BACKGROUND: Numerous studies demonstrate associations between serum concentrations of 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25[OH]D) and a variety of common disorders, including musculoskeletal, metabolic, cardiovascular, malignant, autoimmune, and infectious diseases. Although a causal link between serum 25(OH)D concentrations and many disorders has not been clearly established, these associations have led to widespread supplementation with vitamin D and increased laboratory testing for 25(OH)D in the general population. The benefit-risk ratio of this increase in vitamin D use is not clear, and the optimal vitamin D intake and the role of testing for 25(OH)D for disease prevention remain uncertain. OBJECTIVE: To develop clinical guidelines for the use of vitamin D (cholecalciferol [vitamin D3] or ergocalciferol [vitamin D2]) to lower the risk of disease in individuals without established indications for vitamin D treatment or 25(OH)D testing. METHODS: A multidisciplinary panel of clinical experts, along with experts in guideline methodology and systematic literature review, identified and prioritized 14 clinically relevant questions related to the use of vitamin D and 25(OH)D testing to lower the risk of disease. The panel prioritized randomized placebo-controlled trials in general populations (without an established indication for vitamin D treatment or 25[OH]D testing), evaluating the effects of empiric vitamin D administration throughout the lifespan, as well as in select conditions (pregnancy and prediabetes). The panel defined "empiric supplementation" as vitamin D intake that (a) exceeds the Dietary Reference Intakes (DRI) and (b) is implemented without testing for 25(OH)D. Systematic reviews queried electronic databases for publications related to these 14 clinical questions. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology was used to assess the certainty of evidence and guide recommendations. The approach incorporated perspectives from a patient representative and considered patient values, costs and resources required, acceptability and feasibility, and impact on health equity of the proposed recommendations. The process to develop this clinical guideline did not use a risk assessment framework and was not designed to replace current DRI for vitamin D. RESULTS: The panel suggests empiric vitamin D supplementation for children and adolescents aged 1 to 18 years to prevent nutritional rickets and because of its potential to lower the risk of respiratory tract infections; for those aged 75 years and older because of its potential to lower the risk of mortality; for those who are pregnant because of its potential to lower the risk of preeclampsia, intra-uterine mortality, preterm birth, small-for-gestational-age birth, and neonatal mortality; and for those with high-risk prediabetes because of its potential to reduce progression to diabetes. Because the vitamin D doses in the included clinical trials varied considerably and many trial participants were allowed to continue their own vitamin D-containing supplements, the optimal doses for empiric vitamin D supplementation remain unclear for the populations considered. For nonpregnant people older than 50 years for whom vitamin D is indicated, the panel suggests supplementation via daily administration of vitamin D, rather than intermittent use of high doses. The panel suggests against empiric vitamin D supplementation above the current DRI to lower the risk of disease in healthy adults younger than 75 years. No clinical trial evidence was found to support routine screening for 25(OH)D in the general population, nor in those with obesity or dark complexion, and there was no clear evidence defining the optimal target level of 25(OH)D required for disease prevention in the populations considered; thus, the panel suggests against routine 25(OH)D testing in all populations considered. The panel judged that, in most situations, empiric vitamin D supplementation is inexpensive, feasible, acceptable to both healthy individuals and health care professionals, and has no negative effect on health equity. CONCLUSION: The panel suggests empiric vitamin D for those aged 1 to 18 years and adults over 75 years of age, those who are pregnant, and those with high-risk prediabetes. Due to the scarcity of natural food sources rich in vitamin D, empiric supplementation can be achieved through a combination of fortified foods and supplements that contain vitamin D. Based on the absence of supportive clinical trial evidence, the panel suggests against routine 25(OH)D testing in the absence of established indications. These recommendations are not meant to replace the current DRIs for vitamin D, nor do they apply to people with established indications for vitamin D treatment or 25(OH)D testing. Further research is needed to determine optimal 25(OH)D levels for specific health benefits.
OBJECTIVE: Our objective was to provide a scholarly review of the published literature on menopausal hormonal therapy (MHT), make scientifically valid assessments of the available data, and grade the level of evidence available for each clinically important endpoint. PARTICIPANTS IN DEVELOPMENT OF SCIENTIFIC STATEMENT: The 12-member Scientific Statement Task Force of The Endocrine Society selected the leader of the statement development group (R.J.S.) and suggested experts with expertise in specific areas. In conjunction with the Task Force, lead authors (n = 25) and peer reviewers (n = 14) for each specific topic were selected. All discussions regarding content and grading of evidence occurred via teleconference or electronic and written correspondence. No funding was provided to any expert or peer reviewer, and all participants volunteered their time to prepare this Scientific Statement. EVIDENCE: Each expert conducted extensive literature searches of case control, cohort, and randomized controlled trials as well as meta-analyses, Cochrane reviews, and Position Statements from other professional societies in order to compile and evaluate available evidence. No unpublished data were used to draw conclusions from the evidence. CONSENSUS PROCESS: A consensus was reached after several iterations. Each topic was considered separately, and a consensus was achieved as to content to be included and conclusions reached between the primary author and the peer reviewer specific to that topic. In a separate iteration, the quality of evidence was judged using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) system in common use by The Endocrine Society for preparing clinical guidelines. The final iteration involved responses to four levels of additional review: 1) general comments offered by each of the 25 authors; 2) comments of the individual Task Force members; 3) critiques by the reviewers of the Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism; and 4) suggestions offered by the Council and members of The Endocrine Society. The lead author compiled each individual topic into a coherent document and finalized the content for the final Statement. The writing process was analogous to preparation of a multiauthored textbook with input from individual authors and the textbook editors. CONCLUSIONS: The major conclusions related to the overall benefits and risks of MHT expressed as the number of women per 1000 taking MHT for 5 yr who would experience benefit or harm. Primary areas of benefit included relief of hot flashes and symptoms of urogenital atrophy and prevention of fractures and diabetes. Risks included venothrombotic episodes, stroke, and cholecystitis. In the subgroup of women starting MHT between ages 50 and 59 or less than 10 yr after onset of menopause, congruent trends suggested additional benefit including reduction of overall mortality and coronary artery disease. In this subgroup, estrogen plus some progestogens increased the risk of breast cancer, whereas estrogen alone did not. Beneficial effects on colorectal and endometrial cancer and harmful effects on ovarian cancer occurred but affected only a small number of women. Data from the various Women's Health Initiative studies, which involved women of average age 63, cannot be appropriately applied to calculate risks and benefits of MHT in women starting shortly after menopause. At the present time, assessments of benefit and risk in these younger women are based on lower levels of evidence.
Objective: To update the "Endocrine Treatment of Transsexual Persons: An Endocrine Society Clinical Practice Guideline," published by the Endocrine Society in 2009. Participants: The participants include an Endocrine Society-appointed task force of nine experts, a methodologist, and a medical writer. Evidence: This evidence-based guideline was developed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach to describe the strength of recommendations and the quality of evidence. The task force commissioned two systematic reviews and used the best available evidence from other published systematic reviews and individual studies. Consensus Process: Group meetings, conference calls, and e-mail communications enabled consensus. Endocrine Society committees, members and cosponsoring organizations reviewed and commented on preliminary drafts of the guidelines. Conclusion: Gender affirmation is multidisciplinary treatment in which endocrinologists play an important role. Gender-dysphoric/gender-incongruent persons seek and/or are referred to endocrinologists to develop the physical characteristics of the affirmed gender. They require a safe and effective hormone regimen that will (1) suppress endogenous sex hormone secretion determined by the person's genetic/gonadal sex and (2) maintain sex hormone levels within the normal range for the person's affirmed gender. Hormone treatment is not recommended for prepubertal gender-dysphoric/gender-incongruent persons. Those clinicians who recommend gender-affirming endocrine treatments-appropriately trained diagnosing clinicians (required), a mental health provider for adolescents (required) and mental health professional for adults (recommended)-should be knowledgeable about the diagnostic criteria and criteria for gender-affirming treatment, have sufficient training and experience in assessing psychopathology, and be willing to participate in the ongoing care throughout the endocrine transition. We recommend treating gender-dysphoric/gender-incongruent adolescents who have entered puberty at Tanner Stage G2/B2 by suppression with gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonists. Clinicians may add gender-affirming hormones after a multidisciplinary team has confirmed the persistence of gender dysphoria/gender incongruence and sufficient mental capacity to give informed consent to this partially irreversible treatment. Most adolescents have this capacity by age 16 years old. We recognize that there may be compelling reasons to initiate sex hormone treatment prior to age 16 years, although there is minimal published experience treating prior to 13.5 to 14 years of age. For the care of peripubertal youths and older adolescents, we recommend that an expert multidisciplinary team comprised of medical professionals and mental health professionals manage this treatment. The treating physician must confirm the criteria for treatment used by the referring mental health practitioner and collaborate with them in decisions about gender-affirming surgery in older adolescents. For adult gender-dysphoric/gender-incongruent persons, the treating clinicians (collectively) should have expertise in transgender-specific diagnostic criteria, mental health, primary care, hormone treatment, and surgery, as needed by the patient. We suggest maintaining physiologic levels of gender-appropriate hormones and monitoring for known risks and complications. When high doses of sex steroids are required to suppress endogenous sex steroids and/or in advanced age, clinicians may consider surgically removing natal gonads along with reducing sex steroid treatment. Clinicians should monitor both transgender males (female to male) and transgender females (male to female) for reproductive organ cancer risk when surgical removal is incomplete. Additionally, clinicians should persistently monitor adverse effects of sex steroids. For gender-affirming surgeries in adults, the treating physician must collaborate with and confirm the criteria for treatment used by the referring physician. Clinicians should avoid harming individuals (via hormone treatment) who have conditions other than gender dysphoria/gender incongruence and who may not benefit from the physical changes associated with this treatment.
