Pilot study to define criteria for Pituitary Tumors Centers of Excellence (PTCOE):results of an audit of leading international centers

Purpose: The Pituitary Society established the concept and mostly qualitative parameters for defining uniform criteria for Pituitary Tumor Centers of Excellence (PTCOEs) based on expert consensus. Aim of the study was to validate those previously proposed criteria through collection and evaluation of self-reported activity of several internationally-recognized tertiary pituitary centers, thereby transforming the qualitative 2017 definition into a validated quantitative one, which could serve as the basis for future objective PTCOE accreditation. Methods: An ad hoc prepared database was distributed to nine Pituitary Centers chosen by the Project Scientific Committee and comprising Centers of worldwide repute, which agreed to provide activity information derived from registries related to the years 2018–2020 and completing the database within 60 days. The database, provided by each center and composed of Excel® spreadsheets with requested specific information on leading and supporting teams, was reviewed by two blinded referees and all 9 candidate centers satisfied the overall PTCOE definition, according to referees’ evaluations. To obtain objective numerical criteria, median values for each activity/parameter were considered as the preferred PTCOE definition target, whereas the low limit of the range was selected as the acceptable target for each respective parameter. Results: Three dedicated pituitary neurosurgeons are preferred, whereas one dedicated surgeon is acceptable. Moreover, 100 surgical procedures per center per year are preferred, while the results indicated that 50 surgeries per year are acceptable. Acute post-surgery complications, including mortality and readmission rates, should preferably be negligible or nonexistent, but acceptable criterion is a rate lower than 10% of patients with complications requiring readmission within 30 days after surgery. Four endocrinologists devoted to pituitary diseases are requested in a PTCOE and the total population of patients followed in a PTCOE should not be less than 850. It appears acceptable that at least one dedicated/expert in pituitary diseases is present in neuroradiology, pathology, and ophthalmology groups, whereas at least two expert radiation oncologists are needed. Conclusion: This is, to our knowledge, the first study to survey and evaluate the activity of a relevant number of high-volume centers in the pituitary field. This effort, internally validated by ad hoc reviewers, allowed for transformation of previously formulated theoretical criteria for the definition of a PTCOE to precise numerical definitions based on real-life evidence. The application of a derived synopsis of criteria could be used by independent bodies for accreditation of pituitary centers as PTCOEs.</p

Cross-calibration of dual-energy X-ray densitometers for a large, multi-center genetic study of osteoporosis

Osteoporosis is a common disease with a strong genetic component characterized by reduced bone mass and an increased risk of fragility fractures. Bone mineral density (BMD) is the most important determinant of osteoporotic fracture risk, but the genes responsible for BMD regulation and fracture are incompletely defined. To enable multi-center studies to examine the genetic influences on BMD there is a requirement to standardize measurements across different manufacturers of bone densitometers, different versions of machines and different normative ranges. This paper describes a method developed to allow near-identical subjects with low age-adjusted BMD (based on Z-scores) to be recruited in 17 centers using 27 different densitometers. Cross-calibration was based on measurements using a European spine phantom circulated to all centers and measured ten times on each individual machine. From theses values an individual exponential curve, based on nominal versus observed BMD, was derived for each machine. As expected, there were large and significant variations in nominal BMD values, not only between scanners from different manufacturers but also between different versions of scanners from the same manufacturer. Hologic scanners tended to underestimate the nominal BMD, while Lunar scanners overestimated the value. Norland scanners gave mixed values over estimating BMD at the lower nominal value (0.5 g/cm2) while underestimating the value at the higher value (1.5 g/cm2). The validity of the exponential equations was tested using hip and spine measurements on 991 non-proband women from a familial osteoporosis study (FAMOS). After cross-calibration there was a considerable reduction in variation between machines. This observation, coupled with the absence of a similar reduction in variation attributable to a linear regression on age, demonstrated the validity of the cross-calibration approach. Use of the cross-calibration curves along with a standard normative range (in the case of this study, the Hologic normative range) allowed age-specific Z-scores to be used as an inclusion criterion in this genetic study, a method that will be useful for other trials where age-specific BMD inclusion criteria are required.</p

