Hanzu, Felicia Alexandra

Abstract Context Biochemical test results are central to clinical decision-making for the diagnosis and management of Cushing syndrome (CS). With emerging research and increasing availability of different tests, updated consensus on the utility of these biomarkers is warranted. Objective To establish an updated consensus on the role of biomarkers in the diagnosis and monitoring of adrenocorticotropic hormone-dependent CS, address novel therapeutic approaches, and identify areas for future research. Design A modified 2-round Delphi panel was conducted. Consensus was defined as ≥70% agreement/disagreement for Likert-scale statements or ≥70% selection of the same option for single-choice questions. Setting Participants represented a range of international expertise. Participants Forty-one participants took part in the Delphi panel, with no attrition between rounds (one nonclinician was not required to complete the second round). An 8-member Steering Committee guided statement development. Results Of statements designed to reach consensus, 45% (14/31) and 44% (11/25) statements reached consensus in Rounds 1 and 2, respectively. Notably, most panelists reported the use of late-night salivary cortisol for diagnosis of mild CS and for monitoring following pituitary surgery or medical or radiation therapy. Most panelists responded that block-and-replace therapies can be considered in patients with cyclical or severe CS, and consensus was reached that restoration of circadian rhythm is a treatment goal for patients with CS. Conclusion Areas of alignment among experts on the diagnosis and monitoring of CS are presented. The findings from this study are intended to support clinicians in their clinical decision-making and highlight priority areas for future research.

Abstract Context Most of the patients included in the clinical trials and real-world studies with osilodrostat only include patients with adrenocorticotropic hormone dependent Cushing syndrome (CS), while data on the efficacy and safety of osilodrostat in patients with adrenal CS is scarce. Objective To assess the efficacy and safety of osilodrostat in adrenal CS. Methods International study of patients with adrenal CS: patients treated with osilodrostat at any time were enrolled in the safety evaluation and those treated for longer than 4 weeks, in the efficacy evaluation. Patients were classified as responders if they experienced a reduction in urinary free cortisol (UFC) >50% (complete responders when UFC levels were below the upper limit of normal [ULN] and partial responders if there was a reduction >50% but not normalization). Results Twenty-eight patients with adrenal CS were enrolled: 16 with adrenocortical carcinoma and 12 with benign disease. Osilodrostat was used in monotherapy in 22 patients and in combination with metyrapone in 6 cases. In those patients treated for longer than 4 weeks (n = 21), 66.7% were classified as responders (28.6% with complete response and 38.1% with partial response), and for those treated for longer than 12 weeks, the rate of response increased to 87.5% The use of osilodrostat as a nonfirst-line therapy (odds ratio 15.0, P = .010) was a predictor of response. Osilodrostat led to a significant decrease in systolic blood pressure and body weight (P < .05). Nine patients developed one or more adverse events and in 56% (n = 5) led to osilodrostat discontinuation. Conclusion Osilodrostat controls hypercortisolism in 66.7% of patients with adrenal CS treated for longer than 4 weeks and in 87.5% of cases treated for longer than 12 weeks, with a positive impact on blood pressure and body weight. Patients who received osilodrostat after other previous steroidogenesis inhibitors have a higher probability of response.

Abstract Objective. Several smaller studies on adrenal incidentalomas (AI) suggested an association between autonomous cortisol secretion (ACS) and mortality (Di Dalmazi Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol 2014, Debono J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2014, Patrova Endocrine 2017). However, a recent meta-analysis (9 studies, 1356 patients) could not confirm these findings (Elhassan Ann Intern Med 2019). Aim. To investigate the effects of ACS on mortality, prevalence of cardiovascular (CV) risk factors, and (CV) morbidity, in a representative cohort of AI. Design. Retrospective observational study conducted at 27 ENS@T centers from 15 countries. Methods. Inclusion criteria: AI diagnosed 1996-2015, 1 mg dexamethasone suppression test, follow-up (FU) of ≥36 months, known survival status. Exclusion criteria: clinically relevant adrenal hormone excess (i.e. Cushing’s syndrome, pheochromocytoma, primary hyperaldosteronism), known malignancy. Patient stratification: serum cortisol after dexamethasone (>5 µg/dl, ACS; 1.9-5 µg/dl, possible ACS (PACS); ≤1.8 µg/dl, non-functioning adenoma (NFA)). Definition of CV events (CVE): hospitalization due to myocardial infarction and related interventions (PTCA, surgical bypass), stroke, deep vein thrombosis, pulmonary embolism. Results. 3640 patients (57% NFA, 36% PACS, 7% ACS) were considered eligible: 64% females; median age 61 years (range 18-91); median FU 84 months (36-277) (distribution between subgroups n.s.). 352 patients died during FU. Age- and sex adjusted overall survival was significantly reduced in patients with PACS (HR 1.55; 95%CI 1.24-1.94) and ACS (1.84; 1.29-2.61). Prevalence of CV risk factors were significantly higher in PACS and ACS than in NFA (hypertension: 72, 73, 57%, p<0.0001; dyslipidemia: 42, 49, 35%, p<0.0001; diabetes: 22, 25, 17%, p<0.0001) When adjusted to relevant confounders (i.e. age, sex, CV risk factors), time to first CVE was shorter in PACS (HR 1.36; 1.07-1.73) and ACS (HR 1.62; 1.10-2.40) compared to NFA. Conclusion. PACS and ACS are associated with increased overall mortality and CV morbidity. However, to prove causality a large randomized intervention trial is required.