COSPONSORING ASSOCIATIONS: The European Society of Endocrinology and the Pediatric Endocrine Society. This guideline was funded by the Endocrine Society. OBJECTIVE: To formulate clinical practice guidelines for the assessment, treatment, and prevention of pediatric obesity. PARTICIPANTS: The participants include an Endocrine Society-appointed Task Force of 6 experts, a methodologist, and a medical writer. EVIDENCE: This evidence-based guideline was developed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach to describe the strength of recommendations and the quality of evidence. The Task Force commissioned 2 systematic reviews and used the best available evidence from other published systematic reviews and individual studies. CONSENSUS PROCESS: One group meeting, several conference calls, and e-mail communications enabled consensus. Endocrine Society committees and members and co-sponsoring organizations reviewed and commented on preliminary drafts of this guideline. CONCLUSION: Pediatric obesity remains an ongoing serious international health concern affecting ∼17% of US children and adolescents, threatening their adult health and longevity. Pediatric obesity has its basis in genetic susceptibilities influenced by a permissive environment starting in utero and extending through childhood and adolescence. Endocrine etiologies for obesity are rare and usually are accompanied by attenuated growth patterns. Pediatric comorbidities are common and long-term health complications often result; screening for comorbidities of obesity should be applied in a hierarchal, logical manner for early identification before more serious complications result. Genetic screening for rare syndromes is indicated only in the presence of specific historical or physical features. The psychological toll of pediatric obesity on the individual and family necessitates screening for mental health issues and counseling as indicated. The prevention of pediatric obesity by promoting healthful diet, activity, and environment should be a primary goal, as achieving effective, long-lasting results with lifestyle modification once obesity occurs is difficult. Although some behavioral and pharmacotherapy studies report modest success, additional research into accessible and effective methods for preventing and treating pediatric obesity is needed. The use of weight loss medications during childhood and adolescence should be restricted to clinical trials. Increasing evidence demonstrates the effectiveness of bariatric surgery in the most seriously affected mature teenagers who have failed lifestyle modification, but the use of surgery requires experienced teams with resources for long-term follow-up. Adolescents undergoing lifestyle therapy, medication regimens, or bariatric surgery for obesity will need cohesive planning to help them effectively transition to adult care, with continued necessary monitoring, support, and intervention. Transition programs for obesity are an uncharted area requiring further research for efficacy. Despite a significant increase in research on pediatric obesity since the initial publication of these guidelines 8 years ago, further study is needed of the genetic and biological factors that increase the risk of weight gain and influence the response to therapeutic interventions. Also needed are more studies to better understand the genetic and biological factors that cause an obese individual to manifest one comorbidity vs another or to be free of comorbidities. Furthermore, continued investigation into the most effective methods of preventing and treating obesity and into methods for changing environmental and economic factors that will lead to worldwide cultural changes in diet and activity should be priorities. Particular attention to determining ways to effect systemic changes in food environments and total daily mobility, as well as methods for sustaining healthy body mass index changes, is of importance.
OBJECTIVE: To develop clinical practice guidelines for the management of patients with primary aldosteronism. PARTICIPANTS: The Task Force included a chair, selected by the Clinical Guidelines Subcommittee of the Endocrine Society, six additional experts, a methodologist, and a medical writer. The guideline was cosponsored by American Heart Association, American Association of Endocrine Surgeons, European Society of Endocrinology, European Society of Hypertension, International Association of Endocrine Surgeons, International Society of Endocrinology, International Society of Hypertension, Japan Endocrine Society, and The Japanese Society of Hypertension. The Task Force received no corporate funding or remuneration. EVIDENCE: We searched for systematic reviews and primary studies to formulate the key treatment and prevention recommendations. We used the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation group criteria to describe both the quality of evidence and the strength of recommendations. We used "recommend" for strong recommendations and "suggest" for weak recommendations. CONSENSUS PROCESS: We achieved consensus by collecting the best available evidence and conducting one group meeting, several conference calls, and multiple e-mail communications. With the help of a medical writer, the Endocrine Society's Clinical Guidelines Subcommittee, Clinical Affairs Core Committee, and Council successfully reviewed the drafts prepared by the Task Force. We placed the version approved by the Clinical Guidelines Subcommittee and Clinical Affairs Core Committee on the Endocrine Society's website for comments by members. At each stage of review, the Task Force received written comments and incorporated necessary changes. CONCLUSIONS: For high-risk groups of hypertensive patients and those with hypokalemia, we recommend case detection of primary aldosteronism by determining the aldosterone-renin ratio under standard conditions and recommend that a commonly used confirmatory test should confirm/exclude the condition. We recommend that all patients with primary aldosteronism undergo adrenal computed tomography as the initial study in subtype testing and to exclude adrenocortical carcinoma. We recommend that an experienced radiologist should establish/exclude unilateral primary aldosteronism using bilateral adrenal venous sampling, and if confirmed, this should optimally be treated by laparoscopic adrenalectomy. We recommend that patients with bilateral adrenal hyperplasia or those unsuitable for surgery should be treated primarily with a mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist.
