1. |
|
|
2. |
|
|
3. |
|
|
4. |
- Decker, Ralph, 1968, et al.
(författare)
-
Individualized GH treatment reduces the variation in insulin levels and in body composition during the maintenance growth phase in prepubertal children
- 2011
-
Ingår i: Horm Res Paediatr. - 9783805598354 ; 2011:76 (suppl)
-
Konferensbidrag (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: Few studies have evaluated the metabolic outcomes of growth hormone (GH) treatment in prepubertal short children during different growth phases. We have studied individualized GH treatment in the catch-up growth phase and found a reduction in variation of fasting insulin levels by 34% compared to unchanged standard dose. Thereafter, GH-treated children appear to need lower GH doses to maintain SDscore channel-parallel growth. The individualized approach using prediction models for estimation of GH responsiveness has the advantage of narrowing the range of growth response around mid-parