help button home button Endocrine Society JCEM
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS

This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a related Letter to the Editor
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Request Copyright Permission
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Powell, J. S.
Right arrow Articles by Freda, P. U.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Powell, J. S.
Right arrow Articles by Freda, P. U.
The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism Vol. 85, No. 5 2068-2071
Copyright © 2000 by The Endocrine Society


Comments

Outcome of Radiotherapy for Acromegaly Using Normalization of Insulin-Like Growth Factor I to Define Cure1

Jeffrey S. Powell, Sharon L. Wardlaw, Kalmon D. Post and Pamela U. Freda

Department of Medicine, Columbia University College of Physicians and Surgeons, New York, New York 10032; and Department of Neurosurgery, Mount Sinai Medical Center, New York, New York 10029

Address all correspondence and requests for reprints to: Dr. Pamela U. Freda, Department of Medicine, Columbia University College of Physicians and Surgeons, 630 West 168th Street, New York, New York 10032.

Abstract

Radiation therapy (RT) has traditionally been considered a useful additional therapy for patients with acromegaly not achieving biochemical remission after surgery. However, recent evidence has suggested that RT is not curative in most patients with acromegaly when normalization of the serum insulin-like growth factor I (IGF-I) level is used to define remission. Therefore, we evaluated the success of RT based on IGF-I level in the 47 patients who received RT as part of their treatment from the cohort of 161 patients with acromegaly seen by us between 1981 and 1999. Four patients in whom no post-RT IGF-I level was available were excluded from the analysis. Of the remaining 43 patients, 32 patients received external beam RT, 6 received fractionated stereotactic radiosurgery, 4 received {gamma}-knife RT, and 1 received proton beam RT. The most recent IGF-I levels in these 43 patients, obtained a mean of 5.2 yr post-RT (range, 0.8–13.2 yr), were compared to age-adjusted normal ranges.

IGF-I levels were normal in 17 patients (39.5%) without the addition of medical therapy. The percentage of patients with a normal IGF-I level generally increased with time post-RT; 27% of patients less than 6 yr post-RT, but 69.2% of patients 6 yr or more post-RT had normal IGF-I levels. Using the more traditional criterion for cure, a random GH measurement, 74% of patients had a GH level below 5 ng/mL, and 44% had a GH level below 2.5 ng/mL and would have been considered in remission based on these criteria.

We conclude that with time RT remains a useful adjunctive treatment for many patients with acromegaly. RT should be considered along with appropriate medical therapy in selected patients who do not achieve normalization of IGF-I level after surgery or for those resistant to medical therapy.

RADIATION THERAPY (RT) has been used for many years as adjuvant therapy for patients with acromegaly who have failed surgical and in some cases also medical therapy (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10). This clinical practice has been supported by data from many studies documenting the lowering of GH levels with time after conventional external beam RT; more than 75% of patients with acromegaly achieve a GH level below 5 ng/mL by 15 yr after RT (10). However, the validity of studies assessing the outcome of RT for acromegaly based on GH levels alone can be questioned. Random GH levels are not adequately representative of disease activity in acromegaly. It has also become clear that excess mortality persists at the GH levels once considered representative of cure (11). In addition, the use of sensitive GH assays in conjunction with measurement of insulin-like growth factor I (IGF-I) levels has shown that some patients had been misclassified as cured by older GH criteria and has provided evidence that our criteria for cure still need refinement (12, 13, 14, 15).

By contrast, the IGF-I level, as an integrated measure of 24-h GH secretion, is now considered to be most representative of overall disease activity in patients with acromegaly and should normalize for cure to be established (13, 16, 17, 18). Some data also suggest that normalization of IGF-I levels will be associated with a return of the excess mortality of patients with acromegaly to that of the general population (19). Thus, mounting evidence for the importance of achieving normalization of the IGF-I level and its widespread clinical use have called for a reassessment of outcome of RT based on this biochemical parameter. A recent study, however, has suggested that RT does not normalize IGF-I levels in most patients with acromegaly (20) and has raised questions about the role of RT in the treatment of acromegaly. To further investigate these findings, we examined the outcome of RT in our cohort. We report here a retrospective analysis in 43 patients who underwent RT as part of their treatment for acromegaly, using normalization of IGF-I as the primary determinant of cure.