BACKGROUND: The administration of endocrine therapy for 5 years substantially reduces recurrence rates during and after treatment in women with early-stage, estrogen-receptor (ER)-positive breast cancer. Extending such therapy beyond 5 years offers further protection but has additional side effects. Obtaining data on the absolute risk of subsequent distant recurrence if therapy stops at 5 years could help determine whether to extend treatment. METHODS: In this meta-analysis of the results of 88 trials involving 62,923 women with ER-positive breast cancer who were disease-free after 5 years of scheduled endocrine therapy, we used Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression analyses, stratified according to trial and treatment, to assess the associations of tumor diameter and nodal status (TN), tumor grade, and other factors with patients' outcomes during the period from 5 to 20 years. RESULTS: Breast-cancer recurrences occurred at a steady rate throughout the study period from 5 to 20 years. The risk of distant recurrence was strongly correlated with the original TN status. Among the patients with stage T1 disease, the risk of distant recurrence was 13% with no nodal involvement (T1N0), 20% with one to three nodes involved (T1N1-3), and 34% with four to nine nodes involved (T1N4-9); among those with stage T2 disease, the risks were 19% with T2N0, 26% with T2N1-3, and 41% with T2N4-9. The risk of death from breast cancer was similarly dependent on TN status, but the risk of contralateral breast cancer was not. Given the TN status, the factors of tumor grade (available in 43,590 patients) and Ki-67 status (available in 7692 patients), which are strongly correlated with each other, were of only moderate independent predictive value for distant recurrence, but the status regarding the progesterone receptor (in 54,115 patients) and human epidermal growth factor receptor type 2 (HER2) (in 15,418 patients in trials with no use of trastuzumab) was not predictive. During the study period from 5 to 20 years, the absolute risk of distant recurrence among patients with T1N0 breast cancer was 10% for low-grade disease, 13% for moderate-grade disease, and 17% for high-grade disease; the corresponding risks of any recurrence or a contralateral breast cancer were 17%, 22%, and 26%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: After 5 years of adjuvant endocrine therapy, breast-cancer recurrences continued to occur steadily throughout the study period from 5 to 20 years. The risk of distant recurrence was strongly correlated with the original TN status, with risks ranging from 10 to 41%, depending on TN status and tumor grade. (Funded by Cancer Research UK and others.).
OBJECTIVE: The aim was to update the guidelines for the management of thyroid dysfunction during pregnancy and postpartum published previously in 2007. A summary of changes between the 2007 and 2012 version is identified in the Supplemental Data (published on The Endocrine Society's Journals Online web site at http://jcem.endojournals.org). EVIDENCE: This evidence-based guideline was developed according to the U.S. Preventive Service Task Force, grading items level A, B, C, D, or I, on the basis of the strength of evidence and magnitude of net benefit (benefits minus harms) as well as the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system to describe both the strength of recommendations and the quality of evidence. CONSENSUS PROCESS: The guideline was developed through a series of e-mails, conference calls, and one face-to-face meeting. An initial draft was prepared by the Task Force, with the help of a medical writer, and reviewed and commented on by members of The Endocrine Society, Asia and Oceania Thyroid Association, and the Latin American Thyroid Society. A second draft was reviewed and approved by The Endocrine Society Council. At each stage of review, the Task Force received written comments and incorporated substantive changes. CONCLUSIONS: Practice guidelines are presented for diagnosis and treatment of patients with thyroid-related medical issues just before and during pregnancy and in the postpartum interval. These include evidence-based approaches to assessing the cause of the condition, treating it, and managing hypothyroidism, hyperthyroidism, gestational hyperthyroidism, thyroid autoimmunity, thyroid tumors, iodine nutrition, postpartum thyroiditis, and screening for thyroid disease. Indications and side effects of therapeutic agents used in treatment are also presented.
OBJECTIVE: The objective of the study was to evaluate the current state of clinical assays for estradiol in the context of their applications. PARTICIPANTS: The participants were appointed by the Council of The Endocrine Society and charged with attaining the objective using published data and expert opinion. EVIDENCE: Data were gathered from published sources via online databases (principally PubMed, Ovid MEDLINE, Google Scholar), and the clinical and laboratory experience of the participants. CONSENSUS PROCESS: The statement was an effort of the committee and was reviewed by each member. The Clinical Affairs Committee, the Council of The Endocrine Society, and JCEM reviewers reviewed the manuscript and made recommendations. CONCLUSIONS: The measurement of estradiol in biological fluids is important in human biology from cradle to grave. In addition to its centrality in sexual development, it has significant effects on skin, blood vessels, bone, muscle, coagulation, hepatic cells, adipose tissue, the kidney, the gastrointestinal tract, brain, lung, and pancreas. Alterations in its plasma concentration have been implicated in coronary artery disease, stroke, and breast cancer. Although modern immunoassays and liquid chromatography/tandem mass spectrometry-based methods for estradiol are reasonably well suited to the diagnosis and management of infertility (nonetheless, imprecision and method-to-method differences remain problematic), the very low concentrations that appear to be crucial in nonreproductive tissues are a separate and more difficult issue. Such levels of estradiol are too low to be routinely measured accurately or precisely, and further evolution of analytical methods and the way in which estradiol is standardized is needed.
