Thyroid dysfunction during treatment with systemic antineoplastic therapy for childhood cancer: A systematic review.

Thyroid dysfunction is known to occur following radiotherapy or chemotherapy for childhood cancer. Thyroid dysfunction during treatment for childhood cancer has, however, not been studied extensively, although thyroid hormones are of utmost importance during childhood. This information is needed to develop adequate screening protocols and may be of special importance with upcoming drugs, such as checkpoint inhibitors, which are highly associated with thyroid dysfunction in adults. In this systematic review we have evaluated the occurrence and risk factors for thyroid dysfunction in children during treatment with systemic antineoplastic drugs, up to three months after the end of therapy. Two review authors independently performed the study selection, data extraction and risk of bias assessment of included studies. After an extensive search (January 2021), in total six heterogeneous articles were included, reporting on 91 childhood cancer patients with a thyroid function test during treatment with systemic antineoplastic therapy for childhood cancer. All studies had risk of bias issues. Primary hypothyroidism was found in 18% of children treated with high dose interferon-α (HDI-α) and in 0-10% after tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs). Transient euthyroid sick syndrome (ESS) was common (in 42-100%) during treatment with systematic multi-agent chemotherapy. Only one study addressed possible risk factors, showing different types of treatment to increase the risk. However, the exact prevalence, risk factors and clinical consequences of thyroid dysfunction remain unclear. Prospective high-quality studies including large study samples are needed to longitudinally assess the prevalence, risk factors and possible consequences of thyroid dysfunction during childhood cancer treatment.

An easy, fast, and efficient assay for the quantification of peptide Hepcidin-25 in serum and plasma with LC-MS/MS.

BACKGROUND: The peptide hormone hepcidin-25 plays an important role in iron metabolism. Low or high levels of hepcidin-25 are associated with various iron disorders; therefore, hepcidin-25 is an important biomarker. This study describes an easy and fast analytical assay for the quantification of hepcidin-25 with liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS). METHODS: Sample preparation was performed by protein precipitation with trichloroacetic acid, and injection onto a LC-MS/MS was directly conducted from a LoBind 96-well plate. RESULTS: The concentration range covered by the quality control samples, ranged from 0.25 nmol/L (12.3% CV) to 11.9 nmol/L (CV < 9%). Matrix effect was limited (mean recovery of 99.9% with a CV of 6.4%). The assay was validated for serum, EDTA and heparin plasma. An international secondary reference material was used for calibration. The reference interval (90% CL) was estimated for hepcidin-25 by analysing serum and plasma samples from 156 healthy subjects with a lower limit: 0.12 (0.07-0.19) and upper limit: 11.2 nmol/L (9.5-13.0). CONCLUSIONS: We present a fast and easy assay for the quantification of hepcidin-25 in serum and plasma samples. The assay was successfully used for the detection of various forms of hereditary haemolytic anaemias, to characterize the interplay between erythropoiesis and iron levels.

Clinical interpretation of prostate-specific antigen values: Type of applied cut-off value exceeds methods bias as the major source of variation.

BACKGROUND: Prostate-specific antigen is the biochemical gold standard for the (early) detection and monitoring of prostate cancer. Interpretation of prostate-specific antigen is both dependent on the method and cut-off. The aim of this study was to examine the effect of method-specific differences and cut-off values in a national external quality assessment scheme (EQAS). METHODS: The Dutch EQAS for prostate-specific antigen comprised an annual distribution of 12 control materials. The results of two distributions were combined with the corresponding cut-off value. Differences between methods were quantified by simple linear regression based on the all laboratory trimmed mean. To assess the clinical consequence of method-specific differences and cut-off values, a clinical data-set of 1040 patients with an initial prostate-specific antigen measurement and concomitant conclusive prostate biopsy was retrospectively collected. Sensitivity and specificity for prostate cancer were calculated for all EQAS participants individually. RESULTS: In the Netherlands, seven different prostate-specific antigen methods are used. Interestingly, 67% of these laboratories apply age-specific cut-off values. Methods showed a maximal relative difference of 26%, which were not reflected in the cut-off values. The largest differences were caused by the type of cut-off, for example in the Roche group the cut-off value differed maximal 217%. Clinically, a fixed prostate-specific antigen cut-off has a higher sensitivity than an age-specific cut-off (mean 89% range 86-93% versus 79% range 63-95%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: This study shows that the differences in cut-off values exceed the method-specific differences. These results emphasize the need for (inter)national harmonization/standardization programmes including cut-off values to allow for laboratory-independent clinical decision-making.