Early thyroxine treatment in Down syndrome and thyroid function later in life
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective The hypothalamus–pituitary–thyroid (HPT) axis set point develops during the fetal period and first two years of life. We hypothesized that thyroxine treatment during these first two years, in the context of a randomized controlled trial (RCT) in children with Down syndrome, may have influenced the HPT axis set point and may also have influenced the development of Down syndrome-associated autoimmune thyroiditis. Methods We included 123 children with Down syndrome 8.7 years after the end of an RCT comparing thyroxine treatment vs placebo and performed thyroid function tests and thyroid ultrasound. We analyzed TSH and FT4 concentrations in the subgroup of 71 children who were currently not on thyroid medication and had no evidence of autoimmune thyroiditis. Results TSH concentrations did not differ, but FT4 was significantly higher in the thyroxine-treated group than that in the placebo group (14.1 vs 13.0 pmol/L; P = 0.02). There was an increase in anti-TPO positivity, from 1% at age 12 months to 6% at age 24 months and 25% at age 10.7 years with a greater percentage of children with anti-TPO positivity in the placebo group (32%) compared with the thyroxine-treated group (18.5%) ( P = 0.12). Thyroid volume at age 10.7 years (mean: 3.4 mL; range: 0.5–7.5 mL) was significantly lower ( P < 0.01) compared with reference values (5.5 mL; range: 3–9 mL) and was similar in the thyroxine and placebo group. Conclusion Thyroxine treatment during the first two years of life led to a mild increase in FT4 almost 9 years later on and may point to an interesting new mechanism influencing the maturing HPT axis set point. Furthermore, there was a trend toward less development of thyroid autoimmunity in the thyroxine treatment group, suggesting a protective effect of the early thyroxine treatment. Lastly, thyroid volume was low possibly reflecting Down-specific thyroid hypoplasia.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".