GH receptor polymorphisms guide second-line therapies to prevent acromegaly skeletal fragility: preliminary results of a pilot study.

Background: Skeletal fragility is characterized by increased frequency of vertebral fractures (VFs) in acromegaly. Several trials were conducted to identify modifiable risk factors and predictors of VFs, with limited data on the prognostic role of GH receptor (GHR) isoforms. In this study, we investigated the potential role of GHR polymorphism on the occurrence of incidental VFs (i-VFs), in patients treated with second-line medical therapies. Methods: A longitudinal, retrospective, observational study was conducted on a cohort of 45 acromegalic patients not-responsive to first-generation somatostatin receptor ligands (fg-SRLs) and treated with GHR antagonist (Pegvisomant) or with the second-generation SRLs (Pasireotide long-acting release). Results: Second line treatments were Pegvisomant plus fg-SRLs in 26 patients and Pasireotide LAR in 19 patients. From the group treated with fg-SRLs+Peg-V, the fl-GHR isoform was identified in 18 patients (69.2%) and the d3-GHR isoform in 8 patients (30.8%). I-VFs arose exclusively in fl-GHR isoform carriers (p=0.039). From the group treated with Pasireotide LAR, the fl-GHR isoform was identified in 11 patients (57.9%), and the d3-GHR isoform in 8 patients (42.1%). I-VFs arose exclusively in d3-GHR isoform carriers (p=0.018). Patients with fl-GHR isoform had a higher risk for i-VFs if treated with fg-SRL+Peg-V (OR: 1.6 95%IC: 1.1-2.3, p=0.04), and a lower risk if treated with Pasi-LAR (OR: 0.26 IC95%: 0.11-0.66, p=0.038). Conclusions: Our data support a predictive role of the GHR isoforms for the occurrence of i-VFs in acromegalic patients treated with second-line drugs, tailored to the individual patient. The knowledge of the GHR polymorphism may facilitate the choice of second-line therapies, improving the therapeutic approach, in the context of personalized medicine.

A Review on Coexisting Giants: The Interplay Between Acromegaly and Diabetes Mellitus.

Acromegaly is a rare disease caused mainly by pituitary adenoma, which results in elevated growth hormone (GH) levels and its primary mediator, insulin-like growth factor (IGF-1). The condition causes various complications, including cardiovascular, respiratory, neuropsychiatric, metabolic, and gastrointestinal complications, which affect the patient's quality of life. Metabolically, there has been an increased incidence of acromegaly-associated diabetes mellitus (DM), IGF-1 being the primary mediator, affecting the patient's overall morbidity/mortality and associated surge in cardiovascular events. In the current state of medicine, both nonpharmacologic and pharmacologic approaches in managing acromegaly-associated DM are validated, having their own individualistic positive or negative impact on glucose metabolism. This review article has compiled studies to demonstrate a link between acromegaly. It summarises the existing data on acromegaly associated with DM, explicitly understanding the effect of various medical treatments on glucose homeostasis.

Medical treatment of acromegaly - When the tumor size matters: A narrative review.

Medical treatment of acromegaly is generally positioned as a second line of treatment after pituitary adenoma surgery. With the rising availability and variety of medications for acromegaly increases our understanding of their effectiveness and safety. Volume of the published data on the impact of medical therapy on biochemical control of acromegaly, contrasts a relative lack of publications which comprehensively address pituitary tumor alterations under different drug modalities. Assessment of changes in GH-secreting adenoma volume is often overshadowed by clinicians' focus on GH and IGF-I levels during acromegaly treatment. Close analysis of studies published in the last two decades, reveals that both an increase and decrease in somatotropinoma volume are possible during treatment with any of available drugs for acromegaly. Changes in pituitary tumor size may arise from the biological nature of adenoma itself, independently of the administered medications. Therefore, an individual approach is necessary in the treatment of patients with acromegaly, based on repeated insight to their clinical, biochemical, pathological and imaging characteristics. In this review, we summarize and comment how pituitary tumor size is affected by the treatment with all currently available drugs in acromegaly: long-acting somatostatin receptor ligands of the first generation (octreotide LAR and lanreotide autogel) and the second generation (pasireotide-LAR), as well as pegvisomant (PEG) and cabergoline (CAB).

