Diagnosing Growth Hormone Deficiency: Can a Combined Arginine and Clonidine Stimulation Test Replace 2 Separate Tests?

[Diagnostic significance and considerations of growth hormone stimulation testing and insulin-like growth factor 1 in growth hormone deficiency]

The growth hormone (GH)/insulin-like growth factor 1 (IGF-1) axis is an essential component of the hypothalamic-pituitary growth hormone axis and plays a crucial role in childhood growth and development. Disruptions and abnormalities in the GH/IGF-1 signaling pathway and its pathways typically manifest as short stature in children. Children with short stature often undergo GH stimulation testing and IGF-1 level measurements to differentiate growth hormone deficiency (GHD) from other causes of growth delay. This article aims to analyze and elucidate the values of GH stimulation testing and IGF-1 measurement, providing reference for the diagnosis of GHD in children.

Combined growth hormone stimulation testing: Could the tests be shortened?

INTRODUCTION

Growth hormone stimulation tests (GHST) remain the cornerstone for diagnosing growth hormone deficiency (GHD), yet they can be lengthy and costly. We aimed to examine whether the combined clonidine and glucagon stimulation test (CGST) and l-dopa and glucagon stimulation test (LDGST) can be shortened without compromising the test's specificity.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed the baseline characteristics, auxological and laboratory data of children with short stature who had undergone a CGST and an LDGST for GHD. We compared the diagnostic accuracy for the standard test and shortened test, eliminating time points of 0 and 210 min.

RESULTS

We reviewed 830 charts (8.17 ± 2.92 years old; 56.27% males), with 431 (57.0%) children in the CGST group, and 38 (51.35%) in the LDGST group who tested negative for GHD. The peak and maximum GH levels occurred at the 60-min time point for both the CGST and LDGST. Eliminating the 0-min time point was the only time that did not affect the specificity of the CGST, with a false-positive rate of 2 (2.99%), specificity of 0.99 (0.99-0.99), and p value of 0.25. Eliminating the 0- and 210-min time points did not affect the specificity of the LDGST, with a false-positive rate of 2 (5.26%), specificity of 0.95 (0.95-0.95), and p value of 0.24.

CONCLUSIONS

We concluded that 0-min time point could be eliminated without compromising the combined GHST diagnostic value, thus resulting in cost reduction. Larger studies are needed for the combined LDGST to explore whether the 30- and 210-min time points could be eliminated, thus resulting in cost and time savings.