When Is a Positive Test for Pediatric Growth Hormone Deficiency a True-Positive Test?

Comparison of growth hormone stimulation tests in prepubertal children with short stature according to response to growth hormone replacement

PURPOSE

Growth hormone (GH) stimulation tests are essential tools for diagnosing GH deficiency (GHD). We aimed to compare L-dopa, insulin, and arginine-induced stimulation tests based on response to GH replacement.

METHODS

We retrospectively collected data from a review of patients who underwent the GH stimulation test. A total of 138 patients diagnosed with idiopathic short stature were categorized into group I. The remaining 135 patients, who were diagnosed with GHD and treated for 1 year, were classified into 2 subgroups: group IIa, consisting of patients with an increase of at least 0.5 in height standard deviation score (SDS), and group IIb, patients with an increase of less than 0.5 in height SDS.

RESULTS

At the initial visit, group IIa exhibited significantly lower insulin-like growth factor binding protein-3 (IGF-BP3) and higher body mass index (BMI) SDS compared to the other groups. Following 1 year of treatment, group IIb showed significantly lower height SDS, height SDS gain, growth velocity, predicted adult height SDS, weight SDS, and a higher insulin-like growth factor-1 SDS than group IIa. Bone age and IGF-BP3 were inversely associated, and BMI SDS and IGF-BP3 were positively associated with height SDS gain in GHD patients. The specificity and accuracy rates were 50.3% and 70.3% for the L-dopa-induced stimulation test, 72.3% and 86.6% for the insulin tolerance test (ITT), and 64.7% and 87.2% for the arginine-induced stimulation test (ArST).

CONCLUSION

The ArST demonstrated lower specificity compared to the ITT. However, patients undergoing ArST experienced fewer side effects, suggesting that a careful selection of stimulation tests is crucial in diagnosing GHD.

Childhood growth hormone treatment: challenges, opportunities, and considerations

With long standing demand and popularity, growth hormone treatments continue to be a topic of interest for paediatric endocrinologists and general paediatricians due to ongoing issues regarding their long-term effects, the safety of childhood treatment, and the introduction of long-acting growth hormone preparations in the past decade. Moreover, uncertainty regarding how to approach individual patients and their treatment indications remains, particularly concerning tailored treatment goals and objectives; this uncertainty is further complicated by the multitude of approved indications that surpass substitution therapy. The paediatric endocrinologist thus grapples with pertinent questions, such as what defines reasonable treatment goals for each individual given their indications, and when (and how) to initiate the necessary discussions about risks and benefits with patients and their families. The aim of this Review is to offer advanced physiological concepts of growth hormone function, map out approved paediatric indications for treatment along with evidence on their effects and safety, highlight controversies and complexities surrounding childhood growth hormone treatment, and discuss the potential of long-acting growth hormone and future directions in the realm of childhood growth hormone treatment.

Tackling access and payer barriers for growth hormone therapy in Saudi Arabia: a consensus statement for the Saudi Working Group for Pediatric Endocrinology

Prompt diagnosis and early treatment are key goals to optimize the outcomes of children with growth hormone deficiency (GHD) and attain the genetically expected adult height. Nonetheless, several barriers can hinder prompt diagnosis and treatment of GHD, including payer-related issues. In Saudi Arabia, moderate-to-severe short stature was reported in 13.1 and 11.7 % of healthy boys and girls, respectively. Several access and payer barriers can face pediatric endocrinologists during the diagnosis and treatment of GHD in Saudi Arabia. Insurance coverage policies can restrict access to diagnostic tests for GHD and recombinant human growth hormone (rhGH) due to their high costs and lack of gold-standard criteria. Some insurance policies may limit the duration of treatment with rhGH or the amount of medication covered per month. This consensus article gathered the insights of pediatric endocrinologists from Saudi Arabia to reflect the access and payer barriers to the diagnostic tests and treatment options of children with short stature. We also discussed the current payer-related challenges endocrinologists face during the investigations of children with short stature. The consensus identified potential strategies to overcome these challenges and optimize patient management.

Transient Isolated, Idiopathic Growth Hormone Deficiency-A Self-Limiting Pediatric Disease with Male Predominance or a Diagnosis Based on Uncertain Criteria? Lesson from 20 Years' Real-World Experience with Retesting at One Center

In the majority of children with growth hormone (GH) deficiency (GHD), normal GH secretion may occur before the attainment of final height. The aim of the study was to assess the incidence of persistent and transient GHD and the effectiveness of recombined human GH (rhGH) therapy in children with isolated, idiopathic GHD with respect to the moment of therapy withdrawal and according to different diagnostic criteria of GHD. The analysis included 260 patients (173 boys, 87 girls) with isolated, idiopathic GHD who had completed rhGH therapy and who had been reassessed for GH and IGF-1 secretion. The incidence of transient GHD with respect to different pre- and post-treatment criteria was compared together with the assessment of GH therapy effectiveness. The incidence of transient GHD, even with respect to pediatric criteria, was very high. Normal GH secretion occurred before the attainment of near-final height. Application of more restricted criteria decreased the number of children diagnosed with GHD but not the incidence of transient GHD among them. Poor response to GH therapy was observed mainly in the patients with normal IGF-1 before treatment, suggesting that their diagnosis of GHD may have been a false positive. Further efforts should be made to avoid the overdiagnosis GHD and the overtreatment of patients.