Growth Hormone Upregulates Melanoma Drug Resistance and Migration via Melanoma-Derived Exosomes.

Drug resistance in melanoma is a major hindrance in cancer therapy. Growth hormone (GH) plays a pivotal role in contributing to the resistance to chemotherapy. Knocking down or blocking the GH receptor has been shown to sensitize the tumor cells to chemotherapy. Extensive studies have demonstrated that exosomes, a subset of extracellular vesicles, play an important role in drug resistance by transferring key factors to sensitize cancer cells to chemotherapy. In this study, we explore how GH modulates exosomal cargoes from melanoma cells and their role in drug resistance. We treated the melanoma cells with GH, doxorubicin, and the GHR antagonist, pegvisomant, and analyzed the exosomes released. Additionally, we administered these exosomes to the recipient cells. The GH-treated melanoma cells released exosomes with elevated levels of ABC transporters (ABCC1 and ABCB1), N-cadherin, and MMP2, enhancing drug resistance and migration in the recipient cells. GHR antagonism reduced these exosomal levels, restoring drug sensitivity and attenuating migration. Overall, our findings highlight a novel role of GH in modulating exosomal cargoes that drive chemoresistance and metastasis in melanoma. This understanding provides insights into the mechanisms of GH in melanoma chemoresistance and suggests GHR antagonism as a potential therapy to overcome chemoresistance in melanoma treatment.

Growth hormone receptor antagonist pegvisomant and its role in the medical therapy of growth hormone excess.

Pegvisomant is a growth-hormone (GH) receptor antagonist that prevents the formation of the active heterotrimer of the dimerised GH receptor and the GH molecule necessary for downstream signal transduction. Over the past 20 years, it has become a key therapeutic option for physicians treating syndromes of GH/IGF-1 excess. Sufficient longitudinal follow-up data suggest that it can be deemed both safe and effective. It is the drug with the greatest potential for achieving an amelioration of the biochemical effects of GH excess with a corresponding normalisation of IGF-1 levels; however, insufficient dose titration has lessened real-world therapeutic outcomes. Theoretical concerns about stimulating tumour growth have been resolved as this has not been observed, while derangement of liver enzymes and local skin-related adverse reactions may occur in a minority of the patients. It may be a particularly impactful medication for the treatment of children, young people, and those with inherited disorders of GH excess, where other treatment modalities often fail. Combination therapy of pegvisomant with first- and second-generation somatostatin receptor ligands or with dopamine agonists remains an ongoing area of interest and research. High cost remains a barrier to the use of pegvisomant in many settings.

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.

Bone health and skeletal fragility in second- and third-line medical therapies for acromegaly: preliminary results from a pilot single center experience.

INTRODUCTION: Skeletal fragility is a clinically relevant and not-reversible complication of acromegaly, involving around 30-40% of patients since the disease diagnosis. Few studies have investigated the effects on skeletal health of medical therapies for acromegaly. In this retrospective longitudinal monocentre study, we investigated the outcome of skeletal fragility in patients treated with Pasireotide Lar in combination with Pegvisomant (Pasi-Lar + Peg-V), also comparing those observed in patients treated with conventional therapies. RESULTS: We included 6 patients treated with Pasi-Lar + Peg-V, 5 patients treated with Peg-V in monotherapy (m-Peg-V), 16 patients treated with Peg-V plus first-generation somatostatin receptor ligands (fg-SRLs + Peg-V), 9 patients treated with Pasi-Lar. None of the patients treated with Pasi-Lar + Peg-V experienced worsening of spine and femoral bone mineral density (BMD) and incident vertebral fractures (i-VFs). Eight patients experienced i-VFs. The frequency of i-VFs was significantly lower in patients treated with the Pasi-Lar + Peg-V (0/8; 0%), as compared to those observed in m-Peg-V treated patients (4/8; 50%, p = 0.02). The frequency of i-VFs was slightly but not significantly higher in Pasi-Lar treated patients (1/8; 12.5% p = 0.6) and in fg-SRLs + Peg-V treated patients (3/8; 37.5% p = 0.364), concerning those treated with Pasi-Lar + Peg-V (0/8; 0%). I-VFs occurred more frequently in patients with higher GH levels at acromegaly diagnosis (p < 0.001), and in patients who experienced a BMD worsening (p = 0.005). CONCLUSION: Our preliminary data suggested that in conventional and multi-drug resistant acromegaly, the combination therapy Pasi-Lar + Peg-V may prevent the worsening of BMD and the occurrence of i-VFs. Prospective and translational studies should further validate these results and ascertain underlying physiopathology mechanisms.

