We critically evaluated the diagnostic value of IGF-I and IGF-binding protein-3 (IGFBP-3) in GH deficiency (GHD) in children and adults using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) plot analysis. Sixty-six children (chronological age, 1.3-15 yr) were studied: 34 GHD and 32 idiopathic short stature (ISS). Ninety-two adults (chronological age, 18-70 yr) were also evaluated: 72 GHD, 34 of childhood onset (AGHD-CO), and 38 of adult onset (AGHD-AO); and 20 healthy volunteers. The SD score (SDS) for IGF-I was calculated from 596 normal subjects (212 children and 384 adults), and the SDS for IGFBP-3 was calculated from 350 normal subjects (212 children and 138 adults). The ROC plot showed that the best IGF-I SDS cut-off line was -1.65 for children [sensitivity (S), 68%; specificity (Sp), 97%, diagnostic efficiency (DEf), 81%], the cut-off line for AGHD was -1.65 for AGHD-CO (S, 91%; Sp, 100%; DEf, 94%), and the cut-off line for AGHD-AO was -1.80 (S, 81%; Sp, 100%; DEf, 88%). For IGFBP-3 SDS, the best cut-off line was -1.80 for children (S, 90%; Sp, 60%; DEf, 78%); it was -1.45 for AGHD-CO (S, 90%; Sp, 75%; DEf, 82%) and -0.90 for AGHD-AO (S, 90%; Sp, 68%; DEf, 77%). An accurate diagnosis was obtained using IGF-I SDS alone in GHD children 65%; ISS, 97%; AGHD-CO, 92%; AGHD-AO, 86%, with IGFBP-3 SDS alone in GHD children 60%; ISS, 90%; AGHD-CO, 75%; AGHD-AO, 68%. Considering both, an accurate diagnosis was obtained in GHD children 60%; ISS, 87%; AGHD-CO, 71%; AGHD-AO, 64%. In conclusion, our findings support the need to use cut-off lines expressed in SDS obtained using an appropriate statistical methodology for better characterization of the various clinical presentations. IGF-I proved to be more useful because of its good diagnostic efficiency and accuracy in both children and adults, whereas IGFBP-3 did not significantly contribute to the diagnosis of GHD.

Asymptomatic hyperprolactinemias associated with altered proportions of molecular forms of circulating prolactin (PRL) have been reported in adults. The scarce references available in children and adolescents prompted us to report our experience in the evaluation and follow-up of patients with macroprolactinemia. We studied 5 patients (1 male and 4 females) aged 11.6–18 years with incidentally discovered asymptomatic hyperprolactinemia. Patients underwent repeated evaluations for a period of 3 months to 8 years, and their PRL levels remained elevated (34.4–516 ng/ml). Structural variants of PRL ≥45 kD ranged between 58.9 and 78.6%. Chromatographic profiles showed increases in Big Big PRL in the 5 cases, ranging between 40 and 72% (normal: 9–21%), and in Big PRL in 3 cases, ranging between 30.0 and 32.6% (normal: 5–25%). Little PRL was decreased in all cases, ranging between 20.6 and 41.1% (normal: 50– 90%). In conclusion, upon detection of hyperprolactinemia with no clinical manifestations and no alteration of the remaining endocrine functions, macroprolactinemia should be considered as a possible diagnosis. The confirmed absence of functional alterations during the follow-up would favor a no-treatment approach and at the same time avoid repeating imaging studies.

