Familial pituitary adenomas - who should be tested for AIP mutations?

Unlocking the Genetic Secrets of Acromegaly: Exploring the Role of Genetics in a Rare Disorder

Acromegaly is a rare endocrine disorder characterized by the excessive production of growth hormone (GH) in adulthood. Currently, it is understood that certain pituitary neuroendocrine tumors (PitNETs) exhibit a hereditary predisposition. These tumors' genetic patterns fall into two categories: isolated and syndromic tumors. The isolated forms are characterized by molecular defects that predispose exclusively to PitNETs, including familial isolated pituitary adenomas (FIPAs) and sporadic genetic defects not characterized by hereditary predisposition. All the categories involve either germline or somatic mutations, or both, each associated with varying levels of penetrance and different phenotypes. This highlights the importance of genetic testing and the need for a more comprehensive view of the whole disease. Despite the availability of multiple treatment options, diagnosis often occurs after several years, and management is still difficult. Early detection and intervention are crucial for preventing complications and enhancing the quality of life for affected individuals. This review aims to elucidate the molecular, clinical, and histological characteristics of GH-secreting PitNETs, providing insights into their prevalence, treatment nuances, and the benefits of genetic testing for each type of genetic disorder associated with acromegaly.

Pituitary Adenoma: SSTR2 rs2236750, SSTR5 rs34037914, and AIP rs267606574 Genetic Variants, Serum Levels, and Ki-67 Labeling Index Associations

Background and Objectives: This study explores the complex pathogenesis of pituitary adenomas (PAs), prevalent intracranial tumors in the pituitary gland. Despite their generally benign nature, PAs exhibit a diverse clinical spectrum involving hormone hypersecretion and varying invasiveness, hinting at multifaceted molecular mechanisms and abnormalities in tumorigenesis and gene regulation. Materials and Methods: The investigation focuses on the Ki-67 labeling index, SSTR2 rs2236750, SSTR5 rs34037914, and AIP rs267606574 polymorphisms, alongside serum levels of SSTR2, SSTR5, and AIP, to discern their association with PAs. The Ki-67 labeling index was assessed using immunohistochemical analysis with the monoclonal antibody clone SP6, representing the percentage of tumor cells showing positive staining. Genotyping was performed via real-time polymerase chain reaction, and serum levels were analyzed using ELISA. The study included 128 PA patients and 272 reference group subjects. Results: The results derived from binary logistic regression analysis revealed an intriguing correlation between the SSTR2 rs2236750 AG genotype and approximately a 1.6-fold increased likelihood of PA occurrence. When analyzing SSTR5 rs34037914, statistically significant differences were found between Micro-PA and the reference group (p = 0.022). Additionally, the SSTR5 rs34037914 TT genotype, compared with CC + CT, under the most robust genetic model (selected based on the lowest AIC value), was associated with a 12-fold increased odds of Micro-PA occurrence. However, it is noteworthy that after applying Bonferroni correction, these findings did not retain statistical significance. Conclusions: Consequently, while this study hinted at a potential link between SSTR2 rs2236750 and pituitary adenoma development, as well as a potential link between SSTR5 rs34037914 and Micro-PA development, it underscored the need for further analysis involving a larger cohort to robustly validate these findings.

Consensus guideline for the diagnosis and management of pituitary adenomas in childhood and adolescence: Part 1, general recommendations

Tumours of the anterior part of the pituitary gland represent just 1% of all childhood (aged <15 years) intracranial neoplasms, yet they can confer high morbidity and little evidence and guidance is in place for their management. Between 2014 and 2022, a multidisciplinary expert group systematically developed the first comprehensive clinical practice consensus guideline for children and young people under the age 19 years (hereafter referred to as CYP) presenting with a suspected pituitary adenoma to inform specialist care and improve health outcomes. Through robust literature searches and a Delphi consensus exercise with an international Delphi consensus panel of experts, the available scientific evidence and expert opinions were consolidated into 74 recommendations. Part 1 of this consensus guideline includes 17 pragmatic management recommendations related to clinical care, neuroimaging, visual assessment, histopathology, genetics, pituitary surgery and radiotherapy. While in many aspects the care for CYP is similar to that of adults, key differences exist, particularly in aetiology and presentation. CYP with suspected pituitary adenomas require careful clinical examination, appropriate hormonal work-up, dedicated pituitary imaging and visual assessment. Consideration should be given to the potential for syndromic disease and genetic assessment. Multidisciplinary discussion at both the local and national levels can be key for management. Surgery should be performed in specialist centres. The collection of outcome data on novel modalities of medical treatment, surgical intervention and radiotherapy is essential for optimal future treatment.

Genetic diagnosis in acromegaly and gigantism: From research to clinical practice

It is usually considered that only 5% of all pituitary neuroendocrine tumours are due to inheritable causes. Since this estimate was reported, however, multiple genetic defects driving syndromic and nonsyndromic somatotrophinomas have been unveiled. This heterogeneous genetic background results in overlapping phenotypes of GH excess. Genetic tests should be part of the approach to patients with acromegaly and gigantism because they can refine the clinical diagnoses, opening the possibility to tailor the clinical conduct to each patient. Even more, genetic testing and clinical screening of at-risk individuals have a positive impact on disease outcomes, by allowing for the timely detection and treatment of somatotrophinomas at early stages. Future research should focus on determining the actual frequency of novel genetic drivers of somatotrophinomas in the general population, developing up-to-date disease-specific multi-gene panels for clinical use, and finding strategies to improve access to modern genetic testing worldwide.

Genetic testing in prolactinomas: a cohort study

BACKGROUND

Prolactinomas represent 46%-66% of pituitary adenomas, but the prevalence of germline mutations is largely unknown. We present here the first study focusing on hereditary predisposition to prolactinoma.

OBJECTIVE

We studied the prevalence of germline mutations in a large cohort of patients with isolated prolactinomas.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective study was performed combining genetic and clinical data from patients referred for genetic testing of MEN1, AIP, and CDKN1B between 2003 and 2020. SF3B1 was Sanger sequenced in genetically negative patients.

RESULTS

About 506 patients with a prolactinoma were included: 80 with microprolactinoma (15.9%), 378 with macroprolactinoma (74.7%), 48 unknown; 49/506 in a familial context (9.7%). Among these, 14 (2.8%) had a (likely) pathogenic variant (LPV) in MEN1 or AIP, and none in CDKN1B. All positive patients had developed a macroprolactinoma before age 30. The prevalence of germline mutations in patients with isolated macroprolactinoma under 30 was 4% (11/258) in a sporadic context and 15% (3/20) in a familial context. Prevalence in sporadic cases younger than 18 was 15% in men (5/33) and 7% in women (4/57). No R625H SF3B1 germline mutation was identified in 264 patients with macroprolactinomas.

CONCLUSIONS

We did not identify any LPVs in patients over 30 years of age, either in a familial or in a sporadic context, and in a sporadic context in our series or the literature. Special attention should be paid to young patients and to familial context.

Genetic Testing in Hereditary Pituitary Tumors

Genetic testing is becoming part of mainstream endocrinology. An increasing number of rare and not-so-rare endocrine diseases have an identifiable genetic cause, either at the germline or at the somatic level. Here we summerise germline genetic alterations in patients with pituitary neuroendocrine tumors (pituitary adenomas). These may be disorders with isolated pituitary tumors, such as X-linked acrogigantism, or AIP-related pituitary tumors, or as part of syndromic diseases, such as multiple endocrine neoplasia type 1 or Carney complex. In some cases, this could be relevant for treatment choices and follow-up, as well as for family members, as cascade screening leads to early identification of affected relatives and improved clinical outcomes.

Cutaneous lesions and other non-endocrine manifestations of Multiple Endocrine Neoplasia type 1 syndrome

Background

Multiple Endocrine Neoplasia type 1 is a rare genetic syndrome mainly caused by mutations of MEN1 gene and characterized by a combination of several endocrine and non-endocrine manifestations. The objective of this study was to describe cutaneous lesions and other non-endocrine manifestations of MEN1 in a cohort of patients with familial (F) and sporadic (S) MEN1, compare the prevalence of these manifestations between the two cohorts, and investigate the correlation with MEN1 mutation status.

