Cited by 43Pituitary Gland Disorders and TreatmentsMeningioma and schwannoma managementNeuroendocrine Tumor Research Advances

Fractionated stereotactic radiotherapy in patients with acromegaly: an interim single-centre audit

Roug, S, Rasmussen, Å K, Juhler, M, Kosteljanetz, M, Poulsgaard, L, Heebøll, H, Roed, H, Feldt-Rasmussen, U·2010·European Journal of Endocrinology

Abstract

AIM: To evaluate the effect of fractionated stereotactic radiotherapy (FSRT) in acromegaly in a retrospective analysis. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Thirty-four patients (17 females, median 43 years (range 30-74)) with acromegaly were treated with FSRT (conformal dynamic arcing, dose 54 Gy, 27-30 fractions) between January 1998 and April 2007. Of the 34 patients, 32 had undergone transsphenoidal adenotomy, and 28 were on medical therapy before FSRT. Patients on medical therapy continued this during and after the irradiation. The treatment was gradually decreased/withdrawn after careful assessment. RESULTS: Magnetic resonance scanning of the pituitary gland 34 months (median, range 11-95) after irradiation showed stable or reduced volume of the remaining tumour tissue in 31 of 34 patients (91%). Seventeen patients (50%) were biochemically controlled (normalised nadir GH during oral glucose tolerance test and IGF1 <+2 S.D.) 30 months after FSRT (median, range 6-60), and ten of them had true biochemical remission (off medical therapy) 30 months after FSRT (median, range 12-69). Of 28 patients with one or more functioning pituitary axes before irradiation, 8 (29%) developed further deficit of one or two pituitary axes 48 months (median, range 6-102) after FSRT. Of 34 patients, 20 still required medical treatment for acromegaly at the end of this study, mainly those with a short follow-up period after irradiation. CONCLUSION: The FSRT seems promising in terms of treatment of acromegaly. Longer follow-up is, however, needed to assess the overall efficacy and safety of FSRT for acromegaly.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1530/eje-09-1045

Cites

45 of 45 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Roug, S., Rasmussen, Å. K., Juhler, M., Kosteljanetz, M., Poulsgaard, L., Heebøll, H., Roed, H., & Feldt-Rasmussen, U.
Affiliations
Rigshospitalet (DK)
Venue
European Journal of Endocrinology
Published
2010-04
Volume
162
Issue
4
Pages
685-694
ISSN
  • 0804-4643 (ISSN-L)
  • 1479-683X
OpenAlex
W2100149278
Cited by
43
References
45
Citations by year
2024: 2 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 10 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 2
FWCI
2.41
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • European Journal of Endocrinology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Research at the University of Copenhagen (University of Copenhagen) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Pituitary Gland Disorders and Treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Meningioma and schwannoma management
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Neuroendocrine Tumor Research Advances
Keywords
acromegaly, fractionated stereotactic radiotherapy, pituitary adenoma, transsphenoidal surgery, growth hormone, insulin-like growth factor I, biochemical remission, medical therapy
MeSH terms
Acromegaly, Adenoma, Adult, Aged, Female, Humans, Insulin-Like Growth Factor I, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Middle Aged, Pituitary Neoplasms, Retrospective Studies, Cohort Studies, Human Growth Hormone

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review