4.4 Article

What predicts adverse outcomes in untreated primary hyperparathyroidism? The Parathyroid Epidemiology and Audit Research Study (PEARS)

Journal

CLINICAL ENDOCRINOLOGY
Volume 79, Issue 1, Pages 27-34

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/cen.12206

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Chief Scientist Office in Scotland
  2. Chief Scientist's Office, Scotland, UK
  3. Amgen, Australia

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective This study aims to identify the best biochemical risk factors alongside other factors for predicting adverse outcomes seen in untreated primary hyperparathyroidism (PHPT). Design Population-based cohort study, 1997-2006. Setting Tayside, Scotland, UK. Patients Patients with untreated diagnosed PHPT. Outcome measures and methods Outcomes considered were all-cause mortality, fatal and nonfatal cardiovascular disease (CVD). Models were derived using survival analysis. Potential biochemical predictors tested were baseline serum calcium, parathyroid hormone (PTH), creatinine and alkaline phosphatase (ALP), and other covariates considered were gender, age at diagnosis, deprivation, previous comorbidities and bisphosphonates usage. Results From 1997 to 2006, 2097 patients (mean age, 68 center dot 4years; 69 center dot 9% women) with untreated PHPT were identified with a total follow-up of 7338 person years, in the population of Tayside, Scotland. The median baseline calcium was 2 center dot 61mm, and PTH was 7 center dot 2pm. PTH was the only statistically significant risk factor in all outcomes observed adjusting for other covariates. Serum creatinine and ALP predicted mortality outcomes in the short term (3years), but not long term. Calcium was associated with increased risk of all-cause mortality in the short term but had no significant impact on other outcomes. Conclusion Baseline PTH, rather than calcium, best predicts long-term outcomes in untreated PHPT.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available