RESUMOAcromegalia é uma doença debilitante e desfigurante que, se não controlada adequadamente, reduz a expectativa de vida do paciente.Complicações cardiovasculares e respiratórias representam as principais causas de morte nos acromegálicos. Atualmente, o diagnóstico é realizado de acordo com as diretrizes do consenso de 2000: ausência de supressão do GH para um valor <1ng/mL e IGF-1 elevado. Avanços em todas as modalidades terapêuticas têm ocorrido, propiciando o controle bioquímico da doença em um número cada vez maior de pacientes. Estudos prévios mostraram que a obtenção de níveis seguros de GH (GH médio <2,5ng/mL) e de IGF-1 normal reduz a taxa de mortalidade para o normal. Em 2002, foram publicadas diretrizes para o manejo da acromegalia, o qual envolve, muitas vezes, uma abordagem multidisciplinar. Neste artigo, fazemos uma avaliação crítica do que dispomos no Brasil para seguirmos as diretrizes estabelecidas nos consensos sobre diagnóstico e tratamento da acromegalia. ABSTRACT Diagnosis and Treatment of Acromegaly in Brazil.Acromegaly is a disabling and disfiguring illness, which, if not adequately controlled, decreases life expectancy. Cardiovascular and respiratory complications represent the main causes of death in acromegalic patients. Nowadays, the diagnosis is made following the guidelines reported in the 2000 consensus: Failure of GH to suppress to less than 1ng/mL and an increased IGF-1. Progress in all therapeutic modalities has been made, allowing biochemical disease control in more patients. Previous studies demonstrated that achieving safe GH levels (mean GH <2.5ng/mL) and normal IGF-1 decreases mortality rate to normal. In 2002, the guidelines for management of acromegaly were published which encompass, many times, a multidisciplinary approach. In this article, we critically evaluate what is available in Brazil that allows us to follow the guidelines established in the diagnosis and treatment consensus.

We report here the genetic findings of a new isolated familial somatotropinoma (IFS) kindred in which the mother (subject I:2) and one daughter (subject II:2) are affected; their ages at diagnosis were 25 and 14 years respectively. Additionally, patient I:2 developed virilization due to an androgen-secreting adrenocortical mass, presenting clinical and molecular features of sporadic adrenal carcinoma. To genotype this family and to narrow down the candidate interval of the putative IFS gene at 11q13, we performed haplotyping on the DNA from all five members of the family and allelotyping of one available somatotropinoma using polymorphic microsatellite markers from chromosome region 11q12.1 -11q13.5. Results indicated that the disease haplotype, between markers D11S956 and D11S527, was transmitted from subject I:2 only to subject II:2. A meiotic recombination event was detected in the fraternal twin sister of II:2 (subject II:1), but her disease status is unknown. Since she is only 18 years old this genetic event cannot yet narrow down the area involved in the pathogenesis of IFS. Allelotyping of the somatotropinoma from II:2 revealed loss of the chromosome carrying the wild-type copy of the putative IFS gene inherited from her father. These results support the involvement of a tumor suppressor gene at 11q13.1 -q13.3 in the pathogenesis of IFS.European Journal of Endocrinology 150 643-648

Familial acromegaly/gigantism occurring in the absence of multiple endocrine neoplasia type I (MEN-1) or the Carney complex has been reported in 18 families since the biochemical diagnosis of GH excess became available, and the genetic defect is unknown. In the present study we examined 2 unrelated families with isolated acromegaly/gigantism. In family A, 3 of 4 siblings were affected, with ages at diagnosis of 19, 21, and 23 yr. In family B, 5 of 13 siblings exhibited the phenotype and were diagnosed at 13, 15, 17, 17, and 24 yr of age. All 8 affected patients had elevated basal GH levels associated with high insulin-like growth factor I levels and/or nonsuppressible serum GH levels during an oral glucose tolerance test. GHRH levels were normal in affected members of family A. An invasive macroadenoma was found in 6 subjects, and a microadenoma was found in 1 subject from family B. The sequence of the GHRH receptor complementary DNA in 1 tumor from family A was normal. There was no history of consanguinity in either family, and the past medical history and laboratory results excluded MEN-1 and the Carney complex in all affected and unaffected screened subjects. Five of 8 subjects have undergone pituitary surgery to date, and paraffin-embedded pituitary blocks were available for analysis. Loss of heterozygosity on chromosome 11q13 was studied by comparing microsatellite polymorphisms of leukocyte and tumor DNA using PYGM (centromeric) and D11S527 (telomeric), markers closely linked to the MEN-1 tumor suppressor gene. All tumors exhibited a loss of heterozygosity at both markers. Sequencing of the MEN-1 gene revealed no germline mutations in either family, nor was a somatic mutation found in tumor DNA from one subject in family A. The integrity of the MEN-1 gene in this subject was further supported by demonstration of the presence of MEN-1 messenger ribonucleic acid, as assessed by RT-PCR. These data indicate that loss of heterozygosity in these affected family members appears independent of MEN-1 gene changes and suggest that a novel (tissue-specific?) tumor suppressor gene(s) linked to the PYGM marker and expressed in the pituitary is essential for regulation of somatotrope proliferation. (J Clin Endocrinol Metab 84: 249 -256, 1999)

The majority of somatotropinomas are sporadic, although a small number occur with a familial aggregation, either as a component of an endocrine neoplasia complex that includes multiple endocrine neoplasia type 1 (MEN-1) and Carney complex (CNC) or as isolated familial somatotropinomas (IFS). IFS is defined as the occurrence of at least two cases of acromegaly or gigantism in a family that does not exhibit MEN-1 or CNC. This rare disease is associated with loss of heterozygosity (LOH) on chromosome 11q13, the locus of the MEN-1 gene, although the MEN-1 sequence and expression appear normal. These data suggest the presence of another tumor suppressor gene located at 11q13 that is important in the control of somatotrope proliferation. To establish linkage of IFS to 11q13 and to define the candidate interval of the IFS gene, we performed haplotype and allelotype analyses on two families with IFS. Collectively, allelic retention in one tumor and a recombinant haplotype in an affected individual mapped the tumor suppressor gene involved in the pathogenesis of IFS to a region of 8.6 cM between polymorphic microsatellite markers D11S1335 and INT-2 located at chromosome 11q13.1-13.3. Maximum two-point LOD scores for five markers within this region were 3.0 or more at ϭ 0.0. As somatotropinomas are the predominant pituitary tumor subtype associated with CNC and arise before 30 yr of age, which is strikingly similar to the age at diagnosis for IFS, we explored the possibility that the putative CNC genes might also contribute to the pathogenesis of IFS. Although the genetic defect responsible for the complex is unknown, CNC has been mapped by linkage analysis to chromosomes 2p15-16 and 17q23-24 in different kindreds. Two-point LOD scores less than Ϫ2.0 were obtained using marker D17S949 from chromosome 17q23-24, excluding linkage. However, LOD scores of 2.5 were obtained for markers within 2p16 -12; therefore, linkage of IFS to chromosome 2p cannot be excluded. This report establishes linkage of the tumor suppressor gene involved in the pathogenesis of IFS to chromosome 11q13.1-13.3 and identifies a potential second locus at chromosome 2p16 -12. (J Clin Endocrinol Metab 85: [707][708][709][710][711][712][713][714] 2000)