scholarly journals Insulin-like growth factor-1 level is a poor diagnostic indicator of growth hormone deficiency

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Hideyuki Iwayama ◽  
Sachiko Kitagawa ◽  
Jyun Sada ◽  
Ryosuke Miyamoto ◽  
Tomohito Hayakawa ◽  
...  

AbstractWe evaluated the diagnostic accuracy of insulin-like growth factor-1 (IGF-1) for screening growth hormone deficiency (GHD) to determine the usefulness of IGF-1 as a screening test. Among 298 consecutive children who had short stature or decreased height velocity, we measured IGF-1 levels and performed growth hormone (GH) secretion test using clonidine, arginine, and, in cases with different results of the two tests, L-dopa. Patients with congenital abnormalities were excluded. GHD was defined as peak GH ≤ 6.0 ng/mL in the two tests. We identified 60 and 238 patients with and without GHD, respectively. The mean IGF-1 standard deviation (SD) was not significantly different between the GHD and non-GHD groups (p = 0.23). Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis demonstrated the best diagnostic accuracy at an IGF-1 cutoff of − 1.493 SD, with 0.685 sensitivity, 0.417 specificity, 0.25 positive and 0.823 negative predictive values, and 0.517 area under the curve. Correlation analysis revealed that none of the items of patients’ characteristics increased the diagnostic power of IGF-1. IGF-1 level had poor diagnostic accuracy as a screening test for GHD. Therefore, IGF-1 should not be used alone for GHD screening. A predictive biomarker for GHD should be developed in the future.

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hideyuki Iwayama ◽  
Sachiko Kitagawa ◽  
Jyun Sada ◽  
Ryosuke Miyamoto ◽  
Tomohito Hayakawa ◽  
...  

Abstract Purpose We evaluated the diagnostic accuracy of insulin-like growth factor-1 (IGF-1) for screening growth hormone deficiency (GHD) to determine the usefulness of IGF-1 as a screening test. Methods Among 298 consecutive children who had short stature or decreased height velocity, we measured IGF-1 levels and performed growth hormone (GH) secretion test using clonidine, arginine, and, in cases with different results of the two tests, L-dopa. Patients with congenital abnormalities were excluded. GHD was defined as peak GH ≤ 6.0 ng/mL in the two tests. Results We identified 60 and 238 patients with and without GHD, respectively. The mean IGF-1 (SD) was not significantly different between the GHD and non-GHD groups (p = 0.23). Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis demonstrated the best diagnostic accuracy at an IGF-1 cutoff of −1.493 SD, with 0.685 sensitivity, 0.417 specificity, 0.25 positive and 0.823 negative predictive values, and 0.517 area under the curve. Correlation analysis revealed that none of the items of patients’ characteristics increased the diagnostic power of IGF-1. Conclusion IGF-1 level had poor diagnostic accuracy as a screening test for GHD. Therefore, IGF-1 should not be used alone in the screening of GHD. A predictive biomarker for GHD should be developed in the future.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hideyuki Iwayama ◽  
Sachiko Kitagawa ◽  
Jyun Sada ◽  
Ryosuke Miyamoto ◽  
Tomohito Hayakawa ◽  
...  

Abstract Purpose We evaluated the diagnostic accuracy of insulin-like growth factor-1 (IGF-1) for screening growth hormone deficiency (GHD) to determine the usefulness of IGF-1 as a screening test. Methods On 298 consecutive children who had short stature or decreased height velocity, we measured IGF-1 levels and performed growth hormone (GH) secretion test using clonidine, arginine, and, in cases with different results of the two tests, L-dopa. Patients with congenital abnormalities were excluded. GHD was defined as peak GH ≤ 6.0 ng/mL in the two tests. Results We identified 60 and 238 patients with and without GHD, respectively. The mean IGF-1 (SD) was not significantly different between the GHD and non-GHD groups (p = 0.23). Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis demonstrated the best diagnostic accuracy at an IGF-1 cutoff of −1.493 SD, with sensitivity of 0.685, specificity of 0.417, positive predictive value of 0.25, negative predictive value of 0.823, and area under the curve of 0.517. Spearman’s rank correlation coefficient showed that IGF-1 (SD) was weakly correlated with age, bone age, height velocity before examination, weight (SD), and BMI (SD) and very weakly correlated with height (SD), target height (SD), and maximum GH peak. Conclusion IGF-1 level had poor diagnostic accuracy as a screening test for GHD. Correlation analysis revealed that none of the items increased the diagnostic power of IGF-1. Therefore, IGF-1 should not be used alone in the screening of GHD. A predictive biomarker for GHD should be developed in the future.


