Frequency of Macroprolactinemia in Hyperprolactinemic Women Presenting with Menstrual Irregularities, Galactorrhea, and/or Infertility: Etiology and Clinical Manifestations

The research trend of hyperprolactinemia from 2011 to 2023 was analyzed by bibliometrics

The objective of this study is to conduct a bibliometric analysis of research trends in hyperprolactinemia from 2011 to 2023. This analysis aims to provide researchers with insights into the current hotspots and frontiers related to hyperprolactinemia. It is worth noting that there are currently no existing reports on bibliometric analyses of hyperprolactinemia. The Social Science Citation Index (SSCI) and Science Citation Index Expanded (SCIE) databases of the Web of Science Core Collection were systematically searched for "articles" and "review articles" related to the topic of hyperprolactinemia from 2011 to 2023. VOSviewer was employed to conduct bibliometric analysis, aiming to analyze the research trends in hyperprolactinemia over the past 13 years. A total of 1865 eligible articles were retrieved, with contributions from 9544 scholars representing 83 countries in the field of research. The United States had the highest number of publications, followed by China. The keywords were categorized into six clusters: (1) etiology of hyperprolactinemia and other related endocrine and metabolic diseases. (2) Hyperprolactinemia and mental illness. (3) Diagnosis and management of hyperprolactinemia. (4) Treatment of hyperprolactinemia and prolactinoma. (5) Detection of macroprolactin and macroprolactinemia. (6) Symptoms of male hyperprolactinemia. Over the past 13 years, there has been a consistent and slightly increasing trend in the number of research papers focusing on hyperprolactinemia. The primary areas of research focus are centered around the diagnosis and treatment of hyperprolactinemia caused by antipsychotic drugs or prolactinoma.

Global Prevalence of Macroprolactinemia among Patients with Hyperprolactinemia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Hyperprolactinemia (hPRL) often poses a diagnostic dilemma due to the presence of macroprolactin. Understanding the prevalence of macroprolactinemia (mPRL) has an important implication in managing patients with hPRL. The primary aim of this study was to determine the prevalence of mPRL globally and to explore selected factors influencing the prevalence estimate. Studies with original data related to the prevalence of mPRL among patients with hPRL from inception to March 2020 were identified, and a random effects meta-analysis was performed. Of the 3770 records identified, 67 eligible studies from 27 countries were included. The overall global prevalence estimate was 18.9% (95% CI: 15.8%, 22.1%) with a substantial statistical heterogeneity (I² = 95.7%). The highest random effects pooled prevalence was observed in the African region (30.3%), followed by Region of the Americas (29.1%), European (17.5%), Eastern Mediterranean (13.9%), South-East Asian (12.7%), and Western Pacific Region (12.6%). Lower prevalence was observed in studies involving both sexes as compared to studies involving only female participants (17.1% vs. 25.4%) and in more recent studies (16.4%, 20.4%, and 26.5% in studies conducted after 2009, between 2000 and 2009, and before 2000, respectively). The prevalence estimate does not vary according to the age group of study participants, sample size, and types of polyethylene glycol (PEG) used for detection of macroprolactin (PEG 6000 or PEG 8000). With macroprolactin causing nearly one-fifth of hPRL cases, screening for mPRL should be made a routine before an investigation of other causes of hPRL.

Management of prolactinoma: a survey of endocrinologists in China

Objective To assess the current management of prolactinoma among endocrinologists in China. Methods An online survey of a large sample of endocrinologists was conducted in China. The questionnaire included 21 questions related to controversial issues about the management of prolactinomas. Doctors in the endocrinology department of a university-affiliated hospital or a comprehensive secondary hospital in 12 cities from East, West, South, North and Middle China were surveyed. Results A total of 290 valid questionnaires were collected, and the response rate was 40%. When hyperprolactinemia occurred, 97% of the respondents would test thyroid-stimulating hormone routinely. 22% of the respondents considered that prolactin levels <100 ng/mL exclude the presence of a prolactinoma. Only 9% of the respondents believed that prolactin >250 ng/mL could occur in all the following situations as macroprolactinoma, mircoprolactinoma, macroprolactinemia and drug-induced hyperprolactinemia. Surgery was not recommended by 272 (94%) endocrinologists as the first choice for treating microprolactinomas. 58% and 92% of endocrinologists would start drug treatment for microprolactinomas and macroprolactinomas at diagnosis. 70% and 40% chose to withdraw treatment after 2-3 years of prolactin normalization in microprolactinomas and macroprolactinomas. In case of pregnancy, 57% of the respondents considered bromocriptine as choice for women patients. Drug discontinuation after pregnancy was advocated in 63% and 27% for microprolactinoma and macroprolactinoma. Moreover, 44% of endocrinologists believed that breastfeeding was allowable in both micro- and macroprolactinoma. Conclusion This is the first study to investigate the management of prolactinomas among endocrinologists in China. We found that the current clinical treatment was not uniform. Therefore, it is necessary to strengthen the training of endocrinologists to improve clinical diagnosis and treatment practices.