Subjects and Methods

Subjects

Between 1981 and 1999, 161 patients were seen by at least 1 of the authors for treatment of acromegaly. All patients had preoperative biochemical documentation of acromegaly, with an elevated IGF-I level and/or a GH level above 5.0 ng/mL, and all patients had pathological confirmation of a GH-secreting pituitary adenoma at surgery.

Forty-seven patients in our cohort underwent RT as part of their treatment in most cases because of persistent disease after surgery. Post-RT IGF-I levels could not be obtained for four patients, and these patients were excluded from further analysis. Thus, 43 patients were included in the final analysis, 23 women and 20 men. The mean age at completion of RT was 41 yr (range, 21–76 yr). The mean follow-up period from completion of RT to most recent IGF-I value was 5.2 yr (range, 0.8–13.2 yr).

Endocrine testing

IGF-I levels post-RT were obtained by us or from each patient’s primary physician; the most recent IGF-I values available were used to determine the outcome of RT. Seven patients were taking octreotide at the time of testing and had normal IGF-I levels; these patients were considered to not be in remission in analysis of the data. Pre-RT IGF-I values were available for 26 patients who were not receiving medical therapy. In these 26 subjects, IGF-I values were also expressed as a percentage of the upper limit of the age-adjusted normal range for each laboratory, and pre- and post-RT values were compared by paired t test.

Basal GH levels were available for 40 patients who had simultaneous GH and IGF-I levels measured. GH data were analyzed in the 34 of these 40 patients who were not receiving medical therapy at the time of testing. In addition, 15 patients underwent a fasting 100-g oral glucose tolerance test to determine GH levels.

Hormone assays

IGF-I. IGF-I levels were measured in 30 of the 43 patients (70%) by acid-ethanol-extracted RIA (Nichols Institute Diagnostics, San Juan Capistrano, CA). In 13 patients IGF-I levels were assessed by a variety of other laboratories. Each laboratory’s reported age-adjusted and gender-adjusted normal ranges of IGF-I levels were used in interpreting the results.

GH. Basal GH levels were measured by polyclonal RIA in a variety of laboratories in 40 patients. In 15 patients who underwent an oral glucose tolerance test, GH was also measured by a highly sensitive immunoradiometric assay (IRMA) with a sensitivity of 0.05 ng/mL (Diagnostics Systems Laboratories, Inc., Webster, TX).

Radiation therapy

Forty-one of the 43 patients included in the final analysis underwent pituitary RT after surgery, 1 patient had surgery 6 months after RT, and another had a first surgery 3 months before RT and a second surgery 3 yr after RT.

Thirty-two patients received conventional external beam irradiation. The mean dose delivered was 47.4 Gy (range, 45–54 Gy); the mean number of fractions given was 26 (range, 25–30), and the mean dose per fraction was 1.8 Gy (range, 1.7–2.0 Gy). Six patients received stereotactic radiotherapy using a linear accelerator; 5 of the 6 patients received 5 fractionated weekly doses of 6.0 Gy for a total dose of 30.0 Gy, and the other patient received 1 dose of 18.0 Gy. Thus, the mean dose for these 6 patients was 28 Gy (range, 18–30 Gy). Four patients received their radiation therapy via a {gamma}-knife; the mean dose administered was 48 Gy (range, 44–53 Gy). One patient underwent proton beam RT. The RT was performed at a variety of medical centers.

Results

Of the 43 patients, 17 (39.5%) patients not receiving medical therapy at the time of testing had a normal serum IGF-I level at the most recent follow-up. The percentage of patients in remission generally increased with time from RT (Fig. 1Go). For example, 9 of the 13 patients (69.2%) seen at least 6 yr after RT had a normal IGF-I level off medical therapy. In 26 patients in whom pre-RT IGF-I values were also available, IGF-I levels declined from a mean before RT of 268 ± 32% (range, 116–718%) of the upper limit of normal to 122 ± 12% (range, 38–316%) of the upper limit of normal after RT (P < 0.001; Fig. 2Go).