2019 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 16-23
Author(s):  
Khalid S Aljabri ◽  

Objective: Growth hormone deficiency (GHD) is one of the most important endocrine and treatable causes of short stature. Insulin-like growth factor 1 (IGF-1) concentration is not recommended to establish the diagnosis of GHD. The aim of our study was to analyze the relevance of IGF-1 concentration as a screening test for the diagnosis of GHD. Materials and Methods: We retrospectively studied patients who were evaluated for short stature at the Endocrinology Department of King Fahad Armed Forces Hospital, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia from January 2015 to December 2018. For IGF-1, laboratory reference ranges were based on age and sex. For all eligible patients, IGF-1 concentration was determined and an ITT was performed. Patients with a peak GH of ≤ 5.0 ng/ml were considered to be GHD and patients with a peak GH of ≥ 5.1 ng/ml were considered non-GHD (nGHD). Results: We retrospectively included 47 patients for analysis. Mean age was 14.7 ± 1.7 years. There were 38 males (80.9%) and 9 females (19.1%) and mean IGF-1 concentration was 146.4 ± 69.4 ng/dl. Results from the ITT indicated that 27 (57.4%) had GHD. Age was not significantly different between GHD and non-GHD (14.7 ± 1.8 vs. 14.8 ± 1.6 years, P = 0.9). There were non-significantly more males than females in GHD patients (59% vs. 50%, P = 0.7). Mean IGF-1 concentration was not significantly different (146.9 ± 70.4 ng/dl vs. 145.7 ± 69.8 ng/dl, P = 0.9). IGF-1 concentration below the reference ranges for age and gender was non-significantly higher in patients with GHD compared to non-GHD (53.8% vs. 46.2%, P = 0.8). The mean peak for GH concentration was significantly lower in patients with GHD (2.2 ± 1.3 ng/ml vs. 9.9 ± 5.6 ng/ml, P < 0.0001). Peak GH concentration was not significantly correlated with IGF-1 concentration (r = 0.213, P = 0.2). We plotted a ROC curve of IGF-1 concentration according to the diagnosis of GHD as established using ITT. The AUC was 49%. An IGF-1 threshold of 154 ng/dl was selected to emphasize sensitivity rather than specificity. With a threshold of 154 ng/dl, sensitivity was 52% (95% confidence interval (95% CI); 32%, 71%), specificity was 40% (95% CI; 19%, 64%) and the negative predictive value for the diagnosis of GHD was 38% (95% CI; 24%, 54%). With a threshold of 105 ng/dl, the sensitivity was 41% and the specificity was 70%. A threshold of 74 ng/dl, gave a positive predictive value of 60% but a negative predictive value of 43%. 7 of the patients with IGF-1 concentration above the threshold of 154 ng/dl (N = 20) were normal and 13 had GH deficiency. These 13 GHD patients had IGF-1 concentration that differs significantly from those of their GH-sufficient counterparts (105 ± 35 vs. 222 ± 49 ng/dl, P < 0.0001). If IGF-1 was used as a screening test (with a concentration threshold of 154 ng/dl) and ITT as a confirmatory test, 20 (43%) out of 47 ITT would not have been performed, leading to the misdiagnosis of 13 GH-deficient adults. Thus, in our study population, such a procedure would misdiagnose 13 out of 27 GHD patients (48%) and yield a sensitivity of 52%. Conclusion: Many reports have already reported that IGF-1 concentration is lower in patients with GHD than in the general population, our study demonstrated the poor negative predictive value of IGF-1 concentration for the diagnosis of GHD, making it the need of the use of the “gold standard” method ITT. This observation remains to be validated by population-based studies.


PEDIATRICS ◽  
1998 ◽  
Vol 102 (Supplement_3) ◽  
pp. 524-526
Author(s):  
Raymond L. Hintz