Methods

We collected phenotypic and genotypic data of 185 patients with F-MEN1 and S-MEN1 followed from 1997 to 2022. The associations between F-MEN1 and S-MEN1 or MEN1 mutation-positive and mutation-negative patients and non-endocrine manifestations were determined using chi-square or Fisher's exact tests or multivariate exact logistic regression analyses.

Results

The prevalence of angiofibromas was significantly higher in F-MEN1 than in S-MEN1 in both the whole (p < 0.001) and index case (p = 0.003) cohorts. The prevalence of lipomas was also significantly higher in F-MEN1 than in S-MEN1 (p = 0.009) and in MEN1 mutation-positive than in MEN1 mutation-negative (p = 0.01) index cases. In the whole cohort, the prevalence of lipomas was significantly higher in MEN1 mutation-positive compared to MEN1 mutation-negative patients (OR = 2.7, p = 0.02) and in F-MEN1 than in S-MEN1 (p = 0.03), only after adjustment for age. No significant differences were observed for the other non-endocrine manifestations between the two cohorts. Hibernoma and collagenoma were each present in one patient (0.5%) and meningioma and neuroblastoma in 2.7% and 0.5%, respectively. Gastric leiomyoma was present in 1.1% of the patients and uterine leiomyoma in 14% of women. Thyroid cancer, breast cancer, lung cancer, basal cell carcinoma, melanoma, and colorectal cancer were present in 4.9%, 2.7%, 1.6%, 1.6%, 2.2%, and 0.5% of the whole series, respectively.

Conclusions

We found a significantly higher prevalence of angiofibromas and lipomas in F-MEN1 compared with S-MEN1 and in MEN1 mutation-positive compared to MEN1 mutation-negative patients. In patients with one major endocrine manifestation of MEN1 , the presence of cutaneous lesions might suggest the diagnosis of MEN1 and a possible indication for genetic screening.

The Spectrum of Familial Pituitary Neuroendocrine Tumors

Hereditary pituitary tumorigenesis is seen in a relatively small proportion (around 5%) of patients with pituitary neuroendocrine tumors (PitNETs). The aim of the current review is to describe the main clinical and molecular features of such pituitary tumors associated with hereditary or familial characteristics, many of which have now been genetically identified. The genetic patterns of inheritance are classified into isolated familial PitNETs and the syndromic tumors. In general, the established genetic causes of familial tumorigenesis tend to present at a younger age, often pursue a more aggressive course, and are more frequently associated with growth hormone hypersecretion compared to sporadic tumors. The mostly studied molecular pathways implicated are the protein kinase A and phosphatidyl-inositol pathways, which are in the main related to mutations in the syndromes of familial isolated pituitary adenoma (FIPA), Carney complex syndrome, and X-linked acrogigantism. Another well-documented mechanism consists of the regulation of p27 or p21 proteins, with further acceleration of the pituitary cell cycle through the check points G1/S and M/G1, mostly documented in multiple endocrine neoplasia type 4. In conclusion, PitNETs may occur in relation to well-established familial germline mutations which may determine the clinical phenotype and the response to treatment, and may require family screening.

AIP gene germline variants in adult Polish patients with apparently sporadic pituitary macroadenomas

INTRODUCTION

Up to 5% of all pituitary tumors are hereditary e.g. due to MEN1 or aryl hydrocarbon receptor-interacting protein (AIP) genes mutations.

OBJECTIVES

The study was aimed at the assessment of the frequency and characteristics of AIP-mutation related tumors in patients with apparently sporadic pituitary macroadenomas in the Polish population.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The study included 131 patients (57 males, 74 females; median age 42 years) diagnosed with pituitary macroadenomas, and with a negative family history of familial isolated pituitary adenoma (FIPA) or multiple endocrine neoplasia type 1 (MEN1) syndromes. Sanger sequencing was used for the assessment of AIP gene variants. The study was approved by the Ethics Board of JUMC.

RESULTS

AIP variants were identified in five of the 131 included subjects (3.8%): one diagnosed with Cushing's disease, two with acromegaly, and two with non-secreting adenomas. Patients harboring hereditary AIP gene alterations did not differ from the rest of the study group in median age at diagnosis (41.0 vs. 42.5 years, P=0.8), median largest tumor diameter (25 vs. 24 mm, P=0.6), gender distribution (60.0% vs. 56.3% females, P=0.8), secreting tumor frequency (60.0% vs. 67.5%, P=0.7), or acromegaly diagnosis frequency (40.0% vs.37.3%, P=0.9).

CONCLUSIONS

In our series of apparently sporadic pituitary macroadenomas, AIP gene variant carriers did not differ substantially from patients with negative genetic testing. A risk factor-centred approach to AIP genetic screening may result in missing germline variants. Considering the clinical impact of such genetic variants and their relatively low penetrance, it is, however, doubtful if general genetic screening benefits the whole cohort of pituitary macroadenoma patients and their families.

C, Torres L, Quintero G. Proteína moduladora de la actividad del receptor de aril hidrocarburos (AIP): genética, bioquímica e impacto clínico

El gen AIP (proteína moduladora de la actividad del receptor de aril hidrocarburos) se localiza en la región 11q13.2 y codifica para una proteína de 330 aminoácidos que interactúa con el factor de transcripción AhR (receptor para aril hidrocarburos). Las mutaciones en este gen se han asociado con adenomas pituitarios aislados de tipo familiar (APAF). Se caracterizan por una presentación temprana (alrededor de 20 años), por lo regular producen hormona de crecimiento y/o prolactina, tienen un comportamiento clínico agresivo y poca respuesta a análogos de somatostatina.

Genetics of Acromegaly and Gigantism

Growth hormone (GH)-secreting pituitary tumours represent the most genetically determined pituitary tumour type. This is true both for germline and somatic mutations. Germline mutations occur in several known genes (AIP, PRKAR1A, GPR101, GNAS, MEN1, CDKN1B, SDHx, MAX) as well as familial cases with currently unknown genes, while somatic mutations in GNAS are present in up to 40% of tumours. If the disease starts before the fusion of the epiphysis, then accelerated growth and increased final height, or gigantism, can develop, where a genetic background can be identified in half of the cases. Hereditary GH-secreting pituitary adenoma (PA) can manifest as isolated tumours, familial isolated pituitary adenoma (FIPA) including cases with AIP mutations or GPR101 duplications (X-linked acrogigantism, XLAG) or can be a part of systemic diseases like multiple endocrine neoplasia type 1 or type 4, McCune-Albright syndrome, Carney complex or phaeochromocytoma/paraganglioma-pituitary adenoma association. Family history and a search for associated syndromic manifestations can help to draw attention to genetic causes; many of these are now tested as part of gene panels. Identifying genetic mutations allows appropriate screening of associated comorbidities as well as finding affected family members before the clinical manifestation of the disease. This review focuses on germline and somatic mutations predisposing to acromegaly and gigantism.

The clinical aspects of pituitary tumour genetics

BACKGROUND

Pituitary tumours are usually benign and relatively common intracranial tumours, with under- and overexpression of pituitary hormones and local mass effects causing considerable morbidity and increased mortality. While most pituitary tumours are sporadic, around 5% of the cases arise in a familial setting, either isolated [familial isolated pituitary adenoma, related to AIP or X-linked acrogigantism], or in a syndromic disorder, such as multiple endocrine neoplasia type 1 or 4, Carney complex, McCune-Albright syndrome, phaeochromocytoma/paraganglioma with pituitary adenoma, DICER1 syndrome, Lynch syndrome, and USP8-related syndrome. Genetically determined pituitary tumours usually present at younger age and show aggressive behaviour, and are often resistant to different treatment modalities.