The aim of this study was to evaluate the usefulness of basal measurements of gonadotropins in distinguishing between constitutionally delayed puberty (DP) and hypogonadotropic hypogonadism (HH), comparing its diagnostic efficiency with that of the dynamic GnRH infusion test (0.83 microg/min during 120 min). We studied 20 males, chronological age (CA) 14-18 years, with a final diagnosis of DP (n = 8), partial HH (n = 5) and complete HH (n = 7), confirmed by follow-up. We also evaluated basal samples of ultrasensitive LH and FSH in 117 healthy control males (CA 2-19 yr), classified according to Tanner stage. In the control group, ROC plot analysis showed a cutoff to differentiate prepuberty from puberty of 0.65 IU/l for LH (sensitivity: 91%, specificity: 98%). Differences were found (p < 0.05) in basal LH and in maximal responses to GnRH in complete HH in relation to DP and partial HH. The diagnostic efficiency of the GnRH infusion test was 85%. For basal LH, a cut-off limit of 0.65 IU/l showed a diagnostic efficiency of 85% for complete HH and 100% for partial HH and DP. We conclude that, in our experience, basal LH levels above 0.65 IU/l measured by ultrasensitive assay would rule out a complete deficiency. It was not possible to differentiate DP from partial HH, either in basal samples or with the infusion test.

Objective: To study hormonal and histological parameters of paediatric±adolescent varicocele in order to know certain aspects of its natural history, in an attempt to find prognostic markers of testicular damage. Design and methods: In a prospective cross-sectional study, we evaluated 93 children and adolescents with left unilateral varicocele and 29 healthy males as control group. All of them were classified according to Tanner stage. Scrotal Doppler in both testes and GnRH and human chorionic gonadotrophin (hCG) tests were performed in all subjects. Surgery was performed in 28 patients and homolateral testicular biopsy in 18. Results: Hormonal measurements of patients with varicocele were compared with a control group for each Tanner stage. Testicular biopsy specimens were analysed by light and electron microscopy. We only observed statistical differences in Tanner III patients in basal FSH (median and range) controls 1X70 (1.10±3.70) IU/l vs varicocele 4X20 (1.00±7.50) IU/l, P , 0X05 and in Tanner IV patients in LH post-GnRH: controls 11X0 (7.50±15.0) IU/l vs varicocele 18X0 (5.10±29.0) IU/l, P , 0X05 and in testosterone post-hCG: controls 9X50 (7.7±10.0) ng/ml vs varicocele 12X0 (6.2±23.0) ng/ml, P , 0X01X No correlation was found between the various clinical grades of varicocele and hormonal measurements for each Tanner stage. No statistically significant differences were found between pre-and post-operative hormonal findings, either in basal levels or in maximal responses. On the other hand, no morphological abnormalities were observed by electron microscopy in germ cells, tubular wall and interstice.Conclusions: There appears to be no reliable biochemical marker in children and adolescents that may predict impaired testicular function. A significant size discrepancy between both testes, testicular pain and a hyperresponse to GnRH stimulation should continue to be, for the time being, the indications for surgery.

Background: Glycosylated prolactin (G-PRL) is considered as the major post-translational modification of prolactin (PRL) showing reduced lactotropic and mitogenic activities compared to non-glycosylated prolactin (NG-PRL). Aim: To evaluate the evolution of G-PRL in normoprolactinemic children and adolescents and to analyze possible variations in glycosylated/total prolactin (T-PRL) ratios. Methods: T-PRL, G-PRL and NG-PRL were evaluated in 111 healthy female and male children and adolescents (4.1–18 years), classified as group 1 (Tanner I), group 2 (Tanner II–III) and group 3 (Tanner IV–V). G-PRL and NG-PRL were identified by chromatography on concanavalin-A-Sepharose. Results: G-PRL/T-PRL (median-range): females, group 1: 0.59 (0.17–0.77), group 2: 0.56 (0.31–0.78), group 3: 0.60 (0.38–0.79); males, group 1: 0.64 (0.39–0.80), group 2: 0.61 (0.24–0.79), group 3: 0.62 (0.35–0.90); the p value is not significant among the different groups in both genders. G-PRL/T-PRL ratios do not change when comparing low (first quartile) versus high (third quartile) T-PRL levels in the different groups. Conclusion: Our study would appear to support cosecretion of G-PRL and NG-PRL from childhood to the end of puberty. Such cosecretion would not be dependent on sex steroid levels. It is important to point out that puberty does not change the proportions of G-PRL and NG-PRL.