Cross-calibration of dual-energy X-ray densitometers for a large, multi-center genetic study of osteoporosis

Osteoporosis is a common disease with a strong genetic component characterized by reduced bone mass and an increased risk of fragility fractures. Bone mineral density (BMD) is the most important determinant of osteoporotic fracture risk, but the genes responsible for BMD regulation and fracture are incompletely defined. To enable multi-center studies to examine the genetic influences on BMD there is a requirement to standardize measurements across different manufacturers of bone densitometers, different versions of machines and different normative ranges. This paper describes a method developed to allow near-identical subjects with low age-adjusted BMD (based on Z-scores) to be recruited in 17 centers using 27 different densitometers. Cross-calibration was based on measurements using a European spine phantom circulated to all centers and measured ten times on each individual machine. From theses values an individual exponential curve, based on nominal versus observed BMD, was derived for each machine. As expected, there were large and significant variations in nominal BMD values, not only between scanners from different manufacturers but also between different versions of scanners from the same manufacturer. Hologic scanners tended to underestimate the nominal BMD, while Lunar scanners overestimated the value. Norland scanners gave mixed values over estimating BMD at the lower nominal value (0.5 g/cm2) while underestimating the value at the higher value (1.5 g/cm2). The validity of the exponential equations was tested using hip and spine measurements on 991 non-proband women from a familial osteoporosis study (FAMOS). After cross-calibration there was a considerable reduction in variation between machines. This observation, coupled with the absence of a similar reduction in variation attributable to a linear regression on age, demonstrated the validity of the cross-calibration approach. Use of the cross-calibration curves along with a standard normative range (in the case of this study, the Hologic normative range) allowed age-specific Z-scores to be used as an inclusion criterion in this genetic study, a method that will be useful for other trials where age-specific BMD inclusion criteria are required.</p

Association of the thyroid stimulating hormone receptor gene (TSHR) with Graves' disease

Graves' disease (GD) is a common autoimmune disease (AID) that shares many of its susceptibility loci with other AIDs. The thyroid stimulating hormone receptor (TSHR) represents the primary autoantigen in GD, in which autoantibodies bind to the receptor and mimic its ligand, thyroid stimulating hormone, causing the characteristic clinical phenotype. Although early studies investigating the TSHR and GD proved inconclusive, more recently we provided convincing evidence for association of the TSHR region with disease. In the current study, we investigated a combined panel of 98 SNPs, including 70 tag SNPs, across an extended 800 kb region of the TSHR to refine association in a cohort of 768 GD subjects and 768 matched controls. In total, 28 SNPs revealed association with GD (P<0.05), with strongest SNP associations at rs179247 (X2 = 32.45, P = 8.90 x 10-8, OR = 1.53, 95 CI = 1.32-1.78) and rs12101255 (X2 = 30.91, P = 1.95 x 10-7, OR = 1.55, 95 CI = 1.33-1.81), both located in intron 1 of the TSHR. Association of the most associated SNP, rs179247, was replicated in 303 GD families (P = 7.8 x 10-4). In addition, we provide preliminary evidence that the disease-associated genotypes of rs179247 (AA) and rs12101255 (TT) show reduced mRNA expression ratios of flTSHR relative to two alternate TSHR mRNA splice variants. © The Author 2009. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved

Multidisciplinary management of acromegaly: A consensus

The 13th Acromegaly Consensus Conference was held in November 2019 in Fort Lauderdale, Florida, and comprised acromegaly experts including endocrinologists and neurosurgeons who considered optimal approaches for multidisciplinary acromegaly management. Focused discussions reviewed techniques, results, and side effects of surgery, radiotherapy, and medical therapy, and how advances in technology and novel techniques have changed the way these modalities are used alone or in combination. Effects of treatment on patient outcomes were considered, along with strategies for optimizing and personalizing therapeutic approaches. Expert consensus recommendations emphasize how best to implement available treatment options as part of a multidisciplinary approach at Pituitary Tumor Centers of Excellence