View larger version (19K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Figure 1. Percentage of patients who were not receiving medical therapy with a normal IGF-I level according to years after RT. n, The total number of patients who had IGF-I measured in that time interval after RT.

 


View larger version (26K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Figure 2. IGF-I levels expressed as a percentage of the upper age-adjusted normal limit in each of 26 patients before the start of RT and at their most recent follow-up.

 
Remission rates after different forms of RT in our series did differ, but the number of patients in each group and the number of follow-up periods varied greatly. Normalization of IGF-I was achieved in 14 of 32 (43.7%) patients after external beam RT (mean follow-up, 5.6 yr), in 3 of 6 (50%) poststereotactic radiosurgery (mean follow-up, 2.9 yr), in 0 of 4 after {gamma}-knife RT (mean follow-up, 1.2 yr), and in 0 of 1 patient evaluated 3.6 yr after proton beam RT.

Cure rates based on GH criteria were higher than by IGF-I criteria. In our series, 74% (25 of 34) of patients would have been considered in remission based on a random GH measurement below 5 ng/mL by RIA, whereas 44% (15 of 34) of patients had a random serum GH measurement below 2.5 ng/mL by RIA. However, when comparing simultaneous GH and IGF-I levels in a subset of our patients, we found that 13% (2 of 15) of patients whose basal GH was below 2.5 ng/mL and 36% (9 of 25) of patients whose basal GH was below 5.0 ng/mL had elevated IGF-I levels and would have been falsely classified in remission by GH criteria alone. In a smaller subset of 15 patients, GH levels determined by highly sensitive IRMA as well as IGF-I levels could be compared (Table 1Go). As we have reported previously, there was overlap in the basal and postglucose GH levels in subjects whose disease status was defined by IGF-I level.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Table 1. Basal and glucose-suppressed nadir GH levels in 15 patients at their most recent follow-up after RT

 
Before receiving RT, 11 of the 43 patients (25.6%) had at least 1 pituitary hormone deficit, and 2 had panhypopituitarism. New pituitary hormone deficits developed after radiotherapy in 13 of 41 patients (31.7%). We did not observe the development of new visual abnormalities or second brain malignancies in our series.

Discussion

IGF-I levels are now considered to be the single best available biochemical marker of disease activity in acromegaly and should normalize for cure to be established (13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18). We set out, therefore, to determine the rate of IGF-I normalization in our series of patients and how this compared with cure rate, as assessed by traditional GH criteria and with other recent series. We found that 39.5% of patients who were not receiving medical therapy had a normal IGF-I level at a mean of 5.2 yr after RT. This figure is higher than that in a previous study (20) and closer to that in two other reports (19, 21). Barkan et al. found that only 5% (2 of 38) patients who underwent external beam or proton beam RT between 1975 and 1996 achieved a normal IGF-I level (20). In other reports IGF-I levels normalized in 42% (19 of 45) of patients followed for a mean of 6.7 yr (19) and in 51% (34 of 67) of patients followed for a mean of 11 yr (21) after RT for acromegaly.

A number of factors may contribute to the differences in outcomes observed in various series. One important factor is the rate of follow-up; a high rate of follow-up of the cohort is necessary to eliminate possible selection for those patients who return for further treatment because of poor outcomes. We were able to obtain a recent follow-up for 43 of 47 (91%) of patients in our cohort who have had RT for acromegaly, which is similar to some reports (19, 21), but higher than that in another recent series (20). Uniformity of biochemical testing is also an important determinant of the accuracy of the various studies (22); we were able to obtain follow-up with a high quality IGF-I assay in the majority of patients. Another important consideration may be when RT was performed. Because RT techniques have improved over the last 20 yr in terms of dose fractionation and distribution and because of imaging techniques that can better define tumor margins (23), it may be misleading to compare the results obtained in patients who underwent RT in the 1970s to those who received it more recently. All of the patients in our study received RT after 1980, and 67% received it since 1990; perhaps older RT techniques could have adversely affected the outcome of some series with longer follow-up periods. Follow-up periods were as long as 19 yr (20) or 26 yr (21) in other recent studies. It is also unclear whether prior surgery affects the outcome of RT. Some work suggests lower cure rates than expected by GH criteria for patients who did not have surgery before RT (24). All of our patients had surgery in addition to RT, which is similar to the distribution in other studies. Although 2 patients in our series had surgery after RT, both patients had elevated IGF-I levels at the most recent follow-up and would not account for a more favorable outcome in our series. Of the 38 patients studied by Barkan et al., only 2 had RT without surgery (20).