SUBJECT

In this practical summary, we take a practical approach: which genetic syndromes should be considered in case of different presentation, such as tumour type, family history, age of onset and additional clinical features of the patient.

CONCLUSION

The identification of the causative mutation allows genetic and clinical screening of relatives at risk, resulting in earlier diagnosis, a better therapeutic response and ultimately to better long-term outcomes.

Novel Insights into Pituitary Tumorigenesis: Genetic and Epigenetic Mechanisms

Substantial advances have been made recently in the pathobiology of pituitary tumors. Similar to many other endocrine tumors, over the last few years we have recognized the role of germline and somatic mutations in a number of syndromic or nonsyndromic conditions with pituitary tumor predisposition. These include the identification of novel germline variants in patients with familial or simplex pituitary tumors and establishment of novel somatic variants identified through next generation sequencing. Advanced techniques have allowed the exploration of epigenetic mechanisms mediated through DNA methylation, histone modifications and noncoding RNAs, such as microRNA, long noncoding RNAs and circular RNAs. These mechanisms can influence tumor formation, growth, and invasion. While genetic and epigenetic mechanisms often disrupt similar pathways, such as cell cycle regulation, in pituitary tumors there is little overlap between genes altered by germline, somatic, and epigenetic mechanisms. The interplay between these complex mechanisms driving tumorigenesis are best studied in the emerging multiomics studies. Here, we summarize insights from the recent developments in the regulation of pituitary tumorigenesis.

Significant Benefits of AIP Testing and Clinical Screening in Familial Isolated and Young-onset Pituitary Tumors

CONTEXT

Germline mutations in the aryl hydrocarbon receptor-interacting protein (AIP) gene are responsible for a subset of familial isolated pituitary adenoma (FIPA) cases and sporadic pituitary neuroendocrine tumors (PitNETs).

OBJECTIVE

To compare prospectively diagnosed AIP mutation-positive (AIPmut) PitNET patients with clinically presenting patients and to compare the clinical characteristics of AIPmut and AIPneg PitNET patients.

DESIGN

12-year prospective, observational study.

PARTICIPANTS & SETTING

We studied probands and family members of FIPA kindreds and sporadic patients with disease onset ≤18 years or macroadenomas with onset ≤30 years (n = 1477). This was a collaborative study conducted at referral centers for pituitary diseases.

INTERVENTIONS & OUTCOME

AIP testing and clinical screening for pituitary disease. Comparison of characteristics of prospectively diagnosed (n = 22) vs clinically presenting AIPmut PitNET patients (n = 145), and AIPmut (n = 167) vs AIPneg PitNET patients (n = 1310).

RESULTS

Prospectively diagnosed AIPmut PitNET patients had smaller lesions with less suprasellar extension or cavernous sinus invasion and required fewer treatments with fewer operations and no radiotherapy compared with clinically presenting cases; there were fewer cases with active disease and hypopituitarism at last follow-up. When comparing AIPmut and AIPneg cases, AIPmut patients were more often males, younger, more often had GH excess, pituitary apoplexy, suprasellar extension, and more patients required multimodal therapy, including radiotherapy. AIPmut patients (n = 136) with GH excess were taller than AIPneg counterparts (n = 650).

CONCLUSIONS

Prospectively diagnosed AIPmut patients show better outcomes than clinically presenting cases, demonstrating the benefits of genetic and clinical screening. AIP-related pituitary disease has a wide spectrum ranging from aggressively growing lesions to stable or indolent disease course.

The role of AIP variants in pituitary adenomas and concomitant thyroid carcinomas in the Netherlands: a nationwide pathology registry (PALGA) study

PURPOSE

Germline mutations in the aryl-hydrocarbon receptor interacting protein (AIP) have been identified often in the setting of familial isolated pituitary adenoma (FIPA). To date there is no strong evidence linking germline AIP mutations to other neoplasms apart from the pituitary. Our primary objective was to investigate the prevalence of AIP gene mutations and mutations in genes that have been associated with neuroendocrine tumors in series of tumors from patients presenting with both pituitary adenomas and differentiated thyroid carcinomas (DTCs).

METHODS

Pathology samples were retrieved from all pituitary adenomas in patients with concomitant DTCs, including one with a known germline AIP variant. Subsequently, two additional patients with known germline AIP variants were included, of which one presented only with a follicular thyroid carcinoma (FTC).

RESULTS

In total, 17 patients (14 DTCs and 15 pituitary adenomas) were investigated by targeted next generation sequencing (NGS). The pituitary tumor samples revealed no mutations, while among the thyroid tumor samples BRAF (6/14, 42.9%) was the most frequently mutated gene, followed by NRAS (3/11, 27.3%). In one AIP-mutated FIPA kindred, the AIP-variant c.853C>T; p.Q285* was confirmed in the FTC specimen, including evidence of loss of heterozygosity (LOH) at the AIP locus in the tumor DNA.

CONCLUSION

Although most observed variants in pituitary adenomas and DTCs were similar to those of sporadic DTCs, we confirmed in one AIP mutation-positive case the AIP-variant and LOH at this locus in an FTC specimen, which raises the potential role of the AIP mutation as a rare initiating event.

Surgery, Octreotide, Temozolomide, Bevacizumab, Radiotherapy, and Pegvisomant Treatment of an AIP Mutation‒Positive Child

CONTEXT

Inactivating germline mutations in the aryl hydrocarbon receptor interacting protein (AIP) gene are linked to pituitary adenoma predisposition. Here, we present the youngest known patient with AIP-related pituitary adenoma.

CASE DESCRIPTION

The patient presented at the age of 4 years with pituitary apoplexy and left ptosis with severe visual loss following a 1-year history of abdominal pain, headaches, and rapid growth. His IGF-1 level was 5× the upper limit of normal, and his random GH level was 1200 ng/mL. MRI showed a 43 × 24 × 35‒mm adenoma with suprasellar extension invading the left cavernous sinus (Knosp grade 4). After transsphenoidal surgery, histology showed a grade 2A sparsely granulated somatotropinoma with negative O6-methylguanine-DNA methyltransferase and positive vascular endothelial growth factor staining. Genetic testing identified a heterozygous germline nonsense AIP mutation (p.Arg81Ter). Exome sequencing of the tumor revealed that it had lost the entire maternal chromosome-11, rendering it hemizygous for chromosome-11 and therefore lacking functional copies of AIP in the tumor. He was started on octreotide, but because the tumor rapidly regrew and IGF-1 levels were unchanged, temozolomide was initiated, and intensity-modulated radiotherapy was administered 5 months after surgery. Two months later, bevacizumab was added, resulting in excellent tumor response. Although these treatments stabilized tumor growth over 4 years, IGF-1 was normalized only after pegvisomant treatment, although access to this medication was intermittent. At 3.5 years of follow-up, gamma knife treatment was administered, and pegvisomant dose increase was indicated.

CONCLUSION

Multimodal treatment with surgery, long-acting octreotide, radiotherapy, temozolomide, bevacizumab, and pegvisomant can control genetically driven, aggressive, childhood-onset somatotropinomas.

Pituitary gigantism: a case series from Hospital de San José (Bogotá, Colombia)

INTRODUCTION

Gigantism is a rare pediatric disease characterized by increased production of growth hormone (GH) before epiphyseal closure, that manifests clinically as tall stature, musculoskeletal abnormalities, and multiple comorbidities.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Case series of 6 male patients with gigantism evaluated at the Endocrinology Service of Hospital de San José (Bogotá, Colombia) between 2010 and 2016.

RESULTS

All patients had macroadenomas and their mean final height was 2.01 m. The mean age at diagnosis was 16 years, and the most common symptoms were headache (66%) and hyperhidrosis (66%). All patients had acral changes, and one had visual impairment secondary to compression of the optic chiasm. All patients underwent surgery, and 5 (83%) required additional therapy for biochemical control, including radiotherapy (n = 4, 66%), somatostatin analogues (n = 5, 83%), cabergoline (n = 3, 50%), and pegvisomant (n = 2, 33%). Three patients (50%) achieved complete biochemical control, while 2 patients showed IGF-1 normalization with pegvisomant. Two patients were genetically related and presented a mutation in the aryl hydrocarbon receptor-interacting protein (AIP) gene (pathogenic variant, c.504G>A in exon 4, p.Trp168*), fulfilling the diagnostic criteria of familial isolated pituitary adenoma.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the largest case series of patients with gigantism described to date in Colombia. Transsphenoidal surgery was the first-choice procedure, but additional pharmacological therapy was usually required. Mutations in the AIP gene should be considered in familial cases of GH-producing adenomas.

