Optimization of drug treatment of acromegaly (clinical and morphological comparison)


Cite item

Full Text

Open Access Open Access
Restricted Access Access granted
Restricted Access Subscription or Fee Access

Abstract

Background. Taking into account the morphological heterogeneity of somatotrophic tumors, the search for and stratification of possible predictors, which make it possible to predict the clinical course of the disease and the effectiveness of the treatment, is currently especially relevant. Objective. Clinical and morphological comparison between the effectiveness of long-term drug therapy with 1st generation somatostatin analogs (SA1) and immunophenotypic features of densely and sparsely granulated somatotrophic adenomas (DGSA and SGSA) identified using immunohistochemical assay (IHCA). Methods. 65 patients with acromegaly who underwent transsphenoidal adenomectomy were examined. DGSAs were detected in 28 (9 men), SGSAs - in 37 (14 men) patients. Patients with DGSA were characterized by a late age of diagnosis and smaller initial sizes of pituitary adenoma. Using IHCA, a greater percentage of cells with antibodies (AB) to growth hormone (GH), greater expression of the 2nd somatostatin receptor (SSR) subtype, as well as a large difference and ratio between the 2nd and 5th SSR subtypes were detected in DGSA. The vast majority of patients with DGSA showed good sensitivity to secondary drug therapy with SA1 with the achievement of early and stable biochemical remission. A correlation between the magnitude of the decrease in the insulin-like growth factor 1 (IGF-1) level after 3 months of treatment and the expression of the 2nd SSR subtype was found. On the contrary, patients with SGSA were characterized by an early age of diagnosis, large sizes of pituitary adenoma with extrasellar expansion and invasive growth. Using IHCA, low expression of the 2nd SSR subtype and increased expression of the 5th SSR subtype, a high percentage of cells with antibodies to cytokeratin, and high proliferative index Ki-67 were noted in SGSA. The use of SA1 in patients with SGSA was manifested by a low suppression of the IGF-1 level after 3, 6 and 12 months of treatment, as well as the absence of biochemical remission at the last visit. Conclusion. The results of the work confirm the existence of fundamental clinical and morphological differences between DGSA and SGSA, as well as the need for a differentiated approach to treatment. The magnitude of the decrease in the IGF-1 level after 3 months of treatment correlates with the 2nd SSR subtype expression level and can be used as a cut-off point for predicting the effectiveness of long-term primary or secondary therapy with SA1.

Full Text

Restricted Access

About the authors

Evgeniy V. Pronin

Endocrinological Dispensary of the Moscow Healthcare Department

Email: r-wp@mail.ru
Endocrinologist

M. B Antsiferov

Endocrinological Dispensary of the Moscow Healthcare Department

T. M Alekseeva

Endocrinological Dispensary of the Moscow Healthcare Department

L. S Urusova

Reference Center for Pathomorphological, Immunohistochemical and Radiological Research Methods, National Medical Research Center for Endocrinology

A. M Lapshina

Reference Center for Pathomorphological, Immunohistochemical and Radiological Research Methods, National Medical Research Center for Endocrinology

N. G Mokrysheva

Reference Center for Pathomorphological, Immunohistochemical and Radiological Research Methods, National Medical Research Center for Endocrinology

