Boero L.1, Mallea Gil M S.2, Manavela M.1, Stalldecker G.3, Danilowicz K.1, Guitelman M.4, Alfieri A.5, Ballarino M.C.2, Chervin A.6, García Basavilbaso N.4, Glerean M.6, Loto M.G.7, Nahmías J.A.8, Rogozinski A.S.9, Servidio M.10, Vitale N.M.6, Katz D.11, Fainstein Day P.6
Introducción: La determinación de IGF-I en suero o plasma es una herramienta esencial en el diagnóstico y seguimiento de la acromegalia. Sin embargo, se deben tener presentes algunos inconvenientes en su medición por diferentes inmunoensayos. Objetivos: Evaluar dos inmunoensayos para la determinación de IGF-I y su correlación con el nadir de GH en el TTOG en pacientes acromegalicos. Materiales y métodos: Se analizaron 37 pacientes acromegálicos, 20 mujeres y 17 hombres. IGF-I fue determinada por Immulite 1000, (IMM) y por IRMA (DSL). Se realizó el TTOG y se determinó glucosa y GH en todos los tiempos (basal, 30, 60, 90 y 120min). Se consideró respuesta normal un nadir de GH <1ng/ml. Nueve pacientes se encontraban bajo tratamiento y 28 sin tratamiento. Análisis estadístico: se utilizaron el test de Wilcoxon, de Bland y Altman y curvas ROC. Se consideró significativa una p<0,05. Resultados: Las concentraciones basales de glucosa fueron 97,86±10,91 mg/dl, de GH 2,8 (1,59-14,4) ng/ml, de IGF-I por IMM 602±318 ng/ml y por DSL 1006±596 ng/ml. IGF-I por IMM y DSL mostró una diferencia significativa con p <0,01 y un bias de – 403,2 ng/ml con valores menores por IMM. IGF-I elevada por IMM y DSL, se encontró en el 84% y en el 97% respectivamente. IGF-I elevada con nadir de GH >1ng/ml se encontró en el 70%, con nadir de GH normal en el 13,5%. IGF-I normal con nadir >1ng/ml en el 2,7% y con nadir de GH normal en el 13,5%. El área bajo las curvas ROC no mostró diferencias significativas. Conclusiones: Los niveles de IGF-I determinados por IMM y DSL fueron significativamente diferentes mostrando un bias negativo para IMM. La mayoría de los valores del nadir de GH fueron consistentes con los niveles de IGF-I observándose una discrepancia en el 30% de los pacientes, estuvieran o no bajo tratamiento
Introduction: IGF-I determination in serum or plasma is an essential tool in the diagnosis and follow-up of acromegaly. Hepatic production of IGF-I is regulated by GH and circulates bound to several IGF-I binding proteins which extends its half life. IGF-I is not released in a pulsatile pattern and has no significant variability in 24 h. Objective: To evaluate two different methodologies in IGF-I levels determination and their correlation with GH nadir in OGTT in acromegalic patients. Material and methods: We analyzed 37 acromegalic patients, 20 women and 17 men, mean age was 45±12 years. IGF-I levels were assayed by Immulite 1000, DPC (IMM) and DSL-5600 ACTIVE® IGF-I Coated-Tube IRMA (DSL) and OGTTs (at baseline and at 30, 60, 90 and 120 minutes) were performed by measuring plasma glucose and GH assay by immunochemiluminometric assay (Access); we considered a nadir <1ng/ml as normal response. Nine patients were under medical treatment (cabergoline: 4, octeotride: 4, and cabergoline plus octeotrite: 1) and 28 without treatment. Statistical analysis: Wilcoxon and, Bland and Altman tests and ROC curves. Differences were considered significant at p< 0.05. Results: Basal glucose levels were 97.86±10.91 mg/dl and mean GH was 2.8 (1.59-14.4) ng/ml. Mean IGF-I levels performed by IMM were 602±318 ng/ml and 1006±596 ng/ml by DSL. There was a statistically significant difference between both methodologies (p<0.01). Bland and Altman test showed a bias of – 403.2 ng/ml with lower values by IMM. We observed elevated IGF-I levels in 84% by IMM and in 97% by DSL, and only one patient had normal levels with both methodologies. Elevated IGF-I levels and GH nadir >1ng/ml were observed in 70% of the patients, increased IGF-I with normal GH nadir in 13.5%, normal IGF-I with GH nadir >1ng/ml in 2.7% and normal IGF-I with normal GH nadir in 13.5%. Patients under treatment: 3 showed normal GH nadir with elevated IGF-I levels, in 2 of them by both methodologies, and in the other one it was normal by IMM and elevated by DSL; the other 6 showed GH nadir > 1ng/ml, 5 of them presented elevated IGF-I by both methodologies and the other one showed discrepancy in IGF-I levels. The under ROC curve area and confidence interval (CI) of 95% for IGF-I IMM and DSL were 0.96 (0.90-1.00) and 0.91 (0.82-1.00) respectively. Differences between the ROC curves areas were not significant Conclusions: IGF-I levels determined by IMM and DSL were statistically significantly different. IGF-I levels showed a negative bias by IMM. Most of the results of GH nadir were consistent with IGF-I levels but we observed discrepancy in 30% of the patients, regardless of whether they were under treatment or not.