MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407900930 · doi:10.1210/jendso/bvaf026

Adult Growth Hormone Deficiency (AGHD) and Outcomes (NordiNet and ANSWER)

2025· article· en· W4407900930 on OpenAlexfundno aff
John D. Carmichael, Atil Y. Kargi, Laura E. Dichtel, Nicky Kelepouris, Navid Nedjatian, Moshe Fridman, Matthias M. Weber

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Endocrine Society · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGrowth Hormone and Insulin-like Growth Factors
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNovo Nordisk Canada
KeywordsGrowth hormonePsychologyGrowth hormone deficiencyHormoneMedicineEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.073
Threshold uncertainty score0.476

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.005
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.242 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Endocrine SocietySame topicGrowth Hormone and Insulin-like Growth FactorsFrench-language works237,207