References

  1. Akirov A., Asa S.L., Amer L., et al. The Clinicopathological Spectrum of Acromegaly. J. Clin Med. 2019;8(11):1962. Doi: 10.3390/ jcm8111962.
  2. Lopes M.B.S. The 2017 World Health Organization classification of tumors of the pituitary gland: a summary. Acta Neuropathol. 2017;134(4):521-35. doi: 10.1007/s00401-017-1769-8.
  3. Syro L.V., Rotondo F., Serna C.A., et al. Pathology of GH-producing pituitary adenomas and GH cell hyperplasia of the pituitary Pituitary 2017;20(1):84-92. doi: 10.1007/s11102-016-0748-8.
  4. Cuevas-Ramos D., Carmichael J.D., Cooper O., et al. A structural and functional acromegaly classification. J. Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2015;100(1):122-31. doi: 10.1210/jc.2014-2468.
  5. Asa S.L., Kucharczyk W., Ezzat S. Pituitary acromegaly: not one disease. Endocr Relat Cancer. 2017;24(3):1- 4. doi: 10.1530/ERC-16-049.
  6. Bollerslev J., Heck A., Olarescu N.C. Management of endocrine disease: individualised management of acromegaly. Eur J. Endocrinol. 2019;181(2):57-71. doi: 10.1530/EJE-19-0124.
  7. Agrawal N., loachimescu A.G. Prognostic factors of biochemical remission after transsphenoidal surgery for acromegaly: a structured review. Pituitary. 2020;23(5):582-94. doi: 10.1007/s11102-020-01063-x.
  8. Alquraini H., Schneider M.D.P., Mirakhur B., Barcan A. Biochemical efficacy of long-acting lanreotide depot/Autogel in patients with acromegaly naive to somatostatin-receptor ligands: analysis of three multicenter clinical trials. Pituitary. 2018;21(3):283-89. doi: 10.1007/s11102-018-0867-5.
  9. Giustina A., Barkhoudarian G., Beckers A., et al. Multidisciplinary management of acromegaly: A consensus. Rev Endocr Metab Disord Actions. 2020;21(4):667-678. doi: 10.1007/s11154-020-09588-z.
  10. Puig-Domingo M., Gil J., Sampedro-Nunez M., et al. Molecular profiling for acromegaly treatment: a validation study. Endocr Relat Cancer. 2020;27:375-89. doi: 10.1530/ERC-18-0565.
  11. Sahakian N., Castinetti F., Brue N., Cuny N. Current and Emerging Medical Therapies in Pituitary Tumors. J. Clin Med. 2022;11(4):955. Doi: 10.3390/ jcm11040955.
  12. Gomes-Porras M., Cardenas-Salas J., Alvares-Escola C. Somatostatin Analogs in Clinical Practice: A Review. J. MolSci. 2020;21(5):1682. Doi: 10.3390/ ijms21051682.
  13. Puig-Domingo M., Marazuela M. Precision medicine in the treatment of acromegaly Minerva Endocrinol. 2019;44(2):169- 75. doi: 10.23736/S0391-1977.18.02937-1
  14. Puig-Domingo M., Bernabeu I., Pico A., etal. Pasireotide in the Personalized Treatment of Acromegaly. Front Endocrinol. (Lausanne). 2021;12:648411. doi: 10.3389/fendo.2021.648411.
  15. Ku C.R., Melnikov V., Zhang Z., Lee E.J. Precision Therapy in Acromegaly Caused by Pituitary Tumors: How Close Is It to Reality? Endocrinol Metab. (Seul). 2020;35(2):206-16. Doi: 10.3803/ EnM.2020.35.2.206.
  16. Kocak B., Durmaz E.S., Kadioglu P., et al. Predicting response to somatostatin analogues in acromegaly: machine learning-based high-dimensional quantitative texture analysis on T2-weighted MRI. Eur Radiol. 2019;29:2731-9. doi: 10.1007/s00330- 018-5876-2.
  17. Rass L., Rahvar A-H., Matschke J., etal. Differences in somatostatin receptor subtype expression in patients with acromegaly: new directions for targeted therapy? Hormones (Athens). 2022;21(1):79-89. doi: 10.1007/s42000-021-00327-w.
  18. Villa C., Vasiljevic A., Jaffrain-Rea M.L., et al. A standardised diagnostic approach to pituitary neuroendocrine tumours (PitNETs): a European Pituitary Pathology Group (EPPG) proposal. Virchows Arch. 2019;475:687-92. doi: 10.1007/s00428- 019-02655-0.
  19. Lloyd L.V., Osamura R.Y., Cloppel G., et al. Tumours of the pituitary gland in WHO classification of tumours of endocrine organs. WHO press, Geneva, 2017. P. 19-24.
  20. Casar-Borota O., Heck A., Schulz S., et al. Expression of SSTR2a, but not of SSTRs 1, 3, or 5 in Somatotroph Adenomas Assessed by Monoclonal Antibodies Was Reduced by Octreotide and Correlated With the Acute and Long-Term Effects of Octreotide. Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2013;98(11):E1730-39. Doi: 10.1210/ jc.2013-2145.
  21. Ezzat S., Caspar-Bell G.M., Chik C.L., etal. Predictive markers for postsurgical medical management of acromegaly: a systematic review and consensus treatment guideline. Endocr Pract. 2019;25(4):379- 93. doi: 10.4158/EP-2018-0500.
  22. Анциферов М.Б., Пронин Е.В., Алексеева Т.М., Пронин В.С. Предикторы эффективности медикаментозной терапии акромегалии (по данным Московского регистра). Фарматека. 2020;27(4):50-56. doi: 10.18565/ pharmateca.2022.0.50-56.
  23. Coopmans E., Korevaar TJ.M., van Meyel S.W.F., et al. Multivariable Prediction Model for Biochemical Response to First-Generation Somatostatin Receptor Ligands in Acromegaly. J. Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2020;105(9):dgaa387. doi: 10.1210//clinem/ dgaa387.
  24. Fleseriu M., Biller B.M.K., Freda PU., et al. A Pituitary Society update to acromegaly management guidelines. Pituitary, 2021;24(1):1-13. Doi. org/10.1007/s11102-020-01091-7.
  25. Kasuki L., Wildemberg L.E., Gadelha M. Management of endocrine disease: Personalized medicine in the treatment of acromegaly. Eur J. Endocrinol. 2518;178(3):R89-155. doi: 10.1530/EJE-17-1006.
  26. Gadelha M.R., Wildemberg L.E., Kasuki L. The Future of Somatostatin Receptor Ligands in Acromegaly. J. Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2022;107(2):297-308. doi: 10.1210/olinem/dgab726.
  27. Nista F., Corica G., Castelletti L., et al. Clinical and Radiological Predictors of Biochemical Response to First-Line Treatment With Somatostatin Receptor Ligands in Acromegaly: A Real-Life Perspective. Front Endocrinol. (Lausanne). 2021;12:677919. doi: 10.3389/fendo.2021.677919.
  28. Wildemberg L.E., da Silva Camacho A.H., Miranda R.L., et al. Machine Learning-based Prediction Model for Treatment of Acromegaly With First-generation Somatostatin Receptor Ligands. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2021;16,106(7):2047-56. doi: 10.1210/clinem/dgab125
  29. Liu W., Xie L., He M., et al. Expression of Somatostatin Receptor 2 in Somatotropinoma Correlated with the Short-Term Efficacy of Somatostatin Analogues. Int J. Endocrinol. 2017;2017:9606985. doi: 10.1155/2017/9606985.

Supplementary files

Supplementary Files
Action
1. JATS XML

Copyright (c) 2022 Bionika Media

This website uses cookies

You consent to our cookies if you continue to use our website.

About Cookies