MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3022609122 · doi:10.1210/jendso/bvaa046.241

SUN-930 A Case of Acromegaly Secondary to Ectopic Growth Hormone-Releasing Hormone (GHRH) Secretion from a Bronchial Neuroendocrine Tumour

2020· article· en· W3022609122 on OpenAlexaff
Jasmine Bahrami, Özgür Mete, Ally P.H. Prebtani

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Endocrine Society · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPituitary Gland Disorders and Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity Health NetworkMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAcromegalyMedicineGrowth hormone–releasing hormoneProlactinInternal medicineBiopsyHormoneEndocrinologyPathologyNeuroendocrine differentiationCancerGrowth hormone

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract A Case of Acromegaly Secondary to Ectopic Growth Hormone-Releasing Hormone (GHRH) Secretion from a Bronchial Neuroendocrine Tumour Background Acromegaly due to ectopic GHRH secretion is a rare disorder and only accounts for less than 1% of all cases of acromegaly. Case We present the case of a 42-year old female with acromegaly from a bronchial neuroendocrine tumour (NET) secreting GHRH. The patient presented with gradual onset of dyspnea and wheezing. Subsequent imaging (chest X-ray, CT chest) revealed a large left-sided thoracic mass. Bronchoscopy was performed and a biopsy was taken from the mass. Initial histological examination reported small cell lung carcinoma (SCLC). Therefore, she underwent chemoradiotherapy. The patient was concurrently experiencing increased digital girth, weight gain, and enlarged tongue and was therefore referred to our endocrinology clinic for evaluation of acromegaly. Investigations revealed normal ACTH, markedly elevated IGF-1 (1031 μg/L, normal 63–215 μg/L), and non-suppressed GH levels following a 75g oral glucose tolerance test. The remainder of the pituitary panel, including TSH, prolactin, FSH, LH were all normal. An MRI sella showed a completely normal pituitary and pineal gland with no evidence of brain metastasis. She thus met clinical and biochemical criteria for acromegaly but a pituitary source could not be identified. Given her history, a paraneoplastic process or ectopic GHRH-producing tumour was suspected. Further workup showed a significantly elevated circulating GHRH levels of 73 pg/mL (normal 5 – 18 pg/mL). Subsequently, a second pathologist with expertise in NETs reviewed the same biopsy specimen. The specimen was found to be a GHRH-producing well differentiated pulmonary NET with a Ki67 index of 1.5%, and thus not a SCLC. Furthermore, a somatostatin receptor scintigraphy study was done which showed evidence of a somatostatin avid receptor rich lesion in the lung, corresponding to the known tumour. Thus, what initially appeared to be a SCLC was subsequently found to be a GHRH-secreting NET, illustrating the challenges of diagnosing these rare tumours. She was treated with intramuscular sandostatin 20mg q28days and then underwent a left pneumonectomy, resulting in biochemical resolution of her acromegaly (IGF-1 219 μg/L). Genetic testing for MEN1 was also completed as there is an association between ectopic GHRH NETs and MEN-1; however, genetic testing revealed no pathogenic variants and exon deletions or duplications suggestive of MEN-1. Learning points Diagnosis of acromegaly due to ectopic GHRH secretion requires high clinical suspicion by the treating clinicians (e.g., endocrinologist, oncologist) as well as review of histology by expert pathologists. Our case highlights that ectopic GHRH secretion is a rare but important cause of acromegaly, which should always be suspected when a clear pituitary cause is not identified.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.239 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designCase report
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Endocrine SocietySame topicPituitary Gland Disorders and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207