Remission rates after the different forms of RT in our series differed, but this finding must be interpreted cautiously because of two factors; the follow-up periods and the number of patients who received each type of RT varied considerably. There are several other larger series reporting the use of stereotactic radiosurgery, including the {gamma}-knife, to treat GH-producing pituitary adenomas (25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30). In one series examining {gamma}-knife RT, the average time to normalization of both GH and IGF-I in patients treated with the {gamma}-knife was shorter than that in patients treated with fractionated RT (25), but not all other studies have confirmed this yet (26, 27, 28, 29, 30). The fact that RT was performed at a variety of medical centers and with varying techniques is a limitation of ours and other series.

Similar to other series, our results show a trend toward a greater efficacy with time from RT. This pattern resembles the trend of an increasing normalization rate of GH levels as number of years post-RT increases (10). Our study and others have been retrospective series, but a longitudinal study would best be able to characterize the time course of biochemical efficacy of RT for acromegaly. The slow rate of biochemical response to RT as demonstrated by many studies is the major disadvantage to the use of RT for the treatment of acromegaly.

Not unexpectedly, the cure rate based on an older GH level cut-off of 5.0 ng/mL or less was higher than when normalization of IGF-I alone was used to define remission. Interestingly, using a GH cut-off of 2.5 ng/mL by RIA produced only a slightly higher percentage of patients considered cured compared to using a normal IGF-I level (44% vs. 39.5%), but some patients with GH levels below 2.5 ng/mL did not have normal IGF-I levels. Active acromegaly, as demonstrated by persistently high IGF-I levels, can be found even with GH levels below 1.0 ng/mL (15). After RT, other alterations in GH feedback regulation may make the interpretation of GH dynamic testing more difficult (31). It is not surprising, therefore, that the true efficacy of RT may be better represented by the IGF-I level, which we believe to be a better parameter of overall disease activity than prior GH criteria. As we reported previously, there was overlap in GH levels, including those measured with a highly sensitive GH IRMA, in the cured and not cured groups of patients (Table 1Go). Further studies in a large number of patients will be needed to determine the nadir GH level (as measured with a highly sensitive GH assay) that will correlate best with IGF-I level and most accurately classify disease status in patients with acromegaly.

The development of hypopituitarism is the most prevalent complication of the use of RT for acromegaly (10). Our figure of a 32% incidence of new hypopituitarism after RT is similar to that of several other previous reports using conventional external beam (10, 32, 33) and stereotactic radiosurgery with a linear accelerator (34, 35). In one series, however, new hypopituitarism developed in up to 67% of patients after RT (36). In studies of {gamma}-knife therapy for acromegaly, the rate of new hypopituitarism seems to be lower (25, 27), but the mean follow-up after treatment is relatively short in some studies, and long-term follow-up studies are needed to determine whether this holds true. Other potential, but very rare, complications of RT that we did not observe in our series are the risk of visual loss and second brain tumors (37, 38, 39).

In summary, with time, radiotherapy is an effective adjuvant therapy for acromegaly; in our series, most patients who have been followed for more than 6 yr will achieve normalization of IGF-I level. Surgery remains the initial treatment of choice for most patients with acromegaly. In those patients for whom surgery is not curative, medical therapy is typically given. Given the expanding array of medical therapies now or soon to be available for the treatment of acromegaly, it is likely that most patients will be controlled medically. However, in those patients with large residual or invasive tumors or those resistant to medical therapy, RT may be an important treatment alternative. Given the long lag time to normalization of IGF-I level, medical therapy until RT takes effect will be necessary for most patients. It remains to be determined, as the data from more studies become available, whether newer forms of RT such as the {gamma}-knife will provide greater or earlier efficacy for the treatment of acromegaly. Therefore, the results of our series provide evidence that RT can still play a role in the treatment of acromegaly even when the IGF-I level is used to define cure.