Molecular determinants of the response to medical treatment of growth hormone secreting pituitary neuroendocrine tumors

Acromegaly is a chronic systemic disease mainly caused by a growth hormone (GH)-secreting pituitary neuroendocrine tumor (PitNETs), which is associated with many health complications and increased mortality when not adequately treated. Transsphenoidal surgery is considered the treatment of choice in GH-secreting PitNETs, but patients in whom surgery cannot be considered or with persistent disease after surgery require medical therapy. Treatment with available synthetic somatostatin analogues (SSAs) is considered the mainstay in the medical management of acromegaly which exert their beneficial effects through the binding to a family of G-protein coupled receptors encoded by 5 genes (SSTR1-5). However, although it has been demonstrated that the SST1-5 receptors are physically present in tumor cells, SSAs are in many cases ineffective (i.e. approximately 10-30% of patients with GH-secreting PitNET are unresponsive to SSAs), suggesting that other cellular/molecular determinants could be essential for the response to the pharmacological treatment in patients with GH-secreting PitNETs. Therefore, the scrutiny of these determinants might be used for the identification of subgroups of patients in whom an appropriate pharmacological treatment can be successfully employed (responders vs. non-responders). In this review, we will describe some of the existing, classical and novel, genetic and molecular determinants involved in the response of patients with GH-secreting PitNETs to the available therapeutic treatments, as well as new molecular/therapeutic approaches that could be potentially useful for the treatment of GH-secreting PitNETs.

Giant Prolactinoma of Young Onset: A Clue to Diagnosis of MEN-1 Syndrome

Multiple endocrine neoplasia (MEN) type 1 syndrome is an autosomal dominant disorder caused by germline mutations in MEN1 gene, characterized by tumours in endocrine and nonendocrine organs. Giant prolactinoma is defined as tumours larger than 40mm with very high prolactin secretion. We report two unrelated Sri Lankan patients (8-year-old boy and a 20-year-old female) who presented with giant prolactinomas with mass effects of the tumours. The female patient showed complete response to medical therapy, while the boy developed recurrent resistant prolactinoma needing surgery and radiotherapy. During follow-up, both developed pancreatic neuroendocrine tumours. Genetic analysis revealed that one was heterozygous for a nonsense mutation and other for missense mutation in MEN1 gene. Screening confirmed familial MEN-1 syndrome in their families. High clinical suspicion upon unusual clinical presentation prompted genetic evaluation in these patients and detection of MEN1 gene mutation. Pituitary adenomas in children with MEN-1 syndrome are larger tumours with higher rates of treatment resistance. This report emphasizes importance of screening young patients with giant prolactinoma for MEN-1 syndrome and arranging long-term follow-up for them expecting variable treatment outcomes. Sri Lanka requires further studies to describe the genotypic-phenotypic variability of MEN-1 syndrome in this population.

In vivo bioassay to test the pathogenicity of missense human AIP variants

Background

Heterozygous germline loss-of-function mutations in the aryl hydrocarbon receptor-interacting protein gene (AIP) predispose to childhood-onset pituitary tumours. The pathogenicity of missense variants may pose difficulties for genetic counselling and family follow-up.

Objective

To develop an in vivo system to test the pathogenicity of human AIP mutations using the fruit fly Drosophila melanogaster.

Methods

We generated a null mutant of the Drosophila AIP orthologue, CG1847, a gene located on the Xchromosome, which displayed lethality at larval stage in hemizygous knockout male mutants (CG1847^exon1_3). We tested human missense variants of ‘unknown significance’, with ‘pathogenic’ variants as positive control.

Results

We found that human AIP can functionally substitute for CG1847, as heterologous overexpression of human AIP rescued male CG1847^exon1_3 lethality, while a truncated version of AIP did not restore viability. Flies harbouring patient-specific missense AIP variants (p.C238Y, p.I13N, p.W73R and p.G272D) failed to rescue CG1847^exon1_3 mutants, while seven variants (p.R16H, p.Q164R, p.E293V, p.A299V, p.R304Q, p.R314W and p.R325Q) showed rescue, supporting a non-pathogenic role for these latter variants corresponding to prevalence and clinical data.

Conclusion

Our in vivo model represents a valuable tool to characterise putative disease-causing human AIP variants and assist the genetic counselling and management of families carrying AIP variants.

Risk category system to identify pituitary adenoma patients with AIP mutations

Background

Predictive tools to identify patients at risk for gene mutations related to pituitary adenomas are very helpful in clinical practice. We therefore aimed to develop and validate a reliable risk category system for aryl hydrocarbon receptor-interacting protein (AIP) mutations in patients with pituitary adenomas.

Methods

An international cohort of 2227 subjects were consecutively recruited between 2007 and 2016, including patients with pituitary adenomas (familial and sporadic) and their relatives. All probands (n=1429) were screened for AIP mutations, and those diagnosed with a pituitary adenoma prospectively, as part of their clinical screening (n=24), were excluded from the analysis. Univariate analysis was performed comparing patients with and without AIP mutations. Based on a multivariate logistic regression model, six potential factors were identified for the development of a risk category system, classifying the individual risk into low-risk, moderate-risk and high-risk categories. An internal cross-validation test was used to validate the system.

Results

1405 patients had a pituitary tumour, of which 43% had a positive family history, 55.5% had somatotrophinomas and 81.5% presented with macroadenoma. Overall, 134 patients had an AIP mutation (9.5%). We identified four independent predictors for the presence of an AIP mutation: age of onset providing an odds ratio (OR) of 14.34 for age 0-18 years, family history (OR 10.85), growth hormone excess (OR 9.74) and large tumour size (OR 4.49). In our cohort, 71% of patients were identified as low risk (<5% risk of AIP mutation), 9.2% as moderate risk and 20% as high risk (≥20% risk). Excellent discrimination (c-statistic=0.87) and internal validation were achieved.

Conclusion

We propose a user-friendly risk categorisation system that can reliably group patients into high-risk, moderate-risk and low-risk groups for the presence of AIP mutations, thus providing guidance in identifying patients at high risk of carrying an AIP mutation. This risk score is based on a cohort with high prevalence of AIP mutations and should be applied cautiously in other populations.

Emergence of Pituitary Adenoma in a Child during Surveillance: Clinical Challenges and the Family Members' View in an AIP Mutation-Positive Family

INTRODUCTION

Germline aryl hydrocarbon receptor-interacting protein (AIP) mutations are responsible for 15-30% of familial isolated pituitary adenomas (FIPAs). We report a FIPA kindred with a heterozygous deletion in AIP, aiming to highlight the indications and benefits of genetic screening, variability in clinical presentations, and management challenges in this setting.

PATIENTS

An 18-year-old male was diagnosed with a clinically nonfunctioning pituitary adenoma (NFPA). Two years later, his brother was diagnosed with a somatolactotrophinoma, and a small Rathke's cleft cyst and a microadenoma were detected on screening in their 17-year-old sister. Following amenorrhoea, their maternal cousin was diagnosed with hyperprolactinaemia and two distinct pituitary microadenomas. A 12-year-old niece developed headache and her MRI showed a microadenoma, not seen on a pituitary MRI scan 3 years earlier.

DISCUSSION

Out of the 14 members harbouring germline AIP mutations in this kindred, 5 have pituitary adenoma. Affected members had different features and courses of disease. Bulky pituitary and not fully suppressed GH on OGTT can be challenging in the evaluation of females in teenage years. Multiple pituitary adenomas with different secretory profiles may arise in the pituitary of these patients. Small, stable NFPAs can be present in mutation carriers, similar to incidentalomas in the general population. Genetic screening and baseline review, with follow-up of younger subjects, are recommended in AIP mutation-positive families.

