Citations

Abstract Disclosure: B.M. Biller: Consulting Fee; Self; HRA Pharmaceuticals, Novartis Pharmaceuticals, Sparrow, Strongbridge Biopharma. Grant Recipient; Self; Strongbridge Biopharma. A. Gilis-Januszewska: Speaker; Self; Ipsen, Novartis Pharmaceuticals, Novo Nordisk, Recordati, Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd.. M. Doknic: None. A.M. Pico: None. M. Fleseriu: Consulting Fee; Self; Ascendis, GlaxoSmithKline, Johnson &Johnson, Karyopharm, Novo Nordisk, Pfizer, Inc., Pharmacosmos. Research Investigator; Self; Ascendis. G. Raverot: None. A.M. Isidori: None. Y. Takahashi: None. J.M. Garcia: None. J.M. Silverstein: None. I. Bancos: None. E. Huang: Employee; Self; Ascendis Pharma, Inc. J. Kang: Employee; Self; Ascendis Pharma, Inc. A.S. Komirenko: Employee; Self; Ascendis Pharma, Inc. L. Domrzalski: Employee; Self; Ascendis Pharma, Inc. A. Shu: Employee; Self; Ascendis Pharma, Inc. K. Yuen: Advisory Board Member; Self; Amryt, Ascendis, Corcept, Crinetics, Novo Nordisk, Recordati, Strongbridge, Xeris. Grant Recipient; Self; Amryt, Ascendis, Corcept, Crinetics. Speaker; Self; Corcept, Novo Nordisk, Recordati. Background: Adult GHD (aGHD) is characterized by metabolic abnormalities due to insufficient growth hormone (GH) production. Lonapegsomatropin was designed to provide sustained release of unmodified somatropin, with the identical amino acid sequence as endogenous GH, and once-weekly injection reduces the burden of daily GH replacement therapy. MethodsForesiGHt was a randomized, parallel-3-arm, placebo(PL)-controlled (double-blind) and active-controlled (open-label) trial designed to establish the efficacy and safety of lonapegsomatropin in aGHD. It evaluated 259 adults with GHD across 21 countries who were GH treatment-naïve or not treated with GH in the prior year, randomized 1:1:1 to receive lonapegsomatropin, once-weekly PL, or daily somatropin (dGH). Fixed dosing was based on age and oral estrogen intake, and designed to be comparable across lonapegsomatropin and dGH arms. Following a 12-week (w) titration period to target maintenance dose, fixed doses were administered for 26w. ResultsBaseline (BL) characteristics were similar between arms. Lonapegsomatropin demonstrated superiority on the primary efficacy endpoint of change from BL in trunk percent fat at Week 38 vs PL (lonapegsomatropin -1.7% vs PL 0.4%, LS mean difference -2.0%, p < 0.0001) and on the key secondary efficacy endpoints of change from BL in total body lean mass (lonapegsomatropin 1.6 kg vs PL -0.1 kg, LS mean difference 1.7 kg, p < 0.0001) and change from BL in trunk fat mass (lonapegsomatropin -0.5 kg vs PL 0.2 kg, LS mean difference -0.7 kg, p = 0.0053). Mean total exposure and maintenance doses were similar for lonapegsomatropin and dGH arms, with larger changes from BL in average IGF-I SDS mean at Week 38 in the lonapegsomatropin arm (1.4) vs dGH arm (0.5). To assess outcomes at comparable weekly IGF-I exposure, a post-hoc analysis was performed in a subset of participants with average IGF-I SDS ≤1.75 SDS at Week 38. Mean IGF-I SDS for these subsets were similar (lonapegsomatropin -0.1, dGH -0.5), and comparable effects in fat and lean tissue compartments were demonstrated (change from BL in trunk percent fat mean -2.4% and -2.6% respectively; change from BL in total body lean mass mean 1.7 kg and 1.4 kg respectively). In the safety population, the incidence of severe AEs was low (lonapegsomatropin, 3.4%; placebo, 1.2%; dGH, 2.3%) and the incidence of treatment-related AEs was similar (lonapegsomatropin 24.7%, dGH 22.1%). Injection site reaction incidence was low and similar for lonapegsomatropin (4.5%), dGH (5.8%) and placebo (4.8%), and A1c levels remained stable in all treatment arms. ConclusionsThe results of the foresiGHt trial indicate that lonapegsomatropin is a safe, efficacious, and tolerable replacement for endogenous GH. Once-weekly dosing may be impactful for adults with GHD who typically manage multiple other medical therapies. Presentation: 6/3/2024

