Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2018 Apr;55(4):254-260.
doi: 10.1136/jmedgenet-2017-104957. Epub 2018 Feb 10.

Risk category system to identify pituitary adenoma patients with AIP mutations

Affiliations

Risk category system to identify pituitary adenoma patients with AIP mutations

Francisca Caimari et al. J Med Genet. 2018 Apr.

Abstract

Background: Predictive tools to identify patients at risk for gene mutations related to pituitary adenomas are very helpful in clinical practice. We therefore aimed to develop and validate a reliable risk category system for aryl hydrocarbon receptor-interacting protein (AIP) mutations in patients with pituitary adenomas.

Methods: An international cohort of 2227 subjects were consecutively recruited between 2007 and 2016, including patients with pituitary adenomas (familial and sporadic) and their relatives. All probands (n=1429) were screened for AIP mutations, and those diagnosed with a pituitary adenoma prospectively, as part of their clinical screening (n=24), were excluded from the analysis. Univariate analysis was performed comparing patients with and without AIP mutations. Based on a multivariate logistic regression model, six potential factors were identified for the development of a risk category system, classifying the individual risk into low-risk, moderate-risk and high-risk categories. An internal cross-validation test was used to validate the system.

Results: 1405 patients had a pituitary tumour, of which 43% had a positive family history, 55.5% had somatotrophinomas and 81.5% presented with macroadenoma. Overall, 134 patients had an AIP mutation (9.5%). We identified four independent predictors for the presence of an AIP mutation: age of onset providing an odds ratio (OR) of 14.34 for age 0-18 years, family history (OR 10.85), growth hormone excess (OR 9.74) and large tumour size (OR 4.49). In our cohort, 71% of patients were identified as low risk (<5% risk of AIP mutation), 9.2% as moderate risk and 20% as high risk (≥20% risk). Excellent discrimination (c-statistic=0.87) and internal validation were achieved.

Conclusion: We propose a user-friendly risk categorisation system that can reliably group patients into high-risk, moderate-risk and low-risk groups for the presence of AIP mutations, thus providing guidance in identifying patients at high risk of carrying an AIP mutation. This risk score is based on a cohort with high prevalence of AIP mutations and should be applied cautiously in other populations.

Keywords: AIP mutations; acromegaly; familial pituitary adenoma; risk category system; screening.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interests: None declared.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of the AIP mutation risk category system is 0.87 (95% CI 0.84 to 0.90), indicating an excellent discriminating power.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Risk stratification for AIP mutations, classified as low risk (<5%), moderate risk (5%–19%) or high risk (≥20%). Red: risk of AIP mutation ≥20%; orange: risk of AIP mutation between 5% and 19%; green: risk of AIP mutation <5%. GH, growth hormone; macro, macroadenoma; micro, microadenoma; simplex, patients with no known family history.
Figure 3
Figure 3
AIP screening algorithm based on the proposed risk category system. The overall risk category of a kindred should be based on the risk score of the family member with the highest risk. AIP, aryl hydrocarbon receptor-interacting protein. *See figure 2.

References

    1. Ezzat S, Asa SL, Couldwell WT, Barr CE, Dodge WE, Vance ML, McCutcheon IE. The prevalence of pituitary adenomas: a systematic review. Cancer 2004;101:613–9. 10.1002/cncr.20412 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Fernandez A, Karavitaki N, Wass JAH. Prevalence of pituitary adenomas: a community-based, cross-sectional study in Banbury (Oxfordshire, UK). Clin Endocrinol 2010;72:377–82. 10.1111/j.1365-2265.2009.03667.x - DOI - PubMed
    1. Daly AF, Rixhon M, Adam C, Dempegioti A, Tichomirowa MA, Beckers A. High prevalence of pituitary adenomas: a cross-sectional study in the province of Liege, Belgium. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2006;91:4769–75. 10.1210/jc.2006-1668 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Daly AF, Tichomirowa MA, Beckers A. The epidemiology and genetics of pituitary adenomas. Best Pract Res Clin Endocrinol Metab 2009;23:543–54. 10.1016/j.beem.2009.05.008 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Vierimaa O, Georgitsi M, Lehtonen R, Vahteristo P, Kokko A, Raitila A, Tuppurainen K, Ebeling TM, Salmela PI, Paschke R, Gündogdu S, De Menis E, Mäkinen MJ, Launonen V, Karhu A, Aaltonen LA. Pituitary adenoma predisposition caused by germline mutations in the AIP gene. Science 2006;312:1228–30. 10.1126/science.1126100 - DOI - PubMed

Publication types

Substances