Laboratory and clinical significance of macroprolactinemia in women with hyperprolactinemia

The role of macroprolactinemia in women with hyperprolactinemia is currently controversial and can lead to clinical dilemmas, depending upon the origin of macroprolactin, the presence of hyperprolactinemic symptoms and monomeric prolactin (PRL) levels. Macroprolactinemia is mostly considered an extrapituitary phenomenon of mild and asymptomatic hyperprolactinemia associated with normal concentrations of monomeric PRL and a predominance of macroprolactin confined to the vascular system, which is biologically inactive. Patients can therefore be reassured that macroprolactinemia should be considered a benign clinical condition, resistant to antiprolactinemic drugs, and that no diagnostic investigations or prolonged follow-up should be necessary. However, a significant proportion of macroprolactinemic patients appears to suffer from hyperprolactinemia-related symptoms and radiological pituitary findings commonly associated with true hyperprolactinemia. The symptoms of hyperprolactinemia are correlated to the levels of monomeric PRL excess, which may be explained as coincidental, by dissociation of macroprolactin, or by physiological, pharmacological and pathological causes. The excess of monomeric PRL levels in such cases is of primarily importance and the diagnosis of macroprolactinemia is misleading or inadequate. However, macroprolactinemia of pituitary origin associated with radiological findings of pituitary adenomas may rarely occur with similar hyperprolactinemic manifestations, exclusively due to bioactivity of macroprolactin. Therefore, in such cases with hyperprolactinemic signs and pituitary findings, macroprolactinemia should be considered a pathological biochemical condition of hyperprolactinemia. Accordingly, individualized diagnostic investigations with the introduction of dopamine agonists, or other treatment with prolonged follow-up, should be mandatory. The review analyses the laboratory and clinical significance of macroprolactinemia in hyperprolactinemic women suggesting clinically useful diagnostic and treatment strategies.

Controversial issues in the management of hyperprolactinemia and prolactinomas - An overview by the Neuroendocrinology Department of the Brazilian Society of Endocrinology and Metabolism

Prolactinomas are the most common pituitary adenomas (approximately 40% of cases), and they represent an important cause of hypogonadism and infertility in both sexes. The magnitude of prolactin (PRL) elevation can be useful in determining the etiology of hyperprolactinemia. Indeed, PRL levels > 250 ng/mL are highly suggestive of the presence of a prolactinoma. In contrast, most patients with stalk dysfunction, drug-induced hyperprolactinemia or systemic diseases present with PRL levels < 100 ng/mL. However, exceptions to these rules are not rare. On the other hand, among patients with macroprolactinomas (MACs), artificially low PRL levels may result from the so-called "hook effect". Patients harboring cystic MACs may also present with a mild PRL elevation. The screening for macroprolactin is mostly indicated for asymptomatic patients and those with apparent idiopathic hyperprolactinemia. Dopamine agonists (DAs) are the treatment of choice for prolactinomas, particularly cabergoline, which is more effective and better tolerated than bromocriptine. After 2 years of successful treatment, DA withdrawal should be considered in all cases of microprolactinomas and in selected cases of MACs. In this publication, the goal of the Neuroendocrinology Department of the Brazilian Society of Endocrinology and Metabolism (SBEM) is to provide a review of the diagnosis and treatment of hyperprolactinemia and prolactinomas, emphasizing controversial issues regarding these topics. This review is based on data published in the literature and the authors' experience.

Pituitary response profile following metoclopramide administration in women with different forms of hyperprolactinemia

AIMS

To test the hypothesis that macroprolactinemia is an extra-pituitary phenomenon by showing that the pituitary production of prolactin in patients with hyperprolactinemia due to macroprolactin is comparable to that in normoprolactinemic women and different from that in women with monomeric hyperprolactinemia.

METHODS

Twenty-five women were studied: eight with macroprolactin hyperprolactinemia, eight with monomeric hyperprolactinemia, and nine controls. Prolactin levels were measured before and after precipitation with polyethylene glycol at baseline and at 5, 10,15, 30, and 60 min after metoclopramide administration (10 mg i.v.) in the three groups.

RESULTS

The response profile of total and monomeric prolactin following the administration of metoclopramide was similar in women with monomeric hyperprolactinemia and normoprolactinemia but different in women with macroprolactinemia. The areas under the curve for total and monomeric prolactin were higher in patients with macroprolactinemia than in the other two groups (p < 0·0001). The maximal concentration of monomeric prolactin was reached before that of total prolactin in macroprolactinemic patients but the differences were not significant.

DISCUSSION

Our findings support the hypothesis that prolactin secretion is comparable in women with macroprolactinemia and in normoprolactinemic women. The dynamics of the secretion suggest that the formation of prolactin complexes is an extra-pituitary process.