4.7 Article

Effect of recombinant human growth hormone (GH) replacement on the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis in adult GH-deficient patients

期刊

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM
卷 89, 期 11, 页码 5397-5401

出版社

ENDOCRINE SOC
DOI: 10.1210/jc.2004-1114

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The aim of the study was to evaluate the hypothalamuspituitary-adrenal (HPA) axis in patients ( nine males, three females; mean age +/- SEM 51 +/- 2 yr) with adult-onset GH deficiency (GHD) due to surgically treated pituitary tumors with preserved HPA function and without evidence of tumor recurrence before and during recombinant human ( rh) GH replacement therapy (duration 31 +/- 6 months). HPA function was assessed by urinary free cortisol and morning serum cortisol levels as well as cortisol responses to 1 mug ACTH test (n = 7 patients) or insulin tolerance test (n = 5 patients) before and during rhGH therapy, the cut-off for the diagnosis of hypoadrenalism being a cortisol peak less than 18 mug/dl (< 500 nmol/liter) after stimulatory tests. Serum cortisol and urinary free cortisol levels were significantly lower on therapy than before [7.6 +/- 0.8 vs. 11.5 +/- 0.9 mu g/dl (208 +/- 22 vs. 317 +/- 24 nmol/liter), P < 0.01, and 19.6 +/- 2.5 vs. 32.2 +/- 3.2 mug per 24 h (54 +/- 7 vs. 89 +/- 9 nmol per 24 h), P < 0.05, respectively], whereas no change in cortisol-binding globulin levels was observed. Cortisol peak after either ACTH test or insulin tolerance test was lower on rhGH therapy than before [15.9 +/- 1.5 vs. 20.2 +/- 1.1 mu g/dl (437 +/- 43 vs. 557 +/- 31), P = 0.01, and 13.1 +/- 2.6 vs. 20.4 +/- 1.4 mu g/dl (362 +/- 71 vs. 564 +/- 37 nmol/liter), P = 0.03, respectively]. Accordingly, central hypoadrenalism was detected in nine of 11 patients. In conclusion, low GH and IGF-I levels, likely enhancing the conversion of cortisone to cortisol, may mask a condition of central hypoadrenalism. Therefore, the reassessment of HPA function in GHD patients during rhGH therapy is mandatory.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据