Insights from an Italian Delphi panel: exploring resistance to first-generation somatostatin receptor ligands and guiding second-line medical therapies in acromegaly management.

PURPOSE: First-line medical therapy for acromegaly management includes first-generation somatostatin receptor ligands (fgSRLs), but resistance limits their use. Despite international guidelines, the choice of second-line therapy is debated. METHODS: We aim to discuss resistance to fgSRLs, identify second-line therapy determinants and assess glycemia's impact to provide valuable insights for acromegaly management in clinical practice. A group of Italian endocrinologists expert in the pituitary field participated in a two-round Delphi panel between July and September 2023. The Delphi questionnaire encompassed a total of 75 statements categorized into three sections: resistance to fgSRLs therapy and predictors of response; determinants for the selection of second-line therapy; the role of glycemia in the therapeutic management. The statements were rated on a 6-point Likert scale. RESULTS: Fifty-nine (79%) statements reached a consensus. IGF-1 levels resulted central for evaluating resistance to fgSRLs, that should be defined considering also symptomatic clinical response, degree of tumor shrinkage and complications, using clinician- and patient-reported outcome tools available. Factors to be evaluated for the choice of second-line medical therapy are hyperglycemia-that should be managed as in non-acromegalic patients-tumor remnant, resistant headache and compliance. Costs do not represent a main determinant in the choice of second-line medical treatment. CONCLUSION: The experts agreed on a holistic management approach to acromegaly. It is therefore necessary to choose currently available highly effective second-line medical treatment (pegvisomant and pasireotide) based on the characteristics of the patients.

Pegvisomant and pasireotide in PRL and GH co-secreting vs GH-secreting Pit-NETs.

The objective of the study was to evaluate the efficacy of second-line therapies in patients with acromegaly caused by a growth hormone (GH) and prolactin (PRL) co-secreting pituitary neuroendocrine tumor (GH&PRL-Pit-NET) compared to their efficacy in patients with acromegaly caused by a GH-secreting pituitary neuroendocrine tumor (GH-Pit-NET). This is a multicenter retrospective study of patients with acromegaly on treatment with pasireotide and/or pegvisomant. Patients were classified in two groups: GH&PRL-Pit-NETs when evidence of hyperprolactinemia and immunohistochemistry (IHC) for GH and PRL was positive or if PRL were >200 ng/dL regardless of the PRL-IHC and GH-Pit-NETs when the previously mentioned criteria were not met. A total of 28 cases with GH&PRL-Pit-NETs and 122 with GH-Pit-NETs met the inclusion criteria. GH&PRL-Pit-NETs presented at a younger age, caused hypopituitarism, and were invasive more frequently than GH-Pit-NETs. There were 124 patients treated with pegvisomant and 49 with pasireotide at any time. The efficacy of pegvisomant for IGF-1 normalization was of 81.5% and of pasireotide of 71.4%. No differences in IGF-1 control with pasireotide and with pegvisomant were observed between GH&PRL-Pit-NETs and GH-Pit-NETs. All GH&PRL-Pit-NET cases treated with pasireotide (n = 6) and 82.6% (n = 19/23) of the cases treated with pegvisomant normalized PRL levels. No differences in the rate of IGF-1 control between pegvisomant and pasireotide were detected in patients with GH&PRL-Pit-NETs (84.9% vs 66.7%, P = 0.178). We conclude that despite the more aggressive behavior of GH&PRL-Pit-NETs than GH-Pit-NETs, no differences in the rate of IGF-1 control with pegvisomant and pasireotide were observed between both groups, and both drugs have shown to be effective treatments to control IGF-1 and PRL hypersecretion in these tumors.

