Comparison of the short ACTH stimulation test with the insulin tolerance/glucagon test

Diagnosis and treatment of hypopituitarism: an update

Diagnosis and treatment of patients with hypopituitarism needs careful clinical evaluation and individual optimization. Symptoms of hypopituitarism are variable, often insidious in onset and dependent on the degree of hormone deficiency. Diagnosis of hypopituitarism can be straightforward by measuring reduced basal hormone levels. Frequently, dynamic stimulation tests are indicated in equivocal basal hormone levels or to diagnose partial hormone deficiencies. Knowledge of the use and limitations of these dynamic tests is mandatory for proper interpretation. Hormone replacement therapy should be individualized, taking into account possible interactions. Persisting symptoms and reduced quality of life are frequently reported, explained by, at least in part, intrinsic imperfections of hormone replacement strategies in mimicking normal hormone secretion. In the present overview, the principles of diagnosis and treatment of hypopituitarism are discussed.

Adrenal insufficiency

Adrenal insufficiency is caused by either primary adrenal failure (mostly due to autoimmune adrenalitis) or by hypothalamic-pituitary impairment of the corticotropic axis (predominantly due to pituitary disease). It is a rare disease, but is life threatening when overlooked. Main presenting symptoms such as fatigue, anorexia, and weight loss are non-specific, thus diagnosis is often delayed. The diagnostic work-up is well established but some pitfalls remain, particularly in the identification of secondary adrenal insufficiency. Despite optimised life-saving glucocorticoid-replacement and mineralocorticoid-replacement therapy, health-related quality of life in adrenal insufficiency is more severely impaired than previously thought. Dehydroepiandrosterone-replacement therapy has been introduced that could help to restore quality of life. Monitoring of glucocorticoid-replacement quality is hampered by lack of objective methods of assessment, and is therefore largely based on clinical grounds. Thus, long-term management of patients with adrenal insufficiency remains a challenge, requiring an experienced specialist. However, all doctors should know how to diagnose and manage suspected acute adrenal failure.

Differences in reproducibility and peak growth hormone responses to repeated testing with various stimulators in healthy adults

In healthy adults, GH responses to provocative testing are variable between subjects. Information on the intra-subject variability is limited, despite the importance attached to GH stimulation tests in the diagnosis of GH deficiency. We have investigated and compared the variability of different GH stimulation tests in a group of healthy control subjects. In 16 healthy non-obese adults, two insulin tolerance tests (ITT) (0.15 IU/kg body weight i.v. and a fall in blood glucose < or = 2.2 mmol/l) two GHRH tests (1 microgram/kg body weight i.v.), and two clonidine (CLO) (300 micrograms p.o.) + GHRH (60 min later) tests were performed in the morning after an overnight fast. A pyridostigmine (PD) (120 mg p.o. 60 min before GHRH) + GHRH test was performed twice in an extended group of 31 healthy adult subjects. A wide range of GH responses was observed. Both during the ITT and the GHRH test, low values in the range generally recognized to reflect impairment of GH secretory status were encountered. The median (range) peak GH responses in tests 1 and 2 were: (a) ITT: 14.4 micrograms/l (4.1-71.1) and 14.0 micrograms/l (0.09-69.5), (b) GHRH test: 21.7 micrograms/l (0.71-56.2) and 18.4 micrograms/l (1.6-55.1); (c) CLO + GHRH test: 57.4 micrograms/l (22.9-209) and 65.8 micrograms/l (12.2-206); (d) PD + GHRH test: 36.5 micrograms/l (9.1-125) and 44.6 micrograms/l (6.3-101). The coefficients of variation (CV) were: 58% (ITT), 45% (GHRH), 46% (CLO + GHRH) and 26% (PD + GHRH). The peak GH responses were significantly different in all tests (CLO + GHRH > PD + GHRH > GHRH > ITT). In the individual subject, there was no systematic correlation between the peak GH responses in the different stimulation tests. In conclusion, we found that the stimulated GH responses were highly variable in all tests, and that the peak GH responses differed. Test results in patients should be evaluated against test-specific reference values, and caution is justified in the interpretation of low responses in a single test.