The use of auxologic measurements in the diagnosis of short stature in children has a long history in pediatric endocrinology, and they have even been used as the primary criteria in selecting children for growth hormone (GH) therapy. Certainly, an abnormality in the control of growth is more likely in short children than in children of normal stature. However, most studies have shown little or no value of auxologic criteria in differentiating short children who have classic growth hormone deficiency (GHD) from short children who do not. In National Cooperative Growth Study Substudy VI, in more than 6000 children being assessed for short stature, the overall mean height SD score was −2.5 ± 1.1 and the body mass index standard deviation score was −0.5 ± 1.4. However, there were no significant differences in these measures between the patients who were found subsequently to have GHD and those who were not. There also was no consistent difference in the growth rates between the patients with classic GHD and those short children without a diagnosis of GHD. This probably reflects the fact that we are dealing with a selected population of children who were referred for short stature and are further selecting those who are the shortest for additional investigation. Growth factor measurements have been somewhat more useful in selecting patients with GHD and have been proposed as primary diagnostic criteria. However, in National Cooperative Growth Study Substudy VI, only small differences in the levels of insulin-like growth factor I and insulin-like growth factor binding protein 3 were seen between the patients who were selected for GH treatment and those who were not. Many studies indicate that the primary value of growth factor measurements is to exclude patients who are unlikely to have GHD or to identify those patients in whom an expedited work-up should be performed. The diagnosis of GHD remains difficult and must be based on all of the data possible and the best judgment of an experienced clinician. Even under ideal circumstances, errors of both overdiagnosis and underdiagnosis of GHD still are likely.


2019 ◽  
Vol 25 (11) ◽  
pp. 1191-1232 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kevin C. J. Yuen ◽  
Beverly M. K. Biller ◽  
Sally Radovick ◽  
John D. Carmichael ◽  
Sina Jasim ◽  
...  

Objective: The development of these guidelines is sponsored by the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists (AACE) Board of Directors and American College of Endocrinology (ACE) Board of Trustees and adheres with published AACE protocols for the standardized production of clinical practice guidelines (CPG). Methods: Recommendations are based on diligent reviews of clinical evidence with transparent incorporation of subjective factors, according to established AACE/ACE guidelines for guidelines protocols. Results: The Executive Summary of this 2019 updated guideline contains 58 numbered recommendations: 12 are Grade A (21%), 19 are Grade B (33%), 21 are Grade C (36%), and 6 are Grade D (10%). These detailed, evidence-based recommendations allow for nuance-based clinical decision-making that addresses multiple aspects of real-world care of patients. The evidence base presented in the subsequent Appendix provides relevant supporting information for the Executive Summary recommendations. This update contains 357 citations of which 51 (14%) are evidence level (EL) 1 (strong), 168 (47%) are EL 2 (intermediate), 61 (17%) are EL 3 (weak), and 77 (22%) are EL 4 (no clinical evidence). Conclusion: This CPG is a practical tool that practicing endocrinologists and regulatory bodies can refer to regarding the identification, diagnosis, and treatment of adults and patients transitioning from pediatric to adult-care services with growth hormone deficiency (GHD). It provides guidelines on assessment, screening, diagnostic testing, and treatment recommendations for a range of individuals with various causes of adult GHD. The recommendations emphasize the importance of considering testing patients with a reasonable level of clinical suspicion of GHD using appropriate growth hormone (GH) cut-points for various GH–stimulation tests to accurately diagnose adult GHD, and to exercise caution interpreting serum GH and insulin-like growth factor-1 (IGF-1) levels, as various GH and IGF-1 assays are used to support treatment decisions. The intention to treat often requires sound clinical judgment and careful assessment of the benefits and risks specific to each individual patient. Unapproved uses of GH, long-term safety, and the current status of long-acting GH preparations are also discussed in this document. LAY ABSTRACT This updated guideline provides evidence-based recommendations regarding the identification, screening, assessment, diagnosis, and treatment for a range of individuals with various causes of adult growth-hormone deficiency (GHD) and patients with childhood-onset GHD transitioning to adult care. The update summarizes the most current knowledge about the accuracy of available GH–stimulation tests, safety of recombinant human GH (rhGH) replacement, unapproved uses of rhGH related to sports and aging, and new developments such as long-acting GH preparations that use a variety of technologies to prolong GH action. Recommendations offer a framework for physicians to manage patients with GHD effectively during transition to adult care and adulthood. Establishing a correct diagnosis is essential before consideration of replacement therapy with rhGH. Since the diagnosis of GHD in adults can be challenging, GH–stimulation tests are recommended based on individual patient circumstances and use of appropriate GH cut-points. Available GH–stimulation tests are discussed regarding variability, accuracy, reproducibility, safety, and contraindications, among other factors. The regimen for starting and maintaining rhGH treatment now uses individualized dose adjustments, which has improved effectiveness and reduced reported side effects, dependent on age, gender, body mass index, and various other individual characteristics. With careful dosing of rhGH replacement, many features of adult GHD are reversible and side effects of therapy can be minimized. Scientific studies have consistently shown rhGH therapy to be beneficial for adults with GHD, including improvements in body composition and quality of life, and have demonstrated the safety of short- and long-term rhGH replacement. Abbreviations: AACE = American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists; ACE = American College of Endocrinology; AHSG = alpha-2-HS-glycoprotein; AO-GHD = adult-onset growth hormone deficiency; ARG = arginine; BEL = best evidence level; BMD = bone mineral density; BMI = body mass index; CI = confidence interval; CO-GHD = childhood-onset growth hormone deficiency; CPG = clinical practice guideline; CRP = C-reactive protein; DM = diabetes mellitus; DXA = dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry; EL = evidence level; FDA = Food and Drug Administration; FD-GST = fixed-dose glucagon stimulation test; GeNeSIS = Genetics and Neuroendocrinology of Short Stature International Study; GH = growth hormone; GHD = growth hormone deficiency; GHRH = growth hormone–releasing hormone; GST = glucagon stimulation test; HDL = high-density lipoprotein; HypoCCS = Hypopituitary Control and Complications Study; IGF-1 = insulin-like growth factor-1; IGFBP = insulin-like growth factor–binding protein; IGHD = isolated growth hormone deficiency; ITT = insulin tolerance test; KIMS = Kabi International Metabolic Surveillance; LAGH = long-acting growth hormone; LDL = low-density lipoprotein; LIF = leukemia inhibitory factor; MPHD = multiple pituitary hormone deficiencies; MRI = magnetic resonance imaging; P-III-NP = procollagen type-III amino-terminal pro-peptide; PHD = pituitary hormone deficiencies; QoL = quality of life; rhGH = recombinant human growth hormone; ROC = receiver operating characteristic; RR = relative risk; SAH = subarachnoid hemorrhage; SDS = standard deviation score; SIR = standardized incidence ratio; SN = secondary neoplasms; T3 = triiodothyronine; TBI = traumatic brain injury; VDBP = vitamin D-binding protein; WADA = World Anti-Doping Agency; WB-GST = weight-based glucagon stimulation test