AIP mutations in Brazilian patients with sporadic pituitary adenomas: a single-center evaluation

Aryl hydrocarbon receptor-interacting protein (AIP) gene mutations (AIPmut) are the most frequent germline mutations found in apparently sporadic pituitary adenomas (SPA). Our aim was to evaluate the frequency of AIPmut among young Brazilian patients with SPA. We performed an observational cohort study between 2013 and 2016 in a single referral center. AIPmut screening was carried out in 132 SPA patients with macroadenomas diagnosed up to 40 years or in adenomas of any size diagnosed until 18 years of age. Twelve tumor samples were also analyzed. Leukocyte DNA and tumor tissue DNA were sequenced for the entire AIP-coding region for evaluation of mutations. Eleven (8.3%) of the 132 patients had AIPmut, comprising 9/74 (12%) somatotropinomas, 1/38 (2.6%) prolactinoma, 1/10 (10%) corticotropinoma and no non-functioning adenomas. In pediatric patients (≤18 years), AIPmut frequency was 13.3% (2/15). Out of the 5 patients with gigantism, two had AIPmut, both truncating mutations. The Y268* mutation was described in Brazilian patients and the K273Rfs*30 mutation is a novel mutation in our patient. No somatic AIP mutations were found in the 12 tumor samples. A tumor sample from an acromegaly patient harboring the A299V AIPmut showed loss of heterozygosity. In conclusion, AIPmut frequency in SPA Brazilian patients is similar to other populations. Our study identified two mutations exclusively found in Brazilians and also shows, for the first time, loss of heterozygosity in tumor DNA from an acromegaly patient harboring the A299V AIPmut Our findings corroborate previous observations that AIPmut screening should be performed in young patients with SPA.

Mutational and large deletion study of genes implicated in hereditary forms of primary hyperparathyroidism and correlation with clinical features

The aim of this study was to carry out genetic screening of the MEN1, CDKN1B and AIP genes, both by direct sequencing of the coding region and multiplex ligation-dependent probe amplification (MLPA) assay in the largest monocentric series of Italian patients with Multiple Endocrine Neoplasia type 1 syndrome (MEN1) and Familial Isolated Hyperparathyroidism (FIHP). The study also aimed to describe and compare the clinical features of MEN1 mutation-negative and mutation-positive patients during long-term follow-up and to correlate the specific types and locations of MEN1 gene mutations with onset and aggressiveness of the main MEN1 manifestations. A total of 69 index cases followed at the Endocrinology Unit in Pisa over a period of 19 years, including 54 MEN1 and 15 FIHP kindreds were enrolled. Seven index cases with MEN1 but MEN1 mutation-negative, followed at the University Hospital of Cagliari, were also investigated. FIHP were also tested for CDC73 and CaSR gene alterations. MEN1 germline mutations were identified in 90% of the index cases of familial MEN1 (F-MEN1) and in 23% of sporadic cases (S-MEN1). MEN1 and CDC73 mutations accounted for 13% and 7% of the FIHP cohort, respectively. A CDKN1B mutation was identified in one F-MEN1. Two AIP variants of unknown significance were detected in two MEN1-negative S-MEN1. A MEN1 positive test best predicted the onset of all three major MEN1-related manifestations or parathyroid and gastro-entero-pancreatic tumors during follow-up. A comparison between the clinical characteristics of F and S-MEN1 showed a higher prevalence of a single parathyroid disease and pituitary tumors in sporadic compared to familial MEN1 patients. No significant correlation was found between the type and location of MEN1 mutations and the clinical phenotype. Since all MEN1 mutation-positive sporadic patients had a phenotype resembling that of familial MEN1 (multiglandular parathyroid hyperplasia, a prevalence of gastro-entero-pancreatic tumors and/or the classic triad) we might hypothesize that a subset of the sporadic MEN1 mutation-negative patients could represent an incidental coexistence of sporadic primary hyperparathyroidism and pituitary tumors or a MEN1 phenocopy, in our cohort, as in most cases described in the literature.

Genetic Aspects of Pituitary Adenomas

Although most of pituitary adenomas are benign, they may cause significant burden to patients. Sporadic adenomas represent the vast majority of the cases, where recognized somatic mutations (eg, GNAS or USP8), as well as altered gene-expression profile often affecting cell cycle proteins have been identified. More rarely, germline mutations predisposing to pituitary adenomas -as part of a syndrome (eg, MEN1 or Carney complex), or isolated to the pituitary (AIP or GPR101) can be identified. These alterations influence the biological behavior, clinical presentations and therapeutic responses, and their full understanding helps to provide appropriate care for these patients.

The genetic background of acromegaly

Acromegaly is caused by a somatotropinoma in the vast majority of the cases. These are monoclonal tumors that can occur sporadically or rarely in a familial setting. In the last few years, novel familial syndromes have been described and recent studies explored the landscape of somatic mutations in sporadic somatotropinomas. This short review concentrates on the current knowledge of the genetic basis of both familial and sporadic acromegaly.

Increased Population Risk of AIP-Related Acromegaly and Gigantism in Ireland

The aryl hydrocarbon receptor interacting protein (AIP) founder mutation R304^* (or p.R304^*; NM_003977.3:c.910C>T, p.Arg304Ter) identified in Northern Ireland (NI) predisposes to acromegaly/gigantism; its population health impact remains unexplored. We measured R304^* carrier frequency in 936 Mid Ulster, 1,000 Greater Belfast (both in NI) and 2,094 Republic of Ireland (ROI) volunteers and in 116 NI or ROI acromegaly/gigantism patients. Carrier frequencies were 0.0064 in Mid Ulster (95%CI = 0.0027–0.013; P = 0.0005 vs. ROI), 0.001 in Greater Belfast (0.00011–0.0047) and zero in ROI (0–0.0014). R304^* prevalence was elevated in acromegaly/gigantism patients in NI (11/87, 12.6%, P < 0.05), but not in ROI (2/29, 6.8%) versus non‐Irish patients (0–2.41%). Haploblock conservation supported a common ancestor for all the 18 identified Irish pedigrees (81 carriers, 30 affected). Time to most recent common ancestor (tMRCA) was 2550 (1,275–5,000) years. tMRCA‐based simulations predicted 432 (90–5,175) current carriers, including 86 affected (18–1,035) for 20% penetrance. In conclusion, R304^* is frequent in Mid Ulster, resulting in numerous acromegaly/gigantism cases. tMRCA is consistent with historical/folklore accounts of Irish giants. Forward simulations predict many undetected carriers; geographically targeted population screening improves asymptomatic carrier identification, complementing clinical testing of patients/relatives. We generated disease awareness locally, necessary for early diagnosis and improved outcomes of AIP‐related disease.

Emerging Histopathological and Genetic Parameters of Pituitary Adenomas: Clinical Impact and Recommendation for Future WHO Classification

The review assesses immunohistochemical findings of somatostatin receptors and of metalloproteinases in different pituitary adenoma types and the significance of molecular genetic data. Current evidence does not support routine immunohistochemical assessment of somatostatin or dopamine receptor subtype expression on hormone-secreting or nonfunctioning pituitary adenomas. Further prospective studies are needed to define its role for clinical decision making. Until then we suggest to restrict membrane receptor profiling to individual cases or for study purposes. The problems of adenoma expansion and invasion are discussed. Despite partially contradictory publications, proteases clearly play a major role in permission of infiltrative growth of pituitary adenomas. Therefore, detection of at least MMP-2, MMP-9, TIMP-2, and uPA seems to be justified. Molecular characterization is important for familial adenomas, adenomas in MEN, Carney complex, and McCune-Albright syndrome and can gain insight into pathogenesis of sporadic adenomas.

