15.9) | 55 | 25 (45.5) | 20 | 9 (45.0) | 28 | 13 (46.4) | 0.922 | |
| Visual field defects, n (%) | None | 153 | 128 (83.7) | 63 | 57 (90.5) | 83 | 64 (77.1) | 0.091 | 36 | 30 (83.3) | 37 | 24 (64.9) | |
| Small | 14 (9.2) | 4 (6.4) | 10 (12.1) | 1 (2.8) | 9 (24.3) | ||||||||
| Quadrantanopia | 11 (7.2) | 2 (3.2) | 9 (10.8) | 5 (13.9) | 4 (10.8) | ||||||||
N – number of patients for whom data were available. The results are presented as n (%) for categorical variables, M ± SD for normally distributed continuous variables, Median [IQR] for non-normally distributed continuous variables. M, mean; SD, standard deviation; IQR, interquartile range. The bold values are statistically significant.
Imaging presentation of the study cohort.
| Variable, parameter | Unit or category | Total | Surgical remission | Response to first-generation SRLs | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yes | No | p | Good | Poor | p | ||||||||
| N | Results | N | Results | N | Results | N | Results | N | Results | ||||
| Tumor imaging in MRI, n (%) | Microadenoma | 146 | 31 (21.2) | 58 | 23 (40.0) | 81 | 6 (7.4) | 35 | 5 (14.3) | 37 | 1 (2.7) | 0.102 | |
| Macroadenoma | 115 (78.7) | 35 (60.0) | 75 (92.6) | 30 (85.7) | 36 (97.3) | ||||||||
| Maximal tumor diameter, Median [IQR] | mm | 124 | 19 [12-25] | 54 | 12.5 [9-19] | 64 | 23 [18-30] | 26 | 22 [16-28] | 32 | 25 [20-35] | 0.162 | |
| Extrasellar expansion, n (%) | yes | 129 | 73 (56.6) | 48 | 14 (29.2) | 74 | 58 (78.4) | 30 | 18 (60.0) | 35 | 32 [91.4] | ||
| Compression of the optic chiasm, n (%) | yes | 122 | 31 (25.4) | 48 | 6 (12.5) | 67 | 25 (37.3) | 28 | 5 (17.9) | 32 | 19 (59.4) | ||
| Degree of cavernous sinus invasion, n (%) | None | 130 | 69 (53.1) | 53 | 44 (83.0) | 74 | 22 (29.7) | 30 | 12 (40.0) | 35 | 8 (22.9) | ||
| Unilateral | 47 (36.2) | 9 (17.0) | 38 (51.4) | 16 (53.3) | 17 (48.6) | ||||||||
| Bilateral | 14 (10.8) | 0 (0.0) | 14 (18.9) | 2 (6.7) | 10 (28.6) | ||||||||
The bold values are statistically significant.
Pathomorphological presentation of the study cohort.
| Variable, parameter | Unit or category | Total | Surgical remission | Response to first-generation SRLs | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yes | No | p | Good | Poor | p | ||||||||
| N | Results | N | Results | N | Results | N | Results | N | Results | ||||
| Granulation subtype of tumor, n (%) | Densely | 108 | 59 (54.6) | 41 | 30 (73.2) | 60 | 24 (40.0) | 25 | 16 (64.0) | 27 | 4 (14.8) | ||
| Sparsely | 49 (45.4) | 11 (26.9) | 36 (60.0) | 9 (36.0) | 23 (85.2) | ||||||||
| Immunohistochemical evaluation of tumor, n (%) | Pure GH(+) | 118 | 63 (53.4) | 48 | 23 (47.9) | 63 | 34 (54.0) | 0.847 | 27 | 15 (55.6) | 29 | 17 (58.6) | 0.927 |
| GH(+) PRL(+) | 46 (39.0) | 21 (43.8) | 24 (38.1) | 10 (37.0) | 9 (31.0) | ||||||||
| Plurihormonal | 9 (7.6) | 4 (8.3) | 5 (7.9) | 2 (7.4) | 3 (10.3) | ||||||||
| Alpha-subunit, n (%) | (+) | 117 | 55 (47.0) | 48 | 28 (58.3) | 62 | 22 (35.5) | 27 | 11 (40.7) | 29 | 8 (27.6) | 0.299 | |
| Ki-67 Index, n (%) | Ki-67 < 1 | 116 | 89 (76.7) | 48 | 42 (87.5) | 61 | 40 (65.6) | 26 | 18 (69.2) | 29 | 16 (55.2) | 0.094 | |
| 1 ≤ Ki-67 < 3 | 16 (13.8) | 6 (12.5) | 10 (16.4) | 6 (23.1) | 4 (13.8) | ||||||||
| Ki-67 ≥ 3 | 11 (9.5) | 0 (0.00) | 11 (18.0) | 2 (7.7) | 9 (31.0) | ||||||||
The bold values are statistically significant.
Multivariate logistic regression for surgical remission, n=69.
| OR | p | 80% CI for OR | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lower limit | Upper limit | |||
| Fasting GH at diagnosis [µg/L] | 0.916 | 0.026 | 0.871 | 0.963 |
| Maximal tumor diameter [mm] | 0.870 | 0.069 | 0.789 | 0,960 |
| Densely vs sparsely granulated subtype of tumor | 3.048 | 0.181 | 1.048 | 8.864 |
| Normoprolactinemia vs hyperprolactinemia | 3.857 | 0.096 | 1.365 | 10.898 |
Figure 4Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve for surgical remission (A) and good response to first-generation SRLs (B).
Multivariate logistic regression for good response to first-generation SRLs, N=47.
| OR | p | 80% CI for OR | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lower limit | Upper limit | |||
| Fasting GH at diagnosis [µg/L] | 0.961 | 0.063 | 0.935 | 0.988 |
| Densely vs sparsely granulated subtype of tumor | 10.684 | 0.002 | 3.968 | 28.767 |