Footnotes

1 This work was supported by NIH Grants K08-DK-02561 (to P.U.F) and RR-00645 (to the Columbia General Clinical Research Center). Presented in part at the 81st Annual Meeting of The Endocrine Society, San Diego, California, June 12–15, 1999 (Abstract P3-652). Back

Received October 18, 1999.

Revised January 15, 2000.

Accepted January 18, 2000.

References

  1. Feek CM, McLelland J, Seth J, et al. 1984 How effective is external pituitary irradiation for growth hormone-secreting pituitary tumours? Clin Endocrinol (Oxf). 20:401–408.[Medline]
  2. Clarke SD, Woo SY, Butler EB, et al. 1993 Treatment of secretory pituitaryadenoma with radiation therapy. Radiology. 188:759–763.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  3. Speirs CJ, Reed PI, Morrison R, Aber V, Joplin GF. 1990 The effectiveness of external beam radiotherapy for acromegaly is not affected by previous pituitary ablative treatments. Acta Endocrinol (Copenh). 122:559–565.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  4. Lamberg BA, Kivikangas V, Vartiainen J, Raitta C, Pelkonen R. 1976 Conventional pituitary irradiation in acromegaly. Acta Endocrinol (Copenh). 82:267–281.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  5. Roth J, Gorden P, Brace K. 1970 Efficacy of conventional pituitary irradiation in acromegaly. N Engl J Med. 282:1385–1391.
  6. Eastman RC, Gorden P, Roth J. 1979 Conventional supervoltage irradiation is an effective treatment for acromegaly. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 48:931–940.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  7. Gordon P, Glatstein P, Oldfield E, Roth J. Conventional supervoltage radiation in the treatment of acromegaly. In: Robbins RJ, Melmed S, eds. Acromegaly. A century of scientific and clinical progress. New York: Plenum Press; 211–220.
  8. Macleod AF, Clarke DG, Pambakian H, Lowy C, Sonksen PH, Collins CD. 1989 Treatment of acromegaly by external irradiation. Clin Endocrinol (Oxf). 30:303–314.[Medline]
  9. Littley MD, Shalet SM, Swindell R, Beardwell CG, Sutton ML. 1990 Low-dose pituitary irradiation for acromegaly. Clin Endocrinol (Oxf). 32:261–270.[Medline]
  10. Eastman RC, Gorden P, Glatstein E, Roth J. 1992 Radiation therapy of acromegaly. Endocrinol Metab Clin North Am. 21:693–712.[Medline]
  11. Bates AS, Van’t Hoff W, Jones JM, Clayton RN. 1993 An audit of outcome of treatment in acromegaly. Q J Med. 86:293–299.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  12. Frohman LA. 1996 Acromegaly: what constitutes optimal therapy? J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 81:443–445.[CrossRef][Medline]
  13. Melmed S, Jackson I, Kleinberg D, Klibanski A. 1998 Current treatment guidelines for acromegaly. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 83:2646–2652.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  14. Melmed S. 1998 Tight control of growth hormone: an attainable outcome for acromegaly treatment. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 83:3409–3410.[Free Full Text]
  15. Freda PU, Post KD, Powell JS, Wardlaw SL. 1998 Evaluation of disease status with sensitive measures of growth hormone secretion in 60 postoperative patients with acromegaly. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 83:3808–3816.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  16. Barkan AL, Beitins IZ, Kelch RP. 1988 Plasma insulin-like growth factor-I/somatomedin-C in acromegaly: correlation with the degree of growth hormone hypersecretion. J Clin Endocrinol. Metab. 67:69–73.
  17. Ho KKY, Weissberger AJ. 1994 Characterization of 24-hour growth hormone secretion in acromegaly: implications for diagnosis and therapy. Clin Endocrinol (Oxf). 41:75–83.[Medline]
  18. Clemmons DR, Van Wyk JJ, Ridgway EC, Kliman B, Kjellberg RN, Underwood LE. 1979 Evaluation of acromegaly by radioimmunoassay of somatomedin-C. N Engl J Med. 301:1138–1142.[Abstract]