Genetics of Cushing's disease: an update

INTRODUCTION

Cushing's disease (CD) results from uncontrolled hypercortisolism induced by ACTH-secreting corticotroph adenomas; accordingly, patients diagnosed with CD usually present several comorbidities and an increased risk of mortality. Hypothesis-driven screenings have led to identification of rare alterations in a low number of patients, although the genetic basis underlying CD has remained unclear until recently. Using whole-exome sequencing, recurrent mutations have been reported in the gene coding for the ubiquitin-specific protease 8 (USP8), a protein with deubiquitinase (DUB) activity that modulates the lysosomal turnover of the EGF receptor (EGFR) and other membrane proteins.

METHODS

In this review, we summarize the recent genetic findings and discuss the clinical and pathological implications of USP8 deregulation in corticotroph adenomas.

CONCLUSIONS

Mutations in USP8 have been identified in 35-62 % of functional sporadic corticotroph adenomas causing Cushing's disease, but not in any other type of pituitary tumor. These mutations are found mostly in adult female patients and lead to an aberrant DUB activation by impairing the regulation of USP8 by members of the 14-3-3 family of proteins. The consequence of this hyperactivation is a longer retention of EGFR at the plasma membrane which promotes an enhanced production of ACTH.

Prevalence of AIP mutations in a series of Turkish acromegalic patients: are synonymous AIP mutations relevant?

CONTEXT

In sporadic acromegaly, overall AIP(mut) prevalence is reported as 3, 4.1 and 16 % in studies carried out across Europe. However, it is not known whether the prevalence shows any changes across different ethnicities. The aim of the study was to identify prevalence of AIP(mut) in a series of Turkish acromegalic patients.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Direct sequencing of AIP gene was performed in 92 sporadic acromegalic patients.

RESULTS

One patient was found to have a new mutation in exon 6: g67.258,286 (G/A) heterozygote; (GGC/GAC; gly/asp). Apart from this new mutation, previously defined synonymous mutations in AIP gene were detected in seven patients (Exon 4; rs2276020; (GAC/GAT; asp/asp) and six patients were found to have five different intronic mutations in AIP gene which were not previously defined. The patient with pathogenic AIP(mut) presented at a young age and had an aggressive and treatment resistant tumour. The prevalence of AIP(mut) in Turkish patients was found to be 1 % in sporadic acromegaly in the present study. In addition, one synonymous mutation which was previously defined and six new intronic mutations have been described in Turkish acromegalic patients. All acromegalic patients with synonymous AIP(mut) presented with macroadenoma and majority of them had invasive tumour.

CONCLUSION

The prevalence of AIP(mut) in Turkish patients was found to be 1 % in sporadic acromegaly in the present study. This ratio increases when younger age groups are taken into account 6 % among patients <30 years of age at the time of diagnosis of acromegaly. The clinical features of acromegaly, such as having large and invasive tumours, may be affected by the presence of synonymous AIP(mut).

Landscape of Familial Isolated and Young-Onset Pituitary Adenomas: Prospective Diagnosis in AIP Mutation Carriers

CONTEXT

Familial isolated pituitary adenoma (FIPA) due to aryl hydrocarbon receptor interacting protein (AIP) gene mutations is an autosomal dominant disease with incomplete penetrance. Clinical screening of apparently unaffected AIP mutation (AIPmut) carriers could identify previously unrecognized disease.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the AIP mutational status of FIPA and young pituitary adenoma patients, analyzing their clinical characteristics, and to perform clinical screening of apparently unaffected AIPmut carrier family members.

DESIGN

This was an observational, longitudinal study conducted over 7 years.

SETTING

International collaborative study conducted at referral centers for pituitary diseases.

PARTICIPANTS

FIPA families (n 216) and sporadic young-onset (30 y) pituitary adenoma patients (n 404) participated in the study.

INTERVENTIONS

We performed genetic screening of patients for AIPmuts, clinical assessment of their family members, and genetic screening for somatic GNAS1 mutations and the germline FGFR4 p.G388R variant.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)

We assessed clinical disease in mutation carriers, comparison of characteristics of AIPmut positive and negative patients, results of GNAS1, and FGFR4 analysis.

RESULTS

Thirty-seven FIPA families and 34 sporadic patients had AIPmuts. Patients with truncating AIPmuts had a younger age at disease onset and diagnosis, compared with patients with nontruncating AIPmuts. Somatic GNAS1 mutations were absent in tumors from AIPmut-positive patients, and the studied FGFR4 variant did not modify the disease behavior or penetrance in AIPmut-positive individuals. A total of 164 AIPmut-positive unaffected family members were identified; pituitary disease was detected in 18 of those who underwent clinical screening.

CONCLUSIONS

A quarter of the AIPmut carriers screened were diagnosed with pituitary disease, justifying this screening and suggesting a variable clinical course for AIPmut-positive pituitary adenomas.

Treatment-resistant pediatric giant prolactinoma and multiple endocrine neoplasia type 1

Background

Pediatric pituitary adenomas are rare, accounting for <3 % of all childhood intracranial tumors, the majority of which are prolactinomas. Consequently, they are often misdiagnosed as other suprasellar masses such as craniopharyngiomas in this age group. Whilst guidelines exist for the treatment of adult prolactinomas, the management of childhood presentations of these benign tumors is less clear, particularly when dopamine agonist therapy fails. Given their rarity, childhood-onset pituitary adenomas are more likely to be associated with a variety of genetic syndromes, the commonest being multiple endocrine neoplasia type 1 (MEN-1).

Case description

We present a case of an early-onset, treatment-resistant giant prolactinoma occurring in an 11-year-old peripubertal boy that was initially sensitive, but subsequently highly resistant to dopamine agonist therapy, ultimately requiring multiple surgical debulking procedures and proton beam irradiation. Our patient is now left with long-term tumor- and treatment-related neuroendocrine morbidities including blindness and panhypopituitarism. Only after multiple consultations and clinical data gained from 20-year-old medical records was a complex, intergenerationally consanguineous family history revealed, compatible with MEN-1, with a splice site mutation (c.784-9G > A) being eventually identified in intron 4 of the MEN1 gene, potentially explaining the difficulties in management of this tumor. Genetic counseling and screening has now been offered to the wider family.

Conclusions

This case emphasizes the need to consider pituitary adenomas in the differential diagnosis of all pediatric suprasellar tumors by careful endocrine assessment and measurement of at least a serum prolactin concentration. It also highlights the lack of evidence for the optimal management of pediatric drug-resistant prolactinomas. Finally, the case we describe demonstrates the importance of a detailed family history and the role of genetic testing for MEN1 and AIP mutations in all cases of pediatric pituitary adenoma.

Heterogeneous genetic background of the association of pheochromocytoma/paraganglioma and pituitary adenoma: results from a large patient cohort

CONTEXT

Pituitary adenomas and pheochromocytomas/paragangliomas (pheo/PGL) can occur in the same patient or in the same family. Coexistence of the two diseases could be due to either a common pathogenic mechanism or a coincidence.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of the investigation was to study the possible coexistence of pituitary adenoma and pheo/PGL.

DESIGN

Thirty-nine cases of sporadic or familial pheo/PGL and pituitary adenomas were investigated. Known pheo/PGL genes (SDHA-D, SDHAF2, RET, VHL, TMEM127, MAX, FH) and pituitary adenoma genes (MEN1, AIP, CDKN1B) were sequenced using next generation or Sanger sequencing. Loss of heterozygosity study and pathological studies were performed on the available tumor samples.

SETTING

The study was conducted at university hospitals.

PATIENTS

Thirty-nine patients with sporadic of familial pituitary adenoma and pheo/PGL participated in the study.

OUTCOME

Outcomes included genetic screening and clinical characteristics.

RESULTS

Eleven germline mutations (five SDHB, one SDHC, one SDHD, two VHL, and two MEN1) and four variants of unknown significance (two SDHA, one SDHB, and one SDHAF2) were identified in the studied genes in our patient cohort. Tumor tissue analysis identified LOH at the SDHB locus in three pituitary adenomas and loss of heterozygosity at the MEN1 locus in two pheochromocytomas. All the pituitary adenomas of patients affected by SDHX alterations have a unique histological feature not previously described in this context.