Changes in multi-modality management of acromegaly in a tertiary centre over 2 decades.

PURPOSE: Acromegaly is a rare disease associated with chronic multisystem complications. New therapeutic strategies have emerged in the last decades, combining pituitary transsphenoidal surgery (TSS), radiotherapy or radiosurgery (RXT) and medical treatments. METHODS: This retrospective monocentric study focused on presentation, management and outcome of acromegaly patients diagnosed between 2000 and 2020, still followed up in 2020, with a minimum follow-up of 1 year, and comparison of the first vs. second decade of the study. RESULTS: 275 patients were included, 50 diagnosed before 2010 and 225 after 2010. 95% of them had normal IGF-1 levels (with or without treatment) at the last follow-up. Transsphenoidal surgery was more successful after 2010 (75% vs. 54%; p < 0.01), while tumor characteristics remained the same over time. The time from first treatment to biochemical control was shorter after 2010 than before (8 vs. 16 months; p = 0.03). Since 2010, RT was used less frequently (10% vs. 32%; p < 0.01) but more rapidly after surgery (26 vs. 53 months; p = 0.03). In patients requiring anti-secretory drugs after TSS, the time from first therapy to biochemical control was shorter after 2010 (16 vs. 29 months; p < 0.01). Tumor size, tumor invasiveness, baseline IGF-1 levels and Trouillas classification were identified as predictors of remission. CONCLUSION: The vast majority of patients with acromegaly now have successful disease control with a multimodal approach. They reached biochemical control sooner in the most recent half of the study period. Future work should focus on those patients who are still uncontrolled and on the sequelae of the disease.

Factors associated with disease control failure in acromegaly patients treated with pegvisomant: an ACROSTUDY analysis.

Purpose: The aim of this study was to examine the probability of achieving acromegaly disease control according to several patient-, disease- and treatment-related factors longitudinally. Methods: We analyzed data from ACROSTUDY, an open-label, noninterventional, post-marketing safety surveillance study conducted in 15 countries. A total of 1546 patients with acromegaly and treated with pegvisomant, with available information on baseline IGF-1 level, were included. Factors influencing IGF-1 control were assessed up to 10 years of follow-up by mixed-effects logistic regression models, taking into account changing values of covariates at baseline and at yearly visits. Twenty-eight anthropometric, clinical and treatment-related covariates were examined through univariate and multivariate analyses. We tested whether the probability of non-control was different than 0.50 (50%) by computing effect sizes (ES) and the corresponding 95% CI. Results: Univariate analysis showed that age <40 years, normal or overweight, baseline IGF-1 <300 µg/L or ranged between 300 and 500 µg/L, and all pegvisomant dose <20 mg/day were associated with a lower probability of acromegaly uncontrol. Consistently, in multivariate analyses, the probability of uncontrolled acromegaly was influenced by baseline IGF-1 value: patients with IGF-1 <300 µg/L had the lowest risk of un-controlled acromegaly (ES = 0.29, 95% CI: 0.23-0.36). The probability of acromegaly uncontrol was also lower for values 300-500 µg/L (ES = 0.37, 95% CI: 0.32-0.43), while it was higher for baseline IGF-1 values ≥700 µg/L (ES = 0.58, 95% CI: 0.53-0.64). Conclusion: Baseline IGF-l levels were a good predictor factor for long-term acromegaly control. On the contrary, our data did not support a role of age, sex, BMI and pegvisomant dose as predictors of long-term control of acromegaly. Significance statement: Among factors that could influence and predict the efficacy of pegvisomant therapy in controlling acromegaly, a central role of baseline IGF-1 values on the probability of achieving a biochemical control of acromegaly during the treatment with pegvisomant was identified, in a real-life setting.