  19. Swearingen B, Barker II FG, Katznelson L, et al. 1998 Long-term mortality after transsphenoidal surgery and adjunctive therapy for acromegaly. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 83:3419–3426.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  20. Barkan AL, Halasz I, Dornfeld KJ, et al. 1997 Pituitary irradiation is ineffective in normalizing plasma insulin-like growth factor I in patients with acromegaly. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 82:3187–3191.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  21. Porretti S, Epaminonda E, Cappiello V, Palmieri E, Faglia G, Arosio M. Efficacy of radiotherapy in normalizing IGF-1 levels in acromegalic patients [Abstract P3–653]. Proc of the 81st Annual Meet of The Endocrine Soc. 1999.
  22. van der Lely AJ, de Herder WW, Lamberts SWJ. 1997 The role of radiotherapy in acromegaly. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 82:3185–3186.[Free Full Text]
  23. Landberg TG. 1995 Progress in radiotherapy. Acta Oncol. 34:1023–1029.[Medline]
  24. Thalassinos NC, Tsagarakis S, Ioannides G, Tzavara I, Papavasiliou C. 1998 Megavoltage pituitary irradiation lowers but seldom leads to safe GH levels in acromegaly: a long-term follow-up study. Eur J Endocrinol. 138:160–163.[Abstract]
  25. Landolt AM, Haller D, Lomax N, et al. 1998 Stereotactic radiosurgery forrecurrent surgically treated acromegaly: comparison with fractionated radiotherapy. J Neurosurg. 88:1002–1008.[Medline]
  26. Pollock BE, Kondziolka D, Lusford LD, Flickinger JC. 1994 Stereotactic radiosurgery for pituitary adenomas: imaging, visual, and endocrine results. Acta Neurochir. 62(Suppl):33–38.
  27. Thoren M, Rahn T, Guo WY, Werner S. 1991 Stereotactic radiosurgery with the cobalt-60 gamma unit in the treatment of growth hormone-producing pituitary tumors. Neurosurgery. 29:663–668.[CrossRef][Medline]
  28. Motti EDF, Losa M, Pieralli S, et al. 1996 Stereotactic radiosurgery of pituitary adenomas. Metabolism 45 (Suppl 1):111–114.
  29. Jackson IMD, Noren G. 1999 Role of gamma knife radiotherapy in the management of pituitary tumors. Endocrinol Metab Clin North Am. 28:133–142.[CrossRef][Medline]
  30. Vance L, Woodburn CJ, Steiner L, Laws ER. 1998 Gamma knife radiation for functional pituitary adenomas [Abstract P3–400]. Proc of the 80th Annual Meet of The Endocrine Soc. 1998.
  31. Peacey Sr, Toogood AA, Shalet SM. 1998 Hypothalamic dysfunction in "cured" acromegaly is treatment modality dependent. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 83:1682–1686.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  32. Sheaves R. 1994 Pituitary irradiation for acromegaly. In: Wass JAH, ed. Treating acromegaly. Bristol: Journal of Endocrinology; 103–108.
  33. Dowsett RJ, Fowble B, Sergott RC, et al. 1990 Results of radiotherapy in the treatment of acromegaly: lack of ophthalmologic complications. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 19:453–459.[Medline]
  34. Yoon SC, Suh TS, Jang HS, et al. 1998 Clinical results of 24 pituitary macroadenomas with linac-based stereotactic radiosurgery. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 41:849–853.[CrossRef][Medline]
  35. Rocher FP, Sentenac I, Berger C, Marquis I, Romestaing P, Gerard JP. 1995 Sterotactic radiosurgery: the Lyon experience. Acta Neurochir. 63(Suppl):109–114.
  36. Snyder PJ, Fowble BF, Schatz NJ, Savino PJ, Gennarelli TA. 1986 Hypopituitarism following radiation therapy of pituitary adenomas. Am J Med. 81:457–462.[CrossRef][Medline]
  37. Jones A. 1994 Complications of radiotherapy for acromegaly. In: Wass JAH, ed. Treating acromegaly. Bristol: Journal of Endocrinology; 115–125.
  38. Wass JAH. 1996 Long-term effects of radiotherapy for acromegaly. Metabolism 45(Suppl 1):107–108.
  39. Brada M, Rajan B. 1994 The toxicity of radiotherapy in the treatment of pituitary adenoma. In: Wass JAH, ed. Treating acromegaly. Bristol: Journal of Endocrinology; 127–132.



