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

Standards of care for medical management of acromegaly in pituitary tumor centers of excellence (PTCOE)

Purpose: A series of consensus guidelines on medical treatment of acromegaly have been produced in the last two decades. However, little information is available on their application in clinical practice. Furthermore, international standards of acromegaly care have not been published. The aim of our study was to report current standards of care for medical therapy of acromegaly, using results collected through an audit performed to validate criteria for definition of Pituitary Tumor Centers of Excellence (PTCOE). Methods: Details of medical treatment approaches to acromegaly were voluntarily provided by nine renowned international centers that participated in this audit. For the period 2018–2020, we assessed overall number of acromegaly patients under medical treatment, distribution of patients on different treatment modalities, overall biochemical control rate with medical therapy, and specific control rates for different medical treatment options. Results: Median number of total patients and median number of new patients with acromegaly managed annually in the endocrinology units of the centers were 206 and 16.3, respectively. Median percentage of acromegaly patients on medical treatment was 48.9%. Among the patients on medical treatment, first-generation somatostatin receptor ligand (SRL) monotherapy was used with a median rate of 48.7%, followed by combination therapies with a median rate of 29.3%. Cabergoline monotherapy was used in 6.9% of patients. Pegvisomant monotherapy was used in 7 centers and pasireotide monotherapy in 5 centers, with median rates of 7.9% and 6.3%, respectively. Conclusions: Current standards of care in PTCOEs include use of first-generation SRLs as the first medical option in about 50% of patients, as recommended by consensus guidelines. However, some patients are kept on this treatment despite inadequate control suggesting that cost-effectiveness, availability, patient preference, side effects, and therapeutic inertia may play a possible role also in PTCOE. Moreover, at odds with consensus guidelines, other monotherapies for acromegaly appear to have a marginal role as compared to combination therapies as extrapolated from PTCOE practice data. Presence of uncontrolled patients in each treatment category suggest that further optimization of medical therapy, as well as use of other therapeutic tools such as radiosurgery may be needed

Oral octreotide capsules for the treatment of acromegaly: comparison of 2 phase 3 trial results

Purpose Results are presented from 2 to 3 trials investigating oral octreotide capsules (OOC) as an alternative to injectable somatostatin receptor ligands (iSRLs) in the treatment of acromegaly. Methods CH-ACM-01 was an open-label trial (N = 155) and CHIASMA OPTIMAL was a double-blind placebo-controlled (DPC) trial (N = 56), both investigating OOC as maintenance therapy for patients with acromegaly who were biochemical responders receiving iSRLs. Results Baseline characteristics in both trials reflected those expected of patients with acromegaly responding to treatment and were similar between trials, despite differences in inclusion criteria. OOC demonstrated a consistent degree of biochemical response across trials, with 65% of patients in CH-ACM-01 maintaining response during the core period and 64% of patients in CHIASMA OPTIMAL at the end of the DPC. Mean insulin-like growth factor I (IGF-I) levels remained within inclusion criteria at the end of treatment in both trials. Of 110 patients entering the fixed-dose phase in CH-ACM-01, 80% maintained or improved acromegaly symptoms from baseline to the end of treatment. Over 85% of patients in both trials elected to continue into the extension phases. OOC were found to be well tolerated across both trials, and no dose-related adverse events were observed. Conclusions OOC demonstrated remarkably consistent results for biochemical response, durability of response, and preference to continue with oral treatment across these 2 complementary landmark phase 3 trials, despite differences in the design of each.Diabetes mellitus: pathophysiological changes and therap

Oral octreotide capsules for the treatment of acromegaly: comparison of 2 phase 3 trial results (June, 10.1007/s11102-021-01163-2, 2021)

Diabetes mellitus: pathophysiological changes and therap

Durable biochemical response and safety with oral octreotide capsules in acromegaly

ObjectiveThe objective of this study is to report results from the open-label extension (OLE) of the OPTIMAL trial of oral octreotide capsules (OOC) in adults with acromegaly, evaluating the long-term durability of therapeutic response. DesignThe study design is an OLE of a double-blind placebo-controlled (DPC) trial. MethodsPatients completing the 36-week DPC period on the study drug (OOC or placebo) or meeting predefined withdrawal criteria were eligible for OLE enrollment at 60 mg/day OOC dose, with the option to titrate to 40 or 80 mg/day. The OLE is ongoing; week 48 results are reported. ResultsForty patients were enrolled in the OLE, 20 each having received OOC or placebo, with 14 and 5 patients completing the DPC period as responders, respectively. Ninety percent of patients completing the DPC period on OOC and 70% of those completing on placebo completed 48 weeks of the OLE. Maintenance of response in the OLE (i.e. insulin-like growth factor I (IGF1) <= 1.0 x upper limit of normal (ULN)) was achieved by 92.6% of patients who responded to OOC during the DPC period. Mean IGF1 levels were maintained between the end of the DPC period (0.91 x ULN; 95% CI: 0.784, 1.045) and week 48 of the OLE (0.90 x ULN; 95% CI: 0.750, 1.044) for those completing the DPC period on OOC. OOC safety was consistent with previous findings, with no increased adverse events (AEs) associated with the higher dose and improved gastrointestinal tolerability observed over time. ConclusionsPatients with acromegaly maintained long-term biochemical response while receiving OOC, with no new AEs observed with prolonged OOC exposure

Maintenance of Acromegaly Control in Patients Switching From Injectable Somatostatin Receptor Ligands to Oral Octreotide

Purpose: The phase 3 CHIASMA OPTIMAL trial (NCT03252353) evaluated efficacy and safety of oral octreotide capsules (OOCs) in patients with acromegaly who previously demonstrated biochemical control while receiving injectable somatostatin receptor ligands (SRLs).Methods: In this double-blind study, patients (N = 56) stratified by prior SRL dose were randomly assigned 1:1 to OOC or placebo for 36 weeks. The primary end point was maintenance of biochemical control at the end of treatment (mean insulin-like growth factor 1 [IGF-1] 1.0 or >= 1.3 x ULN definitions) for patients receiving placebo was 16 weeks; for patients receiving OOCs, it was not reached for both definitions during the 36-week trial (P < .0001). Of the patients in the OOC group, 75% completed the trial on oral therapy. The OOC safety profile was consistent with previous SRL experience.Conclusions: OOCs may be an effective therapy for patients with acromegaly who previously were treated with injectable SRLs.Diabetes mellitus: pathophysiological changes and therap