Pasireotide effects on biochemical control and glycometabolic profile in acromegaly patients switched from combination therapies or unconventional dosages of somatostatin analogs.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the impact of pasireotide (PAS) therapy on hormonal and glycometabolic outcome in patients with acromegaly previously treated with combination medical therapies or unconventional dosages of first-generation somatostatin receptor ligands (fg-SRLs). METHODS: Retrospective study carried out in two referral centers for pituitary diseases. Twenty-one acromegalic patients were switched to PAS (12 had biochemical control, 9 were uncontrolled). Data were collected after 3- and 6-months PAS treatment, and at the last available visit (median 35 months). RESULTS: After switching to PAS therapy, a significant reduction in IGF-1 values was observed [median 39%; 0.79 xULN (IQR 0.5-1.01) vs 1.29 xULN (IQR 1.06-1.83); p = 0.009]. IGF-1 reduction was statistically significant in the 9 patients previously uncontrolled (61%, p = 0.016), and in the 12 controlled subjects (33%, p = 0.037). At last follow-up, the number of patients reaching an acceptable biochemical control (IGF-1 < 1.3 xULN) raised from 57 to 90% (p = 0.032). Mean HbA1c levels increased from 5.7% (5.5-5.9) to 6.0% (5.9-7) (p = 0.002), and the percentage of diabetic patients raised from 14% (3/21) to 67% (14/21) (p = 0.004). At the last evaluation HbA1c was ≥ 7.0% in 5 patients (24%). Antidiabetic drugs were initiated in 9 new patients, and in 7 out of 9 metformin alone was effective. Younger age and male sex were predictors for the maintenance of glucose homeostasis. CONCLUSION: PAS monotherapy can be effective in acromegalic patients previously treated with combination medical therapies or unconventional dosages of fg-SRLs. Glucose imbalance can be managed in the vast majority of cases by use of lifestyle interventions and metformin.

The direct impact of pegvisomant on osteoblast functions and bone development.

PURPOSE: Acromegaly is a chronic disease characterized by growth hormone (GH) hypersecretion, usually caused by a pituitary adenoma, resulting in elevated circulating levels of insulin-like growth factor type I (IGF-I). Pegvisomant (PEG), the GH-receptor (GHR) antagonist, is used in treating acromegaly to normalize IGF-I hypersecretion. Exposure to increased levels of GH and IGF-I can cause profound alterations in bone structure that are not completely reverted by treatment of GH hypersecretion. Indeed, there is evidence that drugs used for the treatment of acromegaly might induce direct effects on skeletal health regardless of biochemical control of acromegaly. METHODS: We investigated, for the first time, the effect of PEG on cell proliferation, differentiation, and mineralization in the osteoblast cell lines MC3T3-E1 and hFOB 1.19 and its potential impact on bone development in zebrafish larvae. RESULTS: We observed that PEG did not affect osteoblast proliferation, apoptosis, alkaline phosphatase (ALP) activity, and mineralization. After PEG treatment, the analysis of genes related to osteoblast differentiation showed no difference in Alp, Runx2, or Opg mRNA levels in MC3T3-E1 cells. GH significantly decreased cell apoptosis (- 30 ± 11%, p < 0.001) and increased STAT3 phosphorylation; these effects were suppressed by the addition of PEG in MC3T3-E1 cells. GH and PEG did not affect Igf-I, Igfbp2, and Igfbp4 mRNA levels in MC3T3-E1 cells. Finally, PEG did not affect bone development in zebrafish larvae at 5 days post-fertilization. CONCLUSION: This study provides a first evidence of the impact of PEG on osteoblast functions both in vitro and in vivo. These findings may have clinically relevant implications for the management of skeletal health in subjects with acromegaly.