This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab.Home page
M. Losa, L. Gioia, P. Picozzi, A. Franzin, M. Valle, M. Giovanelli, and P. Mortini
The Role of Stereotactic Radiotherapy in Patients with Growth Hormone-Secreting Pituitary Adenoma
J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab., July 1, 2008; 93(7): 2546 - 2552.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Eur J EndocrinolHome page
P. Abrams, O. Alexopoulou, R. Abs, D. Maiter, and J. Verhelst
Optimalization and cost management of lanreotide-Autogel therapy in acromegaly
Eur. J. Endocrinol., November 1, 2007; 157(5): 571 - 577.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
NEJMHome page
S. Melmed
Acromegaly
N. Engl. J. Med., December 14, 2006; 355(24): 2558 - 2573.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab.Home page
P. J. Jenkins, P. Bates, M. N. Carson, P. M. Stewart, J. A. H. Wass, and on behalf of the UK National Acromegaly Register S
Conventional Pituitary Irradiation Is Effective in Lowering Serum Growth Hormone and Insulin-Like Growth Factor-I in Patients with Acromegaly
J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab., April 1, 2006; 91(4): 1239 - 1245.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Journal of the American Animal Hospital AssociationHome page
C. A. Hurty and B. Flatland
Feline Acromegaly: A Review of the Syndrome
J. Am. Anim. Hosp. Assoc., September 1, 2005; 41(5): 292 - 297.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab.Home page
A. F. Muller, J. J. Kopchick, A. Flyvbjerg, and A. J. van der Lely
Growth Hormone Receptor Antagonists
J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab., April 1, 2004; 89(4): 1503 - 1511.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Endocr. Rev.Home page
A. Colao, D. Ferone, P. Marzullo, and G. Lombardi
Systemic Complications of Acromegaly: Epidemiology, Pathogenesis, and Management
Endocr. Rev., February 1, 2004; 25(1): 102 - 152.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Am. J. Physiol. Endocrinol. Metab.Home page
N. R. Biermasz, A. M. Pereira, M. Frolich, J. A. Romijn, J. D. Veldhuis, and F. Roelfsema
Octreotide represses secretory-burst mass and nonpulsatile secretion but does not restore event frequency or orderly GH secretion in acromegaly
Am J Physiol Endocrinol Metab, January 1, 2004; 286(1): E25 - E30.
[Abstract] [Full Text]


Home page
J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab.Home page
D. R. Clemmons, K. Chihara, P. U. Freda, K. K. Y. Ho, A. Klibanski, S. Melmed, S. M. Shalet, C. J. Strasburger, P. J. Trainer, and M. O. Thorner
Optimizing Control of Acromegaly: Integrating a Growth Hormone Receptor Antagonist into the Treatment Algorithm
J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab., October 1, 2003; 88(10): 4759 - 4767.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a related Letter to the Editor
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Request Copyright Permission
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Powell, J. S.
Right arrow Articles by Freda, P. U.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Powell, J. S.
Right arrow Articles by Freda, P. U.


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Endocrinology Endocrine Reviews J. Clin. End. & Metab.
Molecular Endocrinology Recent Prog. Horm. Res. All Endocrine Journals