Emerging drugs for acromegaly

Feline Acromegaly

Practical relevance Clinicians who deal with diabetic cats can have mixed experiences. Some patients are ‘textbook cases’, responding very well to insulin administration; others prove to be more challenging. Recent studies have shown a significant proportion of problem diabetic cats to have underlying acromegaly (hypersomatotropism). Recognising this syndrome in these cats will be key to successfully managing the concurrent diabetes.

Patient group Just like the ‘normal’ (non-acromegalic) diabetic cat, the acromegalic diabetic cat tends to be a middle-aged to older male neutered domestic short hair. However, with increasing case experience, this signalment may change. Most patients are insulin resistant, although this may not be the initial presenting sign. No breed predispositions have been recognised to date.

Clinical challenges There is no single diagnostic test for feline acromegaly — a confident diagnosis relies on a combination of clinical signs, feline growth hormone and insulin-like growth factor 1 levels, and intracranial imaging. Additionally, the ideal treatment protocol has yet to be established. Currently, radiotherapy is considered by many to be the best treatment; however, costs, the need for multiple anaesthetics, and the often delayed and unpredictable treatment response represent serious limitations of this modality. Previously, medical treatment has proven unsuccessful. Recent studies provide some evidence in favour of, and some against, the use of newer long-acting somatostatin analogue preparations in a proportion of acromegalic cats.

Evidence base Two recent studies have revealed a relatively high prevalence of acromegaly among diabetic cats. One also specifically assessed the value of hormonal tests, computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging during the diagnostic process.

Medical Treatment of Acromegaly with Dopamine Agonists or Somatostatin Analogs

Treatment of acromegaly aims to correct (or prevent) tumor compression of surrounding tissues by excising the disease-causing lesion and reduce growth hormone (GH) and IGF-1 levels to normal values. When surgery (the usual first-line treatment) fails to correct GH/IGF-1 hypersecretion, medical treatment with dopamine agonists (DAs; particularly cabergoline) or somatostatin analogs (SAs) can be used. The GH receptor antagonist pegvisomant is helpful in patients who are totally or partially resistant to SAs and can be given in association with both SAs and/or DAs. Thanks to this multistep therapeutic strategy, adequate hormonal disease control is achieved in most patients, giving them normal life expectancy. Comorbidities associated with acromegaly generally improve after treatment, but persistent sequelae may nonetheless impair quality of life.

Pituitary Centers of Excellence

Pituitary tumors and associated neuroendocrine disorders pose significant challenges in diagnostic and therapeutic management. Optimal care of the “pituitary patient” is best provided in a multidisciplinary collaborative environment that includes not only experienced pituitary practitioners in neurosurgery and endocrinology, but also in otorhinolaryngological surgery, radiation oncology, medical oncology, neuro-ophthalmology, diagnostic and interventional neuroradiology, and neuropathology. We provide the background and rationale for recognizing pituitary centers of excellence and suggest a voluntary verification process, similar to that used by the American College of Surgeons for Trauma Center verification. We propose that pituitary centers of excellence should fulfill 3 key missions: (1) provide comprehensive care and support to patients with pituitary disorders; (2) provide residency training, fellowship training, and/or continuing medical education in the management of pituitary and neuroendocrine disease; and (3) contribute to research in pituitary disorders. As this is a preliminary proposal, we recognize several issues that warrant further consideration including center and surgeon practice volume as well as oversight of the verification process.

[Treatment of acromegaly: a critical analysis of the last ten years]

The ten previous years in terms of acromegaly treatment were essentially characterized by the experience accumulated with new formulations of somatostatin analogues or new drugs such GH-receptor antagonists recently available. Surgery remains the first-line treatment and its results did not change despite the generalization of endoscopy, which mainly seems to decrease local side-effects. The setting of radiotherapy was essentially modified by the increasing use of gamma-knife or stereotactic radiotherapy; however, their results are essentially the same as the classic fractionated, conventional radiotherapy and nobody knows if it will decrease the side-effects of this therapeutic modality. Nevertheless, thanks to a multistep therapeutic strategy, combining the different therapeutic modalities, it has become very rare for acromegaly not to be controlled in a patient.