OBJECTIVE: This clinical practice guideline addresses the diagnosis and treatment of primary adrenal insufficiency. PARTICIPANTS: The Task Force included a chair, selected by The Clinical Guidelines Subcommittee of the Endocrine Society, eight additional clinicians experienced with the disease, a methodologist, and a medical writer. The co-sponsoring associations (European Society of Endocrinology and the American Association for Clinical Chemistry) had participating members. The Task Force received no corporate funding or remuneration in connection with this review. EVIDENCE: This evidence-based guideline was developed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system to determine the strength of recommendations and the quality of evidence. CONSENSUS PROCESS: The evidence used to formulate recommendations was derived from two commissioned systematic reviews as well as other published systematic reviews and studies identified by the Task Force. The guideline was reviewed and approved sequentially by the Endocrine Society's Clinical Guidelines Subcommittee and Clinical Affairs Core Committee, members responding to a web posting, and the Endocrine Society Council. At each stage, the Task Force incorporated changes in response to written comments. CONCLUSIONS: We recommend diagnostic tests for the exclusion of primary adrenal insufficiency in all patients with indicative clinical symptoms or signs. In particular, we suggest a low diagnostic (and therapeutic) threshold in acutely ill patients, as well as in patients with predisposing factors. This is also recommended for pregnant women with unexplained persistent nausea, fatigue, and hypotension. We recommend a short corticotropin test (250 μg) as the "gold standard" diagnostic tool to establish the diagnosis. If a short corticotropin test is not possible in the first instance, we recommend an initial screening procedure comprising the measurement of morning plasma ACTH and cortisol levels. Diagnosis of the underlying cause should include a validated assay of autoantibodies against 21-hydroxylase. In autoantibody-negative individuals, other causes should be sought. We recommend once-daily fludrocortisone (median, 0.1 mg) and hydrocortisone (15-25 mg/d) or cortisone acetate replacement (20-35 mg/d) applied in two to three daily doses in adults. In children, hydrocortisone (∼8 mg/m(2)/d) is recommended. Patients should be educated about stress dosing and equipped with a steroid card and glucocorticoid preparation for parenteral emergency administration. Follow-up should aim at monitoring appropriate dosing of corticosteroids and associated autoimmune diseases, particularly autoimmune thyroid disease.
The management of cancer patients has changed due to the considerably more frequent use of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICPIs). However, the use of ICPI has a risk of side effects, particularly endocrine toxicity. Since the indications for ICPI are constantly expanding due to their efficacy, it is important that endocrinologists and oncologists know how to look for this type of toxicity and how to treat it when it arises. In view of this, the French Endocrine Society initiated the formulation of a consensus document on ICPI-related endocrine toxicity. In this paper, we will introduce data on the general pathophysiology of endocrine toxicity, and we will then outline expert opinion focusing primarily on methods for screening, management and monitoring for endocrine side effects in patients treated by ICPI. We will then look in turn at endocrinopathies that are induced by ICPI including dysthyroidism, hypophysitis, primary adrenal insufficiency and fulminant diabetes. In each chapter, expert opinion will be given on the diagnosis, management and monitoring for each complication. These expert opinions will also discuss the methodology for categorizing these side effects in oncology using 'common terminology criteria for adverse events' (CTCAE) and the difficulties in applying this to endocrine side effects in the case of these anti-cancer therapies. This is shown in particular by certain recommendations that are used for other side effects (high-dose corticosteroids, contraindicated in ICPI for example) and that cannot be considered as appropriate in the management of endocrine toxicity, as it usually does not require ICPI withdrawal or high-dose glucocorticoid intake.