Clinical and laboratory characteristics but not response to treatment can distinguish children with definite growth hormone deficiency from short stature unresponsive to stimulation tests

Introduction

It has been proposed that not all children with short stature displaying an inadequate response to tests for growth hormone (GH) secretion truly suffer from GH deficiency (GHD). Only children with a monogenic cause of GHD or an identifiable combined hormonal deficiency or anatomical anomaly in the hypothalamic-pituitary axis should be considered definite GHD (dGHD). The remaining patients can be defined as a separate group of patients, "short stature unresponsive to stimulation tests" (SUS). The aim of this proof-of-concept study, was to assess whether SUS patients treated with rhGH exhibit any differences compared to GHD patients undergoing the same treatment.

Methods

Retrospective analysis on 153 consecutive patients with short stature and pathological response to two GH stimulation tests. Patients with dGHD were defined as those with a clear genetic or anatomical hypothalamic-pituitary anomaly, as well as those with combined pituitary hormone deficiencies and those with a known insult to the hypothalamic-pituitary axis (i.e. total brain irradiation) (n=38, 25%); those without any of the previous anomalies were defined as SUS (n=115, 75%).

Results

At diagnosis, dGHD and SUS populations did not differ significantly in sex (F 32% vs 28%, p=0.68), age (11.9 vs 12.1, p=0.45), height SDS at diagnosis (-2.2 vs. -2.0, p=0.35) and prevalence of short stature (height <-2 SDS) (56% vs 51%, p=0.45). IGF-1 SDS were significantly lower in dGHD (-2.0 vs -1.3, p<0.01). After 1 year of treatment, the prevalence of short stature was significantly reduced in both groups (31% in dGHD vs. 21% in SUS, p<0.01) without any significant differences between groups (p=0.19), while the increase in IGF-1 SDS for bone age was greater in the dGHD category (+1.9 vs. +1.5, p<0.01), with no further difference in IGF-1 SDS between groups. At the last available follow-up, 59 patients had reached the near adult height (NAH) and underwent retesting for GHD. No differences in NAH were found (-0.3 vs. -0.4 SDS, 0% vs. 4% of short stature). The prevalence of pathological retesting was higher in dGHD (60% vs. 10%, p<0.01) as well as of overweight and obesity (67% vs. 26%).

Conclusion

Stimulation tests and the equivalent benefit from rhGH therapy, cannot distinguish between dGHD and SUS populations. In addition, lower IGF-1 concentrations at baseline and their higher increase during treatment in dGHD patients, and the lack of pathological retesting upon reaching NAH in SUS patients, are facts that suggest that deficient GH secretion may not be the cause of short stature in the SUS studied population.

[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.

Isolated growth hormone deficiency in children with vertically transmitted short stature: What do the genes tell us?

INTRODUCTION

The growth hormone deficiency (GHD) diagnosis is controversial especially due to low specificity of growth hormone (GH) stimulation tests. It is therefore believed that children diagnosed with GHD form a heterogeneous group with growth disorder frequently independent on GH function. No study evaluating the complex etiology of growth failure in children with diagnosed GHD has been performed thus far.

AIMS

To discover genetic etiology of short stature in children with diagnosed GHD from families with short stature.

METHODS

Fifty-two children diagnosed with primary GHD and vertically transmitted short stature (height SDS in the child and his/her shorter parent <-2 SD) were included to our study. The GHD diagnosis was based on growth data suggestive of GHD, absence of substantial disproportionality (sitting height to total height ratio <-2 SD or >+2 SD), IGF-1 levels <0 for age and sex specific SD and peak GH concentration <10 ug/L in two stimulation tests. All children were examined using next-generation sequencing methods, and the genetic variants were subsequently evaluated by American College of Medical Genetics standards and guidelines.

RESULTS

The age of children at enrollment into the study was 11 years (median, IQR 9-14 years), their height prior to GH treatment was -3.0 SD (-3.6 to -2.8 SD), IGF-1 concentration -1.4 SD (-2.0 to -1.1 SD), and maximal stimulated GH 6.3 ug/L (4.8-7.6 ug/L). No child had multiple pituitary hormone deficiency or a midbrain region pathology. Causative variant in a gene that affects growth was discovered in 15/52 (29%) children. Of them, only 2 (13%) had a genetic variant affecting GH secretion or function (GHSR and OTX2). Interestingly, in 10 (67%) children we discovered a primary growth plate disorder (ACAN, COL1A2, COL11A1, COL2A1, EXT2, FGFR3, NF1, NPR2, PTPN11 [2x]), in one (7%) a genetic variant impairing IGF-1 action (IGFALS) and in two (12%) a variant in miscellaneous genes (SALL4, MBTPS2).

CONCLUSIONS

In children with vertically transmitted short stature, genetic results frequently did not correspond with the clinical diagnosis of GH deficiency. These results underline the doubtful reliability of methods standardly used to diagnose GH deficiency.