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Cushing disease (CD) affects mortality and quality of life along with limited long-term remission, underscoring the need to better identify recurrence risk. The identification of surgical or imaging predictors for CD remission after transsphenoidal surgery has yielded some inconsistent results and has been limited by single-center, single-surgeon, or meta-analyses studies. We sought to evaluate the multicenter Registry of Adenomas of the Pituitary and Related Disorders (RAPID) database of academic US pituitary centers to assess whether robust nonhormonal recurrence predictors could be elucidated. METHODS: Patients with treated CD from 2011 to 2023 were included. The perioperative and long-term characteristics of CD patients with and without recurrence were assessed using univariable and multivariable analyses. RESULTS: Of 383 patients with CD from 26 surgeons achieving postoperative remission, 288 (75.2%) maintained remission at last follow-up while 95 (24.8%) showed recurrence (median time to recurrence 9.99 ± 1.34 years). Patients with recurrence required longer postoperative hospital stays (5 ± 3 vs 4 ± 2 days, P = .002), had larger average tumor volumes (1.76 ± 2.53 cm 3 vs 0.49 ± 1.17 cm 3 , P = .0001), and more often previously failed prior treatment (31.1% vs 14.9%, P = .001) mostly being prior surgery. Multivariable hazard prediction models for tumor recurrence found younger age (odds ratio [OR] = 0.95, P = .002) and Knosp grade of 0 (OR = 0.09, reference Knosp grade 4, P = .03) to be protective against recurrence. Comparison of Knosp grade 0 to 2 vs 3 to 4 showed that lower grades had reduced risk of recurrence (OR = 0.27, P = .04). Other factors such as length of stay, surgeon experience, prior tumor treatment, and Knosp grades 1, 2, or 3 failed to reach levels of statistical significance in multivariable analysis. CONCLUSION: This multicenter study centers suggests that the strongest predictors of recurrence include tumor size/invasion and age. This insight can help with patient counseling and prognostication. Long-term follow-up is necessary for patients, and early treatment of small tumors may improve outcomes.

Abstract BACKGROUND Perioperative steroid protocols for patients undergoing transsphenoidal surgery (TSS) for pituitary pathology vary by institution. OBJECTIVE To assess the safety of withholding glucocorticoids in patients undergoing TSS. METHODS Patients with an intact hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) axis undergoing TSS for a pituitary tumor at the same academic institution between 2012 and 2015 were randomized to either receive 100 mg of intravenous hydrocortisone followed by 0.5 mg of intravenous dexamethasone every 6 h for 4 doses (STER, n = 23) or to undergo surgery without steroids (NOSTER, n = 20). Postoperative cortisol levels were then used to determine the need for glucocorticoids after surgery. Data regarding postoperative cortisol levels, hospital stay length, and complications were collected. RESULTS Mean postoperative 8 am cortisol levels were higher in the NOSTER group compared to the STER group (745 ± 359 nmol/L and 386 ± 193 nmol/L, respectively, P = .001) and more patients were discharged on glucocorticoids in the STER group (42% vs 12%, P = .07). There was no difference in the incidence of postoperative complications, including hyperglycemia, diabetes insipidus, or permanent adrenal insufficiency. Permanent adrenal insufficiency occurred in 8% of patients. CONCLUSION Perioperative steroids can be safely withheld in patients with an intact HPA axis undergoing TSS. Although administration of perioperative glucocorticoids does not appear to increase the risk of complications, it may interfere with assessment of the HPA axis after surgery.