BACKGROUND: In the Suppression of Ovarian Function Trial (SOFT) and the Tamoxifen and Exemestane Trial (TEXT), the 5-year rates of recurrence of breast cancer were significantly lower among premenopausal women who received the aromatase inhibitor exemestane plus ovarian suppression than among those who received tamoxifen plus ovarian suppression. The addition of ovarian suppression to tamoxifen did not result in significantly lower recurrence rates than those with tamoxifen alone. Here, we report the updated results from the two trials. METHODS: Premenopausal women were randomly assigned to receive 5 years of tamoxifen, tamoxifen plus ovarian suppression, or exemestane plus ovarian suppression in SOFT and to receive tamoxifen plus ovarian suppression or exemestane plus ovarian suppression in TEXT. Randomization was stratified according to the receipt of chemotherapy. RESULTS: In SOFT, the 8-year disease-free survival rate was 78.9% with tamoxifen alone, 83.2% with tamoxifen plus ovarian suppression, and 85.9% with exemestane plus ovarian suppression (P=0.009 for tamoxifen alone vs. tamoxifen plus ovarian suppression). The 8-year rate of overall survival was 91.5% with tamoxifen alone, 93.3% with tamoxifen plus ovarian suppression, and 92.1% with exemestane plus ovarian suppression (P=0.01 for tamoxifen alone vs. tamoxifen plus ovarian suppression); among the women who remained premenopausal after chemotherapy, the rates were 85.1%, 89.4%, and 87.2%, respectively. Among the women with cancers that were negative for HER2 who received chemotherapy, the 8-year rate of distant recurrence with exemestane plus ovarian suppression was lower than the rate with tamoxifen plus ovarian suppression (by 7.0 percentage points in SOFT and by 5.0 percentage points in TEXT). Grade 3 or higher adverse events were reported in 24.6% of the tamoxifen-alone group, 31.0% of the tamoxifen-ovarian suppression group, and 32.3% of the exemestane-ovarian suppression group. CONCLUSIONS: Among premenopausal women with breast cancer, the addition of ovarian suppression to tamoxifen resulted in significantly higher 8-year rates of both disease-free and overall survival than tamoxifen alone. The use of exemestane plus ovarian suppression resulted in even higher rates of freedom from recurrence. The frequency of adverse events was higher in the two groups that received ovarian suppression than in the tamoxifen-alone group. (Funded by Pfizer and others; SOFT and TEXT ClinicalTrials.gov numbers, NCT00066690 and NCT00066703 , respectively.).
Despite the high prevalence of performance-enhancing drug (PED) use, media attention has focused almost entirely on PED use by elite athletes to illicitly gain a competitive advantage in sports, and not on the health risks of PEDs. There is a widespread misperception that PED use is safe or that adverse effects are manageable. In reality, the vast majority of PED users are not athletes but rather nonathlete weightlifters, and the adverse health effects of PED use are greatly underappreciated. This scientific statement synthesizes available information on the medical consequences of PED use, identifies gaps in knowledge, and aims to focus the attention of the medical community and policymakers on PED use as an important public health problem. PED users frequently consume highly supraphysiologic doses of PEDs, combine them with other PEDs and/or other classical drugs of abuse, and display additional associated risk factors. PED use has been linked to an increased risk of death and a wide variety of cardiovascular, psychiatric, metabolic, endocrine, neurologic, infectious, hepatic, renal, and musculoskeletal disorders. Because randomized trials cannot ethically duplicate the large doses of PEDs and the many factors associated with PED use, we need observational studies to collect valid outcome data on the health risks associated with PEDs. In addition, we need studies regarding the prevalence of PED use, the mechanisms by which PEDs exert their adverse health effects, and the interactive effects of PEDs with sports injuries and other high-risk behaviors. We also need randomized trials to assess therapeutic interventions for treating the adverse effects of PEDs, such as the anabolic-androgen steroid withdrawal syndrome. Finally, we need to raise public awareness of the serious health consequences of PEDs.
OBJECTIVE: Our objective was to develop clinical practice guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of patients with primary aldosteronism. PARTICIPANTS: The Task Force comprised a chair, selected by the Clinical Guidelines Subcommittee (CGS) of The Endocrine Society, six additional experts, one methodologist, and a medical writer. The Task Force received no corporate funding or remuneration. EVIDENCE: Systematic reviews of available evidence were used to formulate the key treatment and prevention recommendations. We used the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) group criteria to describe both the quality of evidence and the strength of recommendations. We used "recommend" for strong recommendations and "suggest" for weak recommendations. CONSENSUS PROCESS: Consensus was guided by systematic reviews of evidence and discussions during one group meeting, several conference calls, and multiple e-mail communications. The drafts prepared by the task force with the help of a medical writer were reviewed successively by The Endocrine Society's CGS, Clinical Affairs Core Committee (CACC), and Council. The version approved by the CGS and CACC was placed on The Endocrine Society's Web site for comments by members. At each stage of review, the Task Force received written comments and incorporated needed changes. CONCLUSIONS: We recommend case detection of primary aldosteronism be sought in higher risk groups of hypertensive patients and those with hypokalemia by determining the aldosterone-renin ratio under standard conditions and that the condition be confirmed/excluded by one of four commonly used confirmatory tests. We recommend that all patients with primary aldosteronism undergo adrenal computed tomography as the initial study in subtype testing and to exclude adrenocortical carcinoma. We recommend the presence of a unilateral form of primary aldosteronism should be established/excluded by bilateral adrenal venous sampling by an experienced radiologist and, where present, optimally treated by laparoscopic adrenalectomy. We recommend that patients with bilateral adrenal hyperplasia, or those unsuitable for surgery, optimally be treated medically by mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists.