Atypical Course of a Patient With AIP-Positive Acromegaly: From GH Excess to GH Deficiency and Back to GH Excess.

Acromegaly/giantism results from the chronic excess of growth hormone (GH) and insulin-like growth factor-1 (IGF-1), in more than 96% of cases, due to a GH-secreting pituitary adenoma. Primary treatment of choice is transsphenoidal resection of the adenoma. More than 30% to 40% of operated cases require adjunctive forms of treatment, be it pharmacological or radiotherapeutical. The multimodal treatment of acromegaly has resulted in substantial improvements in the quality of life and life expectancy of these patients. We herein present the complex case of a patient with acromegaly due to a mammosomatotrope adenoma, with a germ-line AIP (aryl hydrocarbon receptor-interacting protein) mutation, who had a chronic and protracted course of more than 15 years during which he was treated with surgery, somatostatin receptor ligands, dopamine agonist, and the GH receptor antagonist pegvisomant. At one point, he was able to come off medications and was even found to be transiently GH-deficient, only to develop acromegaly again after a couple of years.

Effective Long-term Pediatric Pegvisomant Monotherapy to Final Height in X-linked Acrogigantism.

X-linked acrogigantism (X-LAG) is characterized by extreme tall stature from early childhood resulting from duplication of the GPR101 gene, in turn resulting in GH excess. Most cases present with pituitary tumors secreting GH and prolactin. Diffuse pituitary hyperplasia is uncommon and normal prolactin is rare. We present a girl with tall stature from 3 years of age; her height was +4.25 SD score at 5 years, with no signs of syndromic disease. She had significant GH excess, serum IGF-1 4 times the upper limit of normal and normal circulating GHRH, with normal pituitary magnetic resonance imaging over 13 years. No abnormalities were found in either the AIP or MEN1 genes. Treatment with somatostatin analogues and dopamine agonists showed minimal therapeutic benefit, but significant side effects. She tested positive for duplication of GPR101 6 years after the initial diagnosis. She was then initiated on pegvisomant aged 12 years, achieving prompt IGF-1 normalization and growth cessation. Aged 16.5 years, she showed escape from IGF-1 control, and height velocity increased, but this responded well to a dose increase in pegvisomant, with reassuring long-term pediatric safety over 7 years. Her final height is +2.9 SD score. Currently, life-long pegvisomant treatment is planned with genetic counselling regarding future offspring.

Position statement on the diagnosis and management of acromegaly: The French National Diagnosis and Treatment Protocol (NDTP).

Acromegaly is a rare disease with prevalence of approximately 60 cases per million, slight female predominance and peak onset in adults in the fourth decade. Clinical diagnosis is often delayed by several years due to the slowly progressive onset of symptoms. There are multiple clinical criteria that define acromegaly: dysmorphic syndrome of insidious onset, symptoms related to the pituitary tumor (headaches, visual disorders), general signs (sweating, carpal tunnel syndrome, joint pain, etc.), complications of the disease (musculoskeletal, cardiovascular, pneumological, dental, metabolic comorbidities, thyroid nodules, colonic polyps, etc.) or sometimes clinical signs of associated prolactin hypersecretion (erectile dysfunction in men or cycle disorder in women) or concomitant mass-induced hypopituitarism (fatigue and other symptoms related to pituitary hormone deficiencies). Biological confirmation is based initially on elevated IGF-I and lack of GH suppression on oral glucose tolerance test or an elevated mean GH on repeated measurements. In confirmed cases, imaging by pituitary MRI identifies the causal tumor, to best determine management. In a minority of cases, acromegaly can be linked to a genetic predisposition, especially when it occurs at a young age or in a familial context. The first-line treatment is most often surgical removal of the somatotroph pituitary tumor, either immediately or after transient medical treatment. Medical treatments are most often proposed in patients not controlled by surgical removal. Conformal or stereotactic radiotherapy may be discussed on a case-by-case basis, especially in case of drug inefficacy or poor tolerance. Acromegaly should be managed by a multidisciplinary team, preferably within an expert center such as a reference or skill center for rare pituitary diseases.

