Adult growth hormone deficiency: Optimizing transition of care from pediatric to adult services.

OBJECTIVE: Most patients with childhood-onset growth hormone deficiency (CO-GHD) receive treatment with exogenous growth hormone (GH) to facilitate the attainment of their full potential adult height. Recent evidence suggests that continuing GH administration during the transition period between the end of linear growth and full adult maturity is necessary for proper body composition and bone and muscle health, and may also have beneficial effects on metabolic parameters, bone mineral density, and quality of life. The timing of this transition period coincides with the transfer of care from a pediatric to an adult endocrinologist, creating the potential for a care gap as a consequence of losing the patient to follow-up. DESIGN: An advisory board comprising both pediatric and adult endocrinologists was assembled to address current clinical unmet needs and to collaborate on a structured transitional plan for optimal management of patients with CO-GHD. INSIGHTS/CONCLUSION: The advisors suggest collaborative, multidisciplinary approaches to ensure continuity of care; ongoing testing and monitoring of GHD status into adulthood; and a clearly structured protocol that includes practical guidance for clinicians to establish best practices for transitioning older adolescents with persistent CO-GHD to adult care.

Reducing the Burden of Diabetes Treatment: A Review of Low-cost Oral Hypoglycemic Medications.

BACKGROUND: The vast majority of individuals diagnosed with diabetes are low/middle income and may have access to only three of the 11 oral hypoglycemic medications (OHMs) due to cost: metformin intermediate release (IR) or extended release (ER), sulfonylureas (glimepiride, glipizide, glyburide), and pioglitazone. Sulfonylureas and pioglitazone have had significant controversy related to potential adverse events, but it remains unclear whether these negative outcomes are class, drug, or dose-related. OBJECTIVE: We conducted a narrative review of low-cost OHMs. METHODS: We evaluated the maximum recommended (MAX) compared to the most effective (EFF) daily dose, time-to-peak change in HbA1c levels, and adverse events of low-cost oral hypoglycemic medications. RESULTS: We found that the MAX was often greater than the EFF: metformin IR/ER (MAX: 2,550/2,000 mg, EFF: 1,500-2,000/1,500-2,000 mg), glipizide IR/ER (MAX: 40/20 mg, EFF: 20/5 mg), glyburide (MAX: 20 mg, EFF: 2.5-5.0 mg), pioglitazone (MAX: 45 mg, EFF: 45 mg). Time-to-peak change in HbA1c levels occurred at weeks 12-20 (sulfonylureas), 25-39 (metformin), and 25 (pioglitazone). Glimepiride was not associated with weight gain, hypoglycemia, or negative cardiovascular events relative to other sulfonylureas. Cardiovascular event rates did not increase with lower glyburide doses (p<0.05). Glimepiride and pioglitazone have been successfully used in renal impairment. CONCLUSION: Metformin, glimepiride, and pioglitazone are safe and efficacious OHMs. Prescribing at the EFF rather than the MAX may avoid negative dose-related outcomes. OHMs should be evaluated as individual drugs, not generalized as a class, due to different dosing and adverse-event profiles; Glimepiride is the preferred sulfonylurea since it is not associated with the adverse events as others in its class.

AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF CLINICAL ENDOCRINOLOGISTS, AMERICAN COLLEGE OF ENDOCRINOLOGY DISEASE STATE CLINICAL REVIEW: CLINICAL RELEVANCE OF MACROPROLACTIN IN THE ABSENCE OR PRESENCE OF TRUE HYPERPROLACTINEMIA.

OBJECTIVE: To review the current literature regarding the prevalence of macroprolactin (macroPRL) in hyperprolactinemic patients and determine recommendations for testing. METHODS: An electronic United States National Library of Medicine PubMed search (through October, 2014) was conducted for search term "macroprolactin." Only English-language articles were considered. RESULTS: MacroPRL is an under-recognized cause of elevated prolactin (PRL) and is present in approximately 4% to 40% of hyperprolactinemic patients depending on the referral population. Clinical findings which could be due to hyperprolactinemia are the impetus for testing for PRL. Because of this there is significant overlap in the clinical presentation of patients with true hyperprolactinemia and those with macroPRL, differentiation cannot always be made on the basis of symptoms. A lack of recognition of the presence of macroPRL can lead to unnecessary laboratory investigations, imaging, and pharmacologic or surgical treatment. CONCLUSION: Until there is a commercially available PRL assay that is not subject to interference by macroPRL, clinicians should consider the possibility of macroPRL, especially if the clinical presentation, imaging findings, and/or response to therapy reveal inconsistencies.