An endocrine-disrupting chemical (EDC) is an exogenous chemical, or mixture of chemicals, that can interfere with any aspect of hormone action. The potential for deleterious effects of EDC must be considered relative to the regulation of hormone synthesis, secretion, and actions and the variability in regulation of these events across the life cycle. The developmental age at which EDC exposures occur is a critical consideration in understanding their effects. Because endocrine systems exhibit tissue-, cell-, and receptor-specific actions during the life cycle, EDC can produce complex, mosaic effects. This complexity causes difficulty when a static approach to toxicity through endocrine mechanisms driven by rigid guidelines is used to identify EDC and manage risk to human and wildlife populations. We propose that principles taken from fundamental endocrinology be employed to identify EDC and manage their risk to exposed populations. We emphasize the importance of developmental stage and, in particular, the realization that exposure to a presumptive "safe" dose of chemical may impact a life stage when there is normally no endogenous hormone exposure, thereby underscoring the potential for very low-dose EDC exposures to have potent and irreversible effects. Finally, with regard to the current program designed to detect putative EDC, namely, the Endocrine Disruptor Screening Program, we offer recommendations for strengthening this program through the incorporation of basic endocrine principles to promote further understanding of complex EDC effects, especially due to developmental exposures.
This Executive Summary to the Endocrine Society's second Scientific Statement on environmental endocrine-disrupting chemicals (EDCs) provides a synthesis of the key points of the complete statement. The full Scientific Statement represents a comprehensive review of the literature on seven topics for which there is strong mechanistic, experimental, animal, and epidemiological evidence for endocrine disruption, namely: obesity and diabetes, female reproduction, male reproduction, hormone-sensitive cancers in females, prostate cancer, thyroid, and neurodevelopment and neuroendocrine systems. EDCs such as bisphenol A, phthalates, pesticides, persistent organic pollutants such as polychlorinated biphenyls, polybrominated diethyl ethers, and dioxins were emphasized because these chemicals had the greatest depth and breadth of available information. The Statement also included thorough coverage of studies of developmental exposures to EDCs, especially in the fetus and infant, because these are critical life stages during which perturbations of hormones can increase the probability of a disease or dysfunction later in life. A conclusion of the Statement is that publications over the past 5 years have led to a much fuller understanding of the endocrine principles by which EDCs act, including nonmonotonic dose-responses, low-dose effects, and developmental vulnerability. These findings will prove useful to researchers, physicians, and other healthcare providers in translating the science of endocrine disruption to improved public health.
BACKGROUND: Limb muscle dysfunction is prevalent in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and it has important clinical implications, such as reduced exercise tolerance, quality of life, and even survival. Since the previous American Thoracic Society/European Respiratory Society (ATS/ERS) statement on limb muscle dysfunction, important progress has been made on the characterization of this problem and on our understanding of its pathophysiology and clinical implications. PURPOSE: The purpose of this document is to update the 1999 ATS/ERS statement on limb muscle dysfunction in COPD. METHODS: An interdisciplinary committee of experts from the ATS and ERS Pulmonary Rehabilitation and Clinical Problems assemblies determined that the scope of this document should be limited to limb muscles. Committee members conducted focused reviews of the literature on several topics. A librarian also performed a literature search. An ATS methodologist provided advice to the committee, ensuring that the methodological approach was consistent with ATS standards. RESULTS: We identified important advances in our understanding of the extent and nature of the structural alterations in limb muscles in patients with COPD. Since the last update, landmark studies were published on the mechanisms of development of limb muscle dysfunction in COPD and on the treatment of this condition. We now have a better understanding of the clinical implications of limb muscle dysfunction. Although exercise training is the most potent intervention to address this condition, other therapies, such as neuromuscular electrical stimulation, are emerging. Assessment of limb muscle function can identify patients who are at increased risk of poor clinical outcomes, such as exercise intolerance and premature mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Limb muscle dysfunction is a key systemic consequence of COPD. However, there are still important gaps in our knowledge about the mechanisms of development of this problem. Strategies for early detection and specific treatments for this condition are also needed.
BACKGROUND: Adult patients with diabetes or newly recognized hyperglycemia account for over 30% of noncritically ill hospitalized patients. These patients are at increased risk for adverse clinical outcomes in the absence of defined approaches to glycemic management. OBJECTIVE: To review and update the 2012 Management of Hyperglycemia in Hospitalized Patients in Non-Critical Care Settings: An Endocrine Society Clinical Practice Guideline and to address emerging areas specific to the target population of noncritically ill hospitalized patients with diabetes or newly recognized or stress-induced hyperglycemia. METHODS: A multidisciplinary panel of clinician experts, together with a patient representative and experts in systematic reviews and guideline development, identified and prioritized 10 clinical questions related to inpatient management of patients with diabetes and/or hyperglycemia. The systematic reviews queried electronic databases for studies relevant to the selected questions. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology was used to assess the certainty of evidence and make recommendations. RESULTS: The panel agreed on 10 frequently encountered areas specific to glycemic management in the hospital for which 15 recommendations were made. The guideline includes conditional recommendations for hospital use of emerging diabetes technologies including continuous glucose monitoring and insulin pump therapy; insulin regimens for prandial insulin dosing, glucocorticoid, and enteral nutrition-associated hyperglycemia; and use of noninsulin therapies. Recommendations were also made for issues relating to preoperative glycemic measures, appropriate use of correctional insulin, and diabetes self-management education in the hospital. A conditional recommendation was made against preoperative use of caloric beverages in patients with diabetes. CONCLUSION: The recommendations are based on the consideration of important outcomes, practicality, feasibility, and patient values and preferences. These recommendations can be used to inform system improvement and clinical practice for this frequently encountered inpatient population.