CONCLUSIONS

Mutations in the genes known to cause pheo/PGL can rarely be associated with pituitary adenomas, whereas mutation in a gene predisposing to pituitary adenomas (MEN1) can be associated with pheo/PGL. Our findings suggest that genetic testing should be considered in all patients or families with the constellation of pheo/PGL and a pituitary adenoma.

Frequency of AIP gene mutations in young patients with acromegaly: a registry-based study

CONTEXT

Familial and sporadic GH-secreting pituitary adenomas are associated with mutations in the aryl hydrocarbon receptor-interacting protein (AIP) gene. Patients with an AIP mutation (AIPmut) tend to have more aggressive tumors occurring at a younger age.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of the study was to investigate the frequency of AIPmut in patients diagnosed at 30 years of age or younger.

DESIGN

The German Acromegaly Registry database (1795 patients in 58 centers) was screened for patients diagnosed with acromegaly at 30 years of age or younger (329 patients). Sixteen centers participated and 91 patients consented to AIPmut analysis.

INTERVENTION

DNA was analyzed by direct sequencing and multiplex ligation dependent probe amplification Main outcome Measures: The number of patients with AIPmut was measured.

RESULTS

Five patients had either a mutation (c.490C>T, c.844C>T, and c.911G>A, three males) or gross deletions of exons 1 and 2 of the AIP gene (n = 2, one female). The overall frequency of an AIPmut was 5.5%, and 2.3% or 2.4% in patients with an apparently sporadic adenoma or macroadenoma, respectively. By contrast, three of four patients (75%) with a positive family history were tested positive for an AIPmut. Except for a positive family history, there were no significant differences between patients with and without an AIPmut.

CONCLUSIONS

The frequency of AIPmut in this registry-based cohort of young patients with acromegaly is lower than previously reported. Patients with a positive family history should be tested for an AIPmut, whereas young patients without an apparent family history should be screened, depending on the individual cost to benefit ratio.

Low rate of germline AIP mutations in patients with apparently sporadic pituitary adenomas before the age of 40: a single-centre adult cohort

AIM

To study the prevalence of germline mutations of the aryl-hydrocarbon receptor interacting protein (AIP) gene in a large cohort of patients seen in the Oxford Centre for Diabetes Endocrinology and Metabolism (OCDEM), UK, with apparently sporadic pituitary adenomas, who were either diagnosed or had relevant clinical manifestations by the age of 40 years.

PATIENTS

We prospectively investigated all patients who were seen at Oxford University Hospital, OCDEM, and a tertiary referral centre, between 2012 and 2013, and presented with pituitary tumours under the age of 40 years and with no family history: a total of 127 patients were enrolled in the study.

METHODS

Leukocyte-origin genomic DNA underwent sequence analysis of exons 1-6 and the flanking intronic regions of the AIP gene (NM_003977.2), with dosage analysis by multiplex ligation-dependent probe amplification.

RESULTS

AIP variants were detected in 3% of the 127 patients, comprising four of 48 patients with acromegaly (8%), 0 of 43 with prolactinomas, 0 of the 20 patients with non-functioning adenomas, 0 of 15 with corticotroph adenomas and 0 of one with a thyrotroph adenomas. Definite pathogenetic mutations were seen in 2/4 variants, comprising 4.2% of patients with acromegaly.

CONCLUSIONS

This prospective cohort study suggests a relatively low prevalence of AIP gene mutations in young patients with apparently sporadic pituitary adenomas presenting to a tertiary pituitary UK centre. Those with somatotroph macroadenomas have a higher rate of AIP mutation. These findings should inform discussion of genetic testing guidelines.

A novel germline mutation in the aryl hydrocarbon receptor-interacting protein (AIP) gene in an Italian family with gigantism

PURPOSE

Acromegaly usually occurs as a sporadic disease, but it may be a part of familial pituitary tumor syndromes in rare cases. Germline mutations in the aryl hydrocarbon receptor-interacting protein (AIP) gene have been associated with a predisposition to familial isolated pituitary adenoma. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the AIP gene in a patient with gigantism and in her relatives.

METHODS

Direct sequencing of AIP gene was performed in fourteen members of the family, spanning among three generations.

RESULTS

The index case was an 18-year-old woman with gigantism due to an invasive GH-secreting pituitary adenoma and a concomitant tall-cell variant of papillary thyroid carcinoma. A novel germline mutation in the AIP gene (c.685C>T, p.Q229X) was identified in the proband and in two members of her family, who did not present clinical features of acromegaly or other pituitary disorders. Eleven subjects had no mutation in the AIP gene. Two members of the family with clinical features of acromegaly refused either the genetic or the biochemical evaluation. The Q229X mutation was predicted to generate a truncated AIP protein, lacking the last two tetratricopeptide repeat domains and the final C-terminal α-7 helix.

CONCLUSIONS

We identified a new AIP germline mutation predicted to produce a truncated AIP protein, lacking its biological properties due to the disruption of the C-terminus binding sites for both the chaperones and the client proteins of AIP.

A clinically novel AIP mutation in a patient with a very large, apparently sporadic somatotrope adenoma

Heterozygous germline inactivating mutations in the aryl hydrocarbon receptor-interacting protein (AIP) gene lead to pituitary adenomas that most frequently present in the setting of familial isolated pituitary adenoma syndrome, usually as somatotropinomas and prolactinomas. More recently, they have been found in a significant percentage of young patients presenting with pituitary macroadenoma without any apparent family history. We describe the case of a 19-year-old man who presented with a gigantic somatotropinoma. His family history was negative. His peripheral DNA showed a heterozygous AIP mutation (p.I13N), while tumor tissue only had the mutated allele, showing loss of heterozygosity (LOH) and suggesting that the mutation caused the disease.

Improving differential diagnosis of pituitary adenomas

Pituitary adenomas are common tumors arising in adenohypophysial cells or their precursors. For improving control of the disease an early diagnosis is important. Initially considered sporadic tumors, some of them are associated with familial syndromes and their recognition and classification is also required. Morphologically, pituitary adenomas represent a heterogeneous group of tumors with several subtypes and different clinical behavior thus a precise pathological diagnosis is crucial. The simple diagnosis of pituitary adenoma is not satisfactory and the correct classification of histological subtypes may predict aggressiveness in the majority of cases. Although considered not malignant, some of them are clinically aggressive and their recognition remains a challenge. In this paper we present the recent advances in the event of improving early recognition and differential diagnosis of pituitary tumors.

Clinical experience in the screening and management of a large kindred with familial isolated pituitary adenoma due to an aryl hydrocarbon receptor interacting protein (AIP) mutation

CONTEXT

Germline AIP mutations usually cause young-onset acromegaly with low penetrance in a subset of familial isolated pituitary adenoma families. We describe our experience with a large family with R304* AIP mutation and discuss some of the diagnostic dilemmas and management issues.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the study was to identify and screen mutation carriers in the family.

PATIENTS

Forty-three family members participated in the study.

SETTING

The study was performed in university hospitals.

OUTCOME

We conducted genetic and endocrine screening of family members.

RESULTS

We identified 18 carriers of the R304* mutation, three family members with an AIP-variant A299V, and two family members who harbored both changes. One of the two index cases presented with gigantism and pituitary apoplexy, the other presented with young-onset acromegaly, and both had surgery and radiotherapy. After genetic and clinical screening of the family, two R304* carriers were diagnosed with acromegaly. They underwent transsphenoidal surgery after a short period of somatostatin analog treatment. One of these two patients is in remission; the other achieved successful pregnancy despite suboptimal control of acromegaly. One of the A299V carrier family members was previously diagnosed with a microprolactinoma; we consider this case to be a phenocopy. Height of the unaffected R304* carrier family members is not different compared to noncarrier relatives.