Refractory somatotroph adenomas.

Somatotroph adenomas are usually controlled with standard therapy, which can include surgery, medical treatment and radiotherapy. Some tumors have a more aggressive behavior and are refractory to standard therapy. In this review, we summarize the phenotype of these tumors and the current options for their management.

Targeting growth hormone in cancer: future perspectives.

Decades of published research support a role for growth hormone (GH) in cancer. Accordingly, there is increasing interest in targeting GH in oncology, with GH antagonists exhibiting efficacy in xenograft studies as single agents and in combination with anticancer therapy or radiation. Here we discuss challenges associated with using growth hormone receptor (GHR) antagonists in preclinical models and considerations for translation, such as the identification of predictive biomarkers for selecting patients and for monitoring drug efficacy. Ongoing research will determine whether suppressing GH signalling pharmacologically will also reduce the risk of developing cancer. An increase in GH-targeted drugs in preclinical development will ultimately provide new tools to test anticancer efficacy of blocking the GH signalling pathway.

Control of acromegaly in more than 90% of patients after 10 years of pegvisomant therapy: an European referral centre real-life experience.

PURPOSE: Pegvisomant (PEG) efficaciously controls IGF-I excess in acromegaly and possesses a positive impact on glucose metabolism. Data on very prolonged PEG treatment are still limited, therefore, we investigated the effects of 10-years PEG on disease control, maximal tumour diameter (MTD), and metabolic profile in consecutive patients resistant to somatostatin analogues (SRLs) followed in an European referral centre for acromegaly. METHODS: Since the 2000s, we collected data on anthropometric, hormonal and metabolic parameters, and MTD of patients receiving PEG. In the current study, we included 45 patients (19 men, 26 women, 46.8 ± 11 years) treated for at least 5 years with PEG mono or combined therapy, analyzing data before, after 5- and 10-years PEG. RESULTS: After10 years, 91% of patients showed full disease control and in 37% a significant decrease in MTD was found. Diabetes prevalence was slightly increased, whereas HbA1c remained stable over the decade. Transaminases remained stable and no case of cutaneous lipohypertrophy was recorded. A different metabolic impact between mono- or combined therapy was found. Patients in monotherapy showed significantly lower fasting glucose (p = 0.01), fasting insulin (p = 0.008), HbA1c (p = 0.007), HOMA-IR (p = 0.001), and significantly higher ISI0 (p = 0.002), whereas patients under combined therapy showed significantly lower total (p = 0.03), and LDL cholesterol (p = 0.007). Acromegaly duration before PEG was inversely related to ΔFG (r = - 0.46, p = 0.03) and ΔFI (r = - 0.54, p = 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: PEG is effective and safe in long term. In patients resistant to SRLs, early beginning of PEG allows a wider gluco-insulinemic improvement.

Modern approach to resistant acromegaly.

BACKGROUND: Targets of acromegaly treatment are normalization of biochemical values, removal/reduction/stabilization of the pituitary mass, control of clinical activity and mortality with a multimodal/multidisciplinary approach. Despite significant technological and pharmacological progress, still several patients with acromegaly bear a resistant somatotroph adenoma and active disease may persist for many years with resultant poor clinical outcomes. AIM: To review briefly definition and pathophysiology of resistance to acromegaly treatment and the options of medical treatment in this context, exploring the role of novel clinical and molecular biomarkers in the personalization of therapy and proposing updates to the currently available guidelines for the treatment of resistant GH-secreting adenomas. CONCLUSIONS: In the last few years, in parallel with the increased number of medical options available for the therapy of acromegaly, relevant advances occurred in the understanding of the role of novel molecular and clinical biomarkers in predicting the responsiveness to second-line medical treatments, such as Pegvisomant and Pasireotide LAR, and helping clinicians in the personalization of the follow-up and treatment of resistant somatotroph adenomas. The integration of these findings into the existing guidelines may represent a possibly important step forward in the management of "difficult" acromegaly patients.