4.2 Article

Refractory nonfunctioning pituitary adenomas

Journal

PITUITARY
Volume 26, Issue 3, Pages 278-280

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s11102-023-01298-4

Keywords

Non-functioning pituitary adenomas; Pituitary carcinomas; Aggressive pituitary tumors; Refractory pituitary adenomas; Temozolomide; Pituitary neuroendocrine tumors

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Non-functioning pituitary adenomas (NFPAs) are silent tumors of different pituitary lineages that are difficult to detect early and present as invasive macroscopic tumors with mass effect symptoms. They often cannot be completely surgically removed and may have subsequent remnant progression. When NFPAs show resistance to optimal standard therapies including surgery, radiotherapy, and medical treatment, they are classified as refractory.
Non-functioning pituitary adenomas (NFPAs) comprise silent tumors of different pituitary lineages that tend to escape early detection and present as invasive macroadenomas with symptoms of mass effect. Incomplete surgical resection is common and may be followed by significant rates of subsequent remnant progression. Pituitary tumors are defined as refractory when resistance to optimal standard therapies including surgery, radiotherapy, and medical treatment is documented. In the absence of approved medications for the treatment of NFPAs, the last criterion to classify these tumors as refractory is ill defined. Silent corticotroph and null cell adenomas have been reported, albeit not in all studies, to be larger and recur more often compared with silent gonadotroph tumors. Nevertheless, it is currently unknown if certain NFPA subtypes are more often refractory using well defined criteria. The response rate to temozolomide is lower in NFPA compared to that seen in functioning tumors. Refractory NFPAs present a significant diagnostic and therapeutic challenge and are associated with increased morbidity and mortality rates.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available