Adult Growth Hormone Deficiency (AGHD) and Outcomes (NordiNet and ANSWER)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Adult growth hormone deficiency (AGHD) is a rare disease with both physiological and psychological effects for untreated patients. AGHD symptoms can improve over time with GH treatment. Here we have analyzed the long-term effectiveness and safety of short-acting GH replacement therapy (GHRT) in treatment naïve and nonnaïve patients with AGHD using real-world data from the NordiNet® International Outcome Study and American Norditropin® Studies: Web Enabled Research Program. Outcomes were compared between 3 age groups, comprised of patients aged 18 to 29 years, 30 to 39 years, and 40 to 59 years. The safety outcome was the incidence of nonserious and serious adverse reactions and serious adverse events by age group. Efficacy outcomes included mean GH exposure by age group alone, by sex and age group, or based on estrogen usage in female patients; IGF-I SD score (SDS) levels by sex and age group; mean glycated hemoglobin by sex and age group; and mean non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol by sex and age group. The incidence rates of adverse events and reactions did not statistically differ between the 3 groups. Mean IGF-I SDS levels reached a normal range (-2 to 2) in ≥80% of patients from all groups in the effectiveness analysis set by year 2. Together with previous reports of older patients, these results support the real-world safety and efficacy of short-acting GHRT among all ages of patients with AGHD.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".