CONCLUSIONS

Families with AIP mutations present particular problems such as the occurrence of large invasive tumors, poor response to medical treatment, difficulties with fertility and management of pregnancy, and the finding of AIP sequence variants of unknown significance. Because disease mostly develops at a younger age and penetrance is low, the timing and duration of the follow-up of carriers without overt disease requires further study. The psychological and financial impact of prolonged clinical screening must be considered. Excellent relationships between the family, endocrinologists, and geneticists are essential, and ideally these families should be managed in centers with specialist expertise.

Epidemiology and etiopathogenesis of pituitary adenomas

Pituitary adenomas are usually benign monoclonal tumours presenting either due to hypersecretion of pituitary hormones, and/or due to local space occupying effects and hyposecretion of some or all of the pituitary hormones. Some pituitary adenomas cause prominent symptoms, while others may result in slowly developing, insidious, non-specific complains delaying accurate diagnosis, with a third group remaining symptomless and recognised only incidentally. Therefore, it is a challenge to accurately determine the prevalence and incidence of pituitary adenomas in the general population. The vast majority of pituitary adenomas occur sporadically, but familial cases are now increasingly recognised. Hereditary predisposition, somatic mutations and endocrine factors were shown to have a pathophysiologic role in the initiation and progression of pituitary adenomas, which interestingly almost always remain benign. Here, we summarize the available epidemiological data and the known pathogenesis of the pituitary adenomas.

Familial isolated pituitary adenoma caused by a Aip gene mutation not described before in a family context

The cause of familial isolated pituitary adenomas (FIPA) remains unknown in a high percentage of cases, but the AIP gene plays an important role in the etiology. The aim of the study is to describe a family with FIPA syndrome and the results of genomic studies. A 16-year-old man had a giant prolactinoma resistant tomedical treatment with delayed growth and pubertal development. His mother had been previously diagnosed with a nonfunctioning pituitary macroadenoma. Transsphenoidal endoscopic resection was performed and a genetic study revealed a heterozygous mutation in exon 6: 974G>A (p.Arg325Gln). Because the AIP gene is a tumor suppressor gene, we searched for loss of heterozygosity within the AIP gene by amplifying exon 6 from tumor tissue of the patient. In the electropherogram, only the A allele was amplified (hemizygous state), indicating loss of the normal allele. We report a Spanish family with FIPA in whom a mutation in the AIP gene previously unreported in a familiar context was identified.

Screening for AIP gene mutations in a Han Chinese pituitary adenoma cohort followed by LOH analysis

OBJECTIVE

The aryl hydrocarbon receptor interacting protein gene (AIP) is associated with pituitary adenoma (PA). AIP has not been sequenced in East Asian PA populations, so we performed this study in a Han Chinese cohort.

DESIGN

Our study included six familial PA pedigrees comprising 16 patients and 27 unaffected relatives, as well as 216 sporadic PA (SPA) patients and 100 unrelated healthy controls.

METHODS

AIP sequencing was carried out on genomic DNA isolated from blood samples. Multiplex ligation-dependent probe amplification and microsatellite marker analyses on DNA from the paired tumor tissues were performed for loss of heterozygosity analysis.

RESULTS

We identified three common and four rare single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs), one intron insertion, one novel synonymous variant, four novel missense variants, and a reported nonsense mutation in three familial isolated PA (FIPA) cases from the same family. Large genetic deletions were not observed in the germline but were seen in the sporadic tumor DNA from three missense variant carriers. The prevalence of AIP pathogenic variants in PA patients here was low (3.88%), but was higher in somatotropinoma patients (9.30%), especially in young adults (≤30 years) and pediatric (≥18 years) paients (17.24% and 25.00% respectively). All AIP variant patients suffered from macroadenomas. However, the AIP mutation rate in FIPA families was low in this cohort (16.67%, 1/6 families).

CONCLUSION

AIP gene mutation may not be frequent in FIPA or SPA from the Han Chinese population. AIP sequencing and long-term follow-up investigations should be performed for young patients with large PAs and their families with PA predisposition.

Genetic analysis in young patients with sporadic pituitary macroadenomas: besides AIP don't forget MEN1 genetic analysis

CONTEXT

Germline mutations in the aryl hydrocarbon receptor interacting protein gene (AIP) have been identified in young patients (age ≤30 years old) with sporadic pituitary macroadenomas. Otherwise, there are few data concerning the prevalence of multiple endocrine neoplasia type 1 (MEN1) mutations in such a population.

OBJECTIVE

We assessed the prevalence of both AIP and MEN1 genetic abnormalities (mutations and large gene deletions) in young patients (age ≤30 years old) diagnosed with sporadic and isolated macroadenoma, without hypercalcemia and/or MEN1-associated lesions.

DESIGN

The entire coding sequences of AIP and MEN1 were screened for mutations. In cases of negative sequencing screening, multiplex ligation-dependent probe amplification was performed for the detection of large genetic deletions.

PATIENTS AND SETTINGS

One hundred and seventy-four patients from endocrinology departments of 15 French University Hospital Centers were eligible for this study.

RESULTS

Twenty-one out of 174 (12%) patients had AIP (n=15, 8.6%) or MEN1 (n=6, 3.4%) mutations. In pediatric patients (age ≤18 years old), AIP/MEN1 mutation frequency reached nearly 22% (n=10/46). AIPmut and MEN1mut were identified in 8/79 (10.1%) and 1/79 (1.2%) somatotropinoma patients respectively; they each accounted for 4/74 (5.4%) prolactinoma (PRL) patients with mutations. Half of those patients (n=3/6) with gigantism displayed mutations in AIP. Interestingly, 4/12 (33%) patients with non-secreting adenomas bore either AIP or MEN1 mutations, whereas none of the eight corticotroph adenomas or the single thyrotropinoma case had mutations. No large gene deletions were observed in sequencing-negative patients.

CONCLUSION

Mutations in MEN1 can be of significance in young patients with sporadic isolated pituitary macroadenomas, particularly PRL, and together with AIP, we suggest genetic analysis of MEN1 in such a population.

Familial isolated pituitary adenomas (FIPA) and the pituitary adenoma predisposition due to mutations in the aryl hydrocarbon receptor interacting protein (AIP) gene

Pituitary adenomas are one of the most frequent intracranial tumors and occur with a prevalence of approximately 1:1000 in the developed world. Pituitary adenomas have a serious disease burden, and their management involves neurosurgery, biological therapies, and radiotherapy. Early diagnosis of pituitary tumors while they are smaller may help increase cure rates. Few genetic predictors of pituitary adenoma development exist. Recent years have seen two separate, complimentary advances in inherited pituitary tumor research. The clinical condition of familial isolated pituitary adenomas (FIPA) has been described, which encompasses the familial occurrence of isolated pituitary adenomas outside of the setting of syndromic conditions like multiple endocrine neoplasia type 1 and Carney complex. FIPA families comprise approximately 2% of pituitary adenomas and represent a clinical entity with homogeneous or heterogeneous pituitary adenoma types occurring within the same kindred. The aryl hydrocarbon receptor interacting protein (AIP) gene has been identified as causing a pituitary adenoma predisposition of variable penetrance that accounts for 20% of FIPA families. Germline AIP mutations have been shown to associate with the occurrence of large pituitary adenomas that occur at a young age, predominantly in children/adolescents and young adults. AIP mutations are usually associated with somatotropinomas, but prolactinomas, nonfunctioning pituitary adenomas, Cushing disease, and other infrequent clinical adenoma types can also occur. Gigantism is a particular feature of AIP mutations and occurs in more than one third of affected somatotropinoma patients. Study of pituitary adenoma patients with AIP mutations has demonstrated that these cases raise clinical challenges to successful treatment. Extensive research on the biology of AIP and new advances in mouse Aip knockout models demonstrate multiple pathways by which AIP may contribute to tumorigenesis. This review assesses the current clinical and therapeutic characteristics of more than 200 FIPA families and addresses research findings among AIP mutation-bearing patients in different populations with pituitary adenomas.