Somatostatin and somatostatin receptors: implications for neoplastic growth and cancer biology

Somatostatin agonists (SM-As) are capable of achieving durable symptomatic relief and significant clinical responses in certain tumours. Herein, we review the diverse direct and indirect mechanisms of antineoplastic activity elicited by SM-As as well as the hurdles that complicate their use as monotherapies in a broader range of malignancies. Emphasis is placed on recent clinical attempts to neutralise the IGF-mediated survival factor effects in the bone metastasis microenvironment in advanced prostate cancer. The first clinical trials of this 'anti-survival factor manipulation' strategy utilised the ability of SM-As to suppress the growth hormone-dependent liver-derived IGF-I bioavailability in combination with other drugs, such as dexamethasone, zolendronate and oestrogens, acting systemically and at the bone metastasis microenvironment. These regimens restored androgen ablation responsiveness in stage D3 prostate cancer patients and successfully produced objective clinical responses while only mild toxicities were observed. Furthermore, we focus on the preclinical experimental data of a targeted SM-A coupled to the super-potent doxorubicin derivative AN-201. The resulting conjugate (AN-238) has shown increased antitumour potency with a favourable toxicity profile. The potential use of novel SM-As as anticancer drugs is discussed in relation to data suggesting other direct and indirect treatment approaches pertaining to the somatostatin system.

Tumor volume of growth hormone-secreting pituitary adenomas during treatment with pegvisomant: a prospective multicenter study

CONTEXT

Clinical and biochemical remission in acromegaly can frequently be achieved with the recombinant GH receptor antagonist pegvisomant, even when other treatments fail. However, increases in tumor volume have been reported.

OBJECTIVE

Because previous studies suffer from inhomogenous magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) protocols, this prospective study examined the long-term course of adenoma volume during pegvisomant therapy by standardized MRI.

DESIGN

Five centers in Germany participated. High-resolution MRI was performed at baseline and 6, 12, and 24 months after enrollment.

SETTING/PATIENTS

Patients were outpatients, and pegvisomant is third-line therapy in most of the cases.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary end point was tumor volume at 24 month follow-up, measured by a single, double-blinded rater.

RESULTS

Forty-five of 61 patients completed 24 months' follow-up (73.8%). Tumor volume increase greater than 25% during the study was observed in three of 61 patients (4.9%), all during the first year of enrollment. All three patients had had octreotide treatment before initiation of pegvisomant; none of them had had radiotherapy. All volumetric findings were comparable with clinical radiological interpretations. ANOVA revealed no significant change in tumor volume after 24 months (n = 45).

CONCLUSIONS

This study shows that pegvisomant therapy infrequently coincides with tumor growth during long-term treatment of acromegaly. Because all significant tumor volume increases occurred during the first year, these changes might correlate to the change of medication and thus be the result of a rebound from somatostatin-induced shrinkage.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of somatostatin analogues in the treatment of acromegaly in Brazil

This study aims to compare economic and patient impacts of the treatment of acromegaly with two different somatostatin analogues (octreotide LAR and lanreotide SR) in Brazil. A cost-effectiveness analysis was carried out under the Brazilian Public Health Care System (SUS) perspective. A decision analytical model was developed based on the Brazilian Public Health Care System Clinical Guideline for Acromegaly. A hypothetical cohort of 276 patients was followed for two years. Data were extracted from literature and administrative databases. Based on the analytical model, treatment with octreotide LAR would avoid 12 and 17 cases of GH and IGF-I elevated serum levels, respectively. Octreotide LAR was a cost-saving strategy, with net savings of R$10,448,324 (US$4,465,096) to SUS. Annual net savings per patient were R$ 18,928 (US$8,089). Treatment of acromegaly with octreotide LAR is a dominant strategy when compared to the treatment with lanreotide SR in Brazil. Sensitivity analysis did not alter the cost-saving status.