Management of growth failure and other endocrine aspects in patients with Noonan syndrome across Europe: A sub-analysis of a European clinical practice survey
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: To date, there is a lack of international guidelines regarding the management of the endocrine features of individuals with Noonan syndrome (NS). The aim was to develop a clinical practice survey to gather information on current treatment and management of these patients across Europe. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A group of 10 experts from three clinical specialities involved in the management of NS patients (clinical geneticists, paediatric endocrinologists, and paediatric cardiologists) developed a 60-question clinical practice survey. The questionnaire was implemented in Survey Monkey and sent to physicians from these three specialities via European/national societies. Contingency tables and the Chi-Squared test for independence were used to examine differences between specialities and countries. RESULTS: In total, responses of 364 specialists (paediatric endocrinologists, 40%; geneticists, 30%; paediatric cardiologists, 30%) from 20 European countries were analysed. While endocrinologists mostly referred to national growth charts for the general population, geneticists mostly referred to NS-specific growth charts. Approximately half of the endocrinologists perform growth hormone (GH) stimulation tests in short patients with low IGF1 levels. Two thirds of endocrinologists begin GH treatment for short patients in early childhood (4-6.9 years), and over half of them selected a threshold of -2 standard deviation score (SDS) according to national growth charts. The main concerns about GH treatment appear to be presence of hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) (59%), increased risk of malignancy (46%), and limited efficacy (31%). When asked if they consider HCM as a contraindication for GH treatment, one third of respondents skipped this question, and among those who replied, two thirds selected 'cannot answer', suggesting a high level of uncertainty. A total of 21 adverse cardiac responses to GH treatment were reported. Although most respondents had not encountered any malignancy during GH treatment, six malignancies were reported. Finally, about half of the endocrinologists expected a typical final height gain of 1-1.5 SDS with GH treatment. CONCLUSION: This survey describes for the first time the current clinical practice of endocrine aspects of NS across Europe and helps us to identify gaps in the management but also in the knowledge of this genetic disorder.
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 | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".