1992 ◽  
Vol 127 (4) ◽  
pp. 351-358 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zvi Laron ◽  
Anne-Maria Suikkari ◽  
Beatrice Klinger ◽  
Aviva Silbergeld ◽  
Athalia Pertzelan ◽  
...  

Insulin-like growth factors (IGFs) mediate the effects of growth hormone (GH), and the insulin-like growth factor-binding proteins (IGFBPs) modulate the actions of IGFs in tissues. We studied the circulating levels of IGFBP-1 in 6 children and 9 adults with Laron type dwarfism (LTD), in 11 children and 21 adults with growth hormone deficiency (GHD), and in 8 children with constitutional short stature. Compared with the situation in healthy children, the basal serum IGFBP-1 concentration was 5.4-fold higher in LTD children, 4.1-fold higher in GHD children, and 3.8-fold higher in children with short stature (p<0.02 vs controls in all groups). In adult patients with multiple pituitary hormone deficiency (MPHD), the IGFBP-1 concentration was 2-fold elevated, but it was normal in adult LTD patients. Intravenous (N= 10) or subcutaneous (N=9) administration ofIGF-I (75 μg·kg−1 and 150 μg·kg−1, respectively) in LTD children resulted in a rapid 50–60% fall in serum insulin (p<0.02), a decline in blood glucose and a concomitant 40–60% rise of IGFBP-1 levels (p<0.05). Treatment for seven days with IGF-I (150 μg·kg−1·d−1) resulted in a decrease by 34% and 44% of serum IGFBP-1 level in two out of three children with LTD. After prolonged GH therapy, the IGFBP-1 level fell in GHD children by 29% (p<0.05), in GHD adults by 52% (p<0.02) and in children with constitutional short stature by 17% (p<0.02). IGFBP-1 and insulin concentrations were inversely related in patients with GHD (r= −0.66, p<0.001) or with LTD (r= −0.57, p<0.05). Our data suggest that: (a) increased IGFBP-1 concentration in LTD, GHD and constitutional short children may, at least in part, be accounted for by an IGF-I deficiency; (b) both the rise in IGF-I and a fall in insulin contributed to the rise in IGFBP-1 after acute IGF-I administration; (c) prolonged IGF-I or GH treatment causes a persistent decline in IGFBP-1 concentration. In conclusion, IGF-I and GH may regulate IGFBP-1 secretion either directly or via insulin.


2000 ◽  
Vol 52 (6) ◽  
pp. 735-739 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laurence Bussières ◽  
Jean-Claude Souberbielle ◽  
Graziella Pinto ◽  
Luis Adan ◽  
Michele Noel ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document