Longitudinal Monitoring of Hair Cortisol Using Liquid Chromatography-Mass Spectrometry to Prevent Hypercortisolism in Patients Undergoing Glucocorticoid Replacement Therapy

OBJECTIVE

Currently available methods for endogenous cortisol monitoring in patients with hormonal insufficiency rely on measurements of plasma levels only at a single time point; thus, any kind of chronic exposure to cortisol is challenging to evaluate because it requires collecting samples at different time points. Hair cortisol levels acquired longitudinally better reflected chronic exposure (both cortisol synthesis and deposition) and may significantly contribute to better outcomes in glucocorticoid replacement therapies.

DESIGN

Twenty-two patients on cortisol substitution therapy were monitored for plasma, urinary, and hair cortisol levels for 18 months to determine whether hair cortisol may serve as a monitoring option for therapy setting and adjustment.

METHODS

Plasma and urinary cortisol levels were measured using standardized immunoassay methods, and segmented (∼1 cm) hair cortisol levels were monitored by liquid chromatography coupled to mass spectrometry. A log-normal model of the changes over time was proposed, and Bayesian statistics were used to compare plasma, urinary, and hair cortisol levels over 18 months.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS

Hair cortisol levels decreased over time in patients undergoing substitutional therapy. The residual variance of hair cortisol in comparison to plasma or urinary cortisol levels was much lower. Thus, longitudinal monitoring of hair cortisol levels could prove beneficial as a noninvasive tool to reduce the risk of overdosing and improve the overall patient health.

Long-term relationship between unattended automated blood pressure and auscultatory BP measurements in hypertensive patients

AIMS

Unattended automated office blood pressure (uAutoOBP) has attracted more attention since SPRINT trial had been published. However, its long-term relationship to attended office blood pressure (AuscOBP) is not known.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Stable treated hypertensive subjects were examined in four Czech academic hypertension centers. All subjects attended four clinical visits three months apart. uAutoOBP was measured with the BP Tru device; AuscOBP was measured three times with auscultatory method by the physician. 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) was performed within one week from the second clinical visit.

RESULTS

Data on 112 subjects aged 65.6 ± 10.8 years with mean AuscOBP 128.2 ± 12.2/78.5 ± 10.3 mm Hg are reported. Across the four clinical visits, the uAutoOBP was by 10.1/3.7 mm Hg lower than AuscOBP and the mean difference was similar during all four visits (P≥.061). Both uAutoOBP and AuscOBP had similar intra-individual variability during study follow-up as demonstrated by similar intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC, for systolic ICC = 0.50, for diastolic ICC = 0.72). However, the intra-individual variability of the systolic AuscOBP and uAutoOBP difference was high as demonstrated by low ICCs for absolute (ICC = 0.17 [95%CI, 0.09 - 0.25]) and low κ coefficients for categorized differences (κ ≤ 0.16). The main determinant of AuscOBP-uAutoOBP difference was AuscOBP level. The AuscOBP-uAutoOBP difference was poor tool to identify hypertension control categories defined on the basis of AuscOBP and ABPM.

CONCLUSIONS

Although mean AuscOBP-uAutoOBP differences were relatively similar across the four clinical visits, intra-individual variability of this difference was high. The AuscOBP-uAutoOBP difference was poor tool to identify hypertension control categories defined on the basis of AuscOBP and ABPM. Therefore, uAutoOBP cannot be used as a replacement for ABPM.

A multicentre study on unattended automated office blood pressure measurement in treated hypertensive patients

AIMS

Unattended automated office blood pressure (uAutoOBP) may eliminate white-coat effect. In the present study, we studied its relationships to attended office blood pressure (BP) and ambulatory BP monitoring (ABPM).

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Stable treated hypertensive subjects were examined in four Czech academic hypertension centres. uAutoOBP was measured with the BP Tru device; attended BP was measured six times: three times with auscultatory method (AuscOBP) by the physician followed optionally by three oscillometric measurements (OscOBP). ABPM was performed within one week from the clinical visit.

RESULTS

Data on 172 subjects aged 63.7 ± 12.4 years with AuscOBP 127.6 ± 12.1/77.6 ± 10.0 mm Hg are reported. uAutoOBP was by 8.5 ± 9.0/3.0 ± 6.1 mm Hg lower than AuscOBP. The AuscOBP-uAutoOBP difference increased with the AuscOBP level and it did not depend on any other factor. OscOBP differed by 8.6 ± 8.6/1.9 ± 5.7 mm Hg from uAutoOBP. 24-hour mean BP was by 4.2 ± 12.1/3.5 ± 7.8 mm Hg lower than AuscOBP and by 4.3 ± 11.0/0.5 ± 6.9 mm Hg higher than uAutoOBP; the correlation coefficients of 24-hour mean BP with AuscOBP and with uAutoOBP did not differ (p for difference ≥.13). In the lowest BP group (systolic AuscOBP <120 mm Hg or diastolic AuscOBP <70 mm Hg), both AuscOBP and uAutoOBP were lower than 24-hour mean BP, while in the highest BP group (systolic AuscOBP ≥140 mm Hg or diastolic AuscOBP ≥90 mm Hg), they were higher.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared to uAutoOBP, attended BP measurement gives higher values, both when measured with auscultatory or oscillometric method. Inter-individual variability of AutoOBP - uAuscOBP difference, as well of uAutoOBP - ABPM difference, is large. We did not prove that uAutoOBP would be associated to 24-hour ambulatory BP more closely than attended BP.

[SPRINT study: far lower systolic blood pressure]

There is still no consensus, which blood pressure value is the most profitable for the patients when treating the systolic hypertension in the context of reduction of cardiovascular events and cardiovascular and overall mortality.Researchers of the ACCORD study were comparing intensive treatment of systolic blood pressure bellow 120 mmHg and standard treatment reaching bellow 140 mmHg and showed no influence of intensive treatment on the primary goal in individuals with diabetes mellitus.Last autumn, SPRINT study was presented and published showing the favourable effect of intensive (i. e. bellow 120 mmHg) blood pressure lowering on combined primary goal which was myocardial infarction, other acute coronary syndromes, ischemic stroke, heart failure or death from cardiovascular reasons. On the other hand, intensive treatment also resulted in statistically significant occurrence of adverse events (hypotension, syncope, renal injury of failure).