Search

Severe hypercalcaemia during pregnancy is rare and most cases are secondary to hyperparathyroidism. This is the first report of a parathyroid hormone related protein (PTHrP) secreting neuroendocrine tumour of the [...]

OBJECTIVE Cabergoline is now established as an effective and well-tolerated treatment for prolactinoma. However, there are relatively few published data on the treatment of macro-, as opposed to micro-, prolactinoma. We have therefore reviewed the efficacy and safety of cabergoline in the treatment of patients with prolactin-secreting macroadenomas treated on a compassionate basis.
STUDY DESIGN AND PATIENTS Eighty-five patients with prolactin-secreting macroadenomas were treated with cabergoline 0.25 to 10.5 mg per week (median 1 mg) given in one to seven doses. Treatment durations ranged between 3 months and 8 years. Sixty-five patients (32 intolerant, 16 resistant) had been treated previously with other dopamine agonists.
Pretreatment prolactin levels ranged between 80 and 8300 mug/l and tumour maximum diameters were between 11 and 42 mm.
MEASUREMENTS Serum prolactin, visual fields if initially abnormal, occurrence of menses or return of libido and potency, blood chemistry and adverse events were assessed at 1 month and then at 3-month intervals during treatment. Pituitary computed tomography or magnetic resonance imaging was usually repeated at 3 months and 1 year, then yearly, in most patients (n=62).
RESULTS Normalization of prolactin levels was achieved in 52 patients (61.2%) and a prolactin decrease of at least 75% of pretreatment values occurred in 24 others (28.2%). Of the 20 de novo patients, 17 had prolactin normalized and the remainder had at least 75% reduction. Disappearance of tumour image was found in eight of 62 evaluable patients (12.9%) and reduction of the largest diameter by at least 25% in another 33 (53.2%), with an overall success rate of 66.1%; among the 17 evaluable de novo patients the success rate was 82.3%. Fifteen of 21 patients who failed to show tumour shrinkage had previously demonstrated resistance/intolerance to other prolactin-lowering treatments. Of the 12 patients with visual field defects at baseline, six normalized and two showed an improvement. Menses resumed during cabergoline treatment in 79.5% of premenopausal women. Restoration of potency was reported by seven of eight evaluable men. Adverse events were recorded in 24.7% of cases, four of whom (4.7%) discontinued treatment.
CONCLUSIONS Although the present data were not obtained in a formal study we conclude that cabergoline is an effective and well-tolerated treatment for macroprolactinoma patients.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE The usefulness of dynamic tests of PRL release in determining underlying pathology in hyperprolactinaemic patients is not well recognized by endocrinologists, only 15% of whom routinely perform such tests. High resolution pituitary magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has become more widely available during the past 5 years and is now generally regarded as the pituitary imaging method of choice. Since few prolactinoma patients are now submitted to surgery, it is important to ascertain the usefulness of these techniques in suggesting a pathological diagnosis.
DESIGN A 3 year retrospective audit of the information derived from measurement of PRL and TSH responses to the dopamine antagonist domperidone and from high resolution pituitary MRI in patients being investigated for hyperprolactinaemia in regional endocrine unit.
PATIENTS Eighty-four patients (10 male, 74 female) whose investigation of hyperprolactinaemia included a domperidone test and high resolution pituitary MRI. Patients who had domperidone tests performed after pituitary surgery or who did not have pituitary MRI were excluded from the analysis.
MEASUREMENTS PRL and TSH were measured basally and at 30 and 60 minutes following domperidone (10 mg i.v.) and gadolinium-enhanced pituitary MRI was performed in all patients.
RESULTS 20 patients had a normal PRL response to domperidone (defined as PRL30'/PRL0' >3) and this group included five patients in whom hyperprolactinaemia was not sustained. Pituitary MRI showed evidence of a microadenoma in only two patients, imaging being unequivocally normal in the majority.
Sixty-four patients had an abnormal PRL response to domperidone and 18 of these had a macrolesion (nine prolactinomas, nine other tumours). Pituitary MRI was performed in the remaining 46 patients with abnormal PRL response to domperidone and suggested microadenoma in 29 (63%), identified other structural abnormalities in six cases but was entirely normal in 11 cases. Neither the basal PRL level nor the TSH response could refine the diagnosis further because of overlap between the various subgroups.
CONCLUSIONS The majority of patients with a normal dynamic response of PRL to domperidone had a normal or near normal pituitary MRI scan. In the two cases where an abnormality was detected it could have been an incidental microadenoma or cyst, thus suggesting that pituitary scanning could normally be omitted in patients whose PRL response to domperidone is normal (24% of our total).
The group of patients with an abnormal dynamic response of PRL to domperidone was not generally amenable to further diagnostic refinement by considering the degree of hyperprolactinaemia or the TSH response to domperidone because of overlap of these parameters between the diagnostic subgroups. Therefore any degree of hyperprolactinaemia associated with a blunted PRL response to domperidone warrants pituitary imaging.