The purpose of the American Cancer Society/American Society of Clinical Oncology Breast Cancer Survivorship Care Guideline is to provide recommendations to assist primary care and other clinicians in the care of female adult survivors of breast cancer. A systematic review of the literature was conducted using PubMed through April 2015. A multidisciplinary expert workgroup with expertise in primary care, gynecology, surgical oncology, medical oncology, radiation oncology, and nursing was formed and tasked with drafting the Breast Cancer Survivorship Care Guideline. A total of 1,073 articles met inclusion criteria; and, after full text review, 237 were included as the evidence base. Patients should undergo regular surveillance for breast cancer recurrence, including evaluation with a cancer-related history and physical examination, and should be screened for new primary breast cancer. Data do not support performing routine laboratory tests or imaging tests in asymptomatic patients to evaluate for breast cancer recurrence. Primary care clinicians should counsel patients about the importance of maintaining a healthy lifestyle, monitor for post-treatment symptoms that can adversely affect quality of life, and monitor for adherence to endocrine therapy. Recommendations provided in this guideline are based on current evidence in the literature and expert consensus opinion. Most of the evidence is not sufficient to warrant a strong evidence-based recommendation. Recommendations on surveillance for breast cancer recurrence, screening for second primary cancers, assessment and management of physical and psychosocial long-term and late effects of breast cancer and its treatment, health promotion, and care coordination/practice implications are made.This guideline was developed through a collaboration between the American Cancer Society and the American Society of Clinical Oncology and has been published jointly by invitation and consent in both CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians and Journal of Clinical Oncology. All rights reserved. No part of this document may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopy, recording, or any information storage and retrieval system, without written permission by the American Cancer Society or the American Society of Clinical Oncology.
BACKGROUND: Ovarian suppression plus tamoxifen is a standard adjuvant treatment in premenopausal women with endocrine-responsive breast cancer. Aromatase inhibitors are superior to tamoxifen in postmenopausal patients, and preclinical data suggest that zoledronic acid has antitumor properties. METHODS: We examined the effect of adding zoledronic acid to a combination of either goserelin and tamoxifen or goserelin and anastrozole in premenopausal women with endocrine-responsive early breast cancer. We randomly assigned 1803 patients to receive goserelin (3.6 mg given subcutaneously every 28 days) plus tamoxifen (20 mg per day given orally) or anastrozole (1 mg per day given orally) with or without zoledronic acid (4 mg given intravenously every 6 months) for 3 years. The primary end point was disease-free survival; recurrence-free survival and overall survival were secondary end points. RESULTS: After a median follow-up of 47.8 months, 137 events had occurred, with disease-free survival rates of 92.8% in the tamoxifen group, 92.0% in the anastrozole group, 90.8% in the group that received endocrine therapy alone, and 94.0% in the group that received endocrine therapy with zoledronic acid. There was no significant difference in disease-free survival between the anastrozole and tamoxifen groups (hazard ratio for disease progression in the anastrozole group, 1.10; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.78 to 1.53; P=0.59). The addition of zoledronic acid to endocrine therapy, as compared with endocrine therapy without zoledronic acid, resulted in an absolute reduction of 3.2 percentage points and a relative reduction of 36% in the risk of disease progression (hazard ratio, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.46 to 0.91; P=0.01); the addition of zoledronic acid did not significantly reduce the risk of death (hazard ratio, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.32 to 1.11; P=0.11). Adverse events were consistent with known drug-safety profiles. CONCLUSIONS: The addition of zoledronic acid to adjuvant endocrine therapy improves disease-free survival in premenopausal patients with estrogen-responsive early breast cancer. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00295646.)
OBJECTIVE: To formulate clinical practice guidelines for hormonal replacement in hypopituitarism in adults. PARTICIPANTS: The participants include an Endocrine Society-appointed Task Force of six experts, a methodologist, and a medical writer. The American Association for Clinical Chemistry, the Pituitary Society, and the European Society of Endocrinology co-sponsored this guideline. EVIDENCE: The Task Force developed this evidence-based guideline using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation system to describe the strength of recommendations and the quality of evidence. The Task Force commissioned two systematic reviews and used the best available evidence from other published systematic reviews and individual studies. CONSENSUS PROCESS: One group meeting, several conference calls, and e-mail communications enabled consensus. Committees and members of the Endocrine Society, the American Association for Clinical Chemistry, the Pituitary Society, and the European Society of Endocrinology reviewed and commented on preliminary drafts of these guidelines. CONCLUSIONS: Using an evidence-based approach, this guideline addresses important clinical issues regarding the evaluation and management of hypopituitarism in adults, including appropriate biochemical assessments, specific therapeutic decisions to decrease the risk of co-morbidities due to hormonal over-replacement or under-replacement, and managing hypopituitarism during pregnancy, pituitary surgery, and other types of surgeries.