Analysis of molecular heterogeneity of prolactin in human systemic lupus erythematosus

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.

Bioactive prolactin levels and risk of breast cancer: a nested case-control study

BACKGROUND

Prolactin is a lactogenic hormone associated with breast cancer risk in prospective studies, which used immunoassays. The immunoassay captures multiple isoforms and may not fully reflect the biologic activity of prolactin relevant to breast carcinogenesis.

METHODS

We considered plasma bioactive prolactin levels measured by the Nb2 lymphoma cell bioassay, which is sensitive to the somatolactogenic activity of prolactin and growth hormone, within a nested case-control study of invasive breast cancer in the Nurses' Health Studies (NHS/NHSII). We also considered associations with breast cancer risk factors.

RESULTS

We had bioassay measures on 1,329 cases and 1,329 controls. Bioassay levels were inversely associated with parity (4+ vs. 0 children = -18%, P = 0.01), body mass index (30+ vs. <22 kg/m(2) = -16%, P < 0.01), and age at menopause (53+ vs. 48 years = -18%, P = 0.03) and positively with family history of breast cancer (yes vs. no = 14%, P < 0.01). The relative risk (RR) comparing the top versus bottom quartile of bioassay levels was 1.19 [95% confidence intervals (CI), 0.94-1.51; Ptrend = 0.18]. The association was suggestively stronger for postmenopausal (RR = 1.36; 95% CI, 0.93-1.98; Ptrend = 0.12) versus premenopausal women (RR = 0.99; 95% CI, 0.71-1.37; Ptrend = 0.71). There was an association for cases diagnosed <4 years after blood draw (RR = 2.66; 95% CI, 1.45-4.89; Ptrend < 0.01), but not for cases diagnosed later. We did not observe differential associations by estrogen receptor status or other tumor characteristics.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results show similar associations for prolactin levels measured by bioassay and by immunoassay with both breast cancer risk factors and risk.

IMPACT

Future work examining risk prediction model of breast cancer can use the immunoassay to accurately characterize risk.

Prolactin and breast cancer etiology: an epidemiologic perspective

A number of epidemiologic studies of prolactin and breast cancer etiology have recently become available. Retrospective case-control studies have suggested a modest positive or null relationship between circulating prolactin concentrations and risk of breast cancer. However these studies are limited by small sample sizes and the collection of blood after case diagnosis. Several large prospective studies, in which blood was collected prior to diagnosis, have observed modest positive associations between prolactin and risk. In a pooled analysis of approximately 80% of the world's prospective data, the relative risk (RR) comparing women in the top vs bottom quartile of prolactin levels was 1.3 (95% confidence interval (CI): 1.1, 1.6, p-trend = 0.002). The results were similar for premenopausal and postmenopausal women. Most notably, high prolactin levels were associated with a 60% increased risk of estrogen receptor (ER) positive tumors, but not with ER negative tumors. Limited genetic data suggest a role of polymorphisms in the prolactin and prolactin receptor genes in risk of breast cancer. Studies of survival have suggested that high pretreatment prolactin levels were associated with treatment failure, earlier recurrence, and worse overall survival. Parity and certain medications are the only confirmed factors associated with prolactin levels in women. Overall, epidemiologic data suggest that prolactin is involved in breast cancer etiology. Further research to better elucidate these associations and their underlying mechanisms is warranted.

Correlation between serum prolactin levels and lupus activity

To assess the frequency of hyperprolactinemia and evaluate its possible clinical significance in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). We determined serum prolactin (PRL) levels in 30 patients with SLE by a radioimmunometric assay. For each patient, the clinical disease activity was assessed using the Systemic Lupus Activity Measure. Antinuclear antibodies were determined by standard techniques. Correlation between PRL concentrations and SLE clinical and serological activity were evaluated. Elevated serum concentrations of PRL (>25 ng/ml in female and >16 ng/ml in male) were found in 10 of the 30 (33.3%) patients (7-85 ng/ml, mean 33.8, SD 19.8). A significant correlation was found between the PRL levels and the clinical disease activity of SLE (P < 0.001, r = 0.675). In addition, hyperprolactinemia was associated with serological activity. Hyperprolactinemia was frequently detected in patients with SLE. There is a significant correlation between hyperprolactinemia and lupus activity.

Serum free prolactin concentrations in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus are associated with lupus activity

OBJECTIVE

To determine in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) the relationships among serum total and free prolactin (PRL) levels, isoforms of PRL and lupus activity.

METHODS

In a cross-sectional study, 259 patients with SLE were tested for serum total PRL, serum free PRL, and PRL in fractions obtained after gel filtration chromatography (in 70 sera taken at random) by immunoradiometric assay based on disease activity.

RESULTS

A significant correlation between direct PRL and free PRL levels was found in patients with and without lupus activity (r = 0.475, P<0.001); however, this was less so for non-active patients than for active patients (r=0.433, P<0.001 and r=0.909, P<0.001, respectively). SLE Disease Activity Index (SLEDAI) scores correlated positively with serum free PRL levels (r=0.314, P<0.001) and percentage of little PRL (r=0.33, P=0.005) and negatively with percentage of big big PRL (r=-0.3, P=0.012). Patients with active disease had higher serum free PRL levels (median 12.6 vs 9.3 ng/ml, P<0.001), higher percentages of little PRL (83.1 +/- 21.2 vs 63.6 +/- 24.8%, P=0.011) and lower percentages of big big PRL (9.4 +/- 18.0 vs 25.2 +/- 24.3%, P=0.031). Different clinical manifestations and serological parameters of lupus disease activity were more frequent in patients with free hyperprolactinaemia than in patients with normal serum free PRL levels (such as neurological manifestations, renal involvement, serositis, haematological manifestations, anti-double-stranded DNA and hypocomplementaemia; P<0.021).

CONCLUSION

An increase in serum free PRL levels, higher percentages of little PRL and lower percentages of big big PRL proved to be factors related to lupus activity in a subset of patients with SLE. These novel data must be taken into account in future studies aiming to establish a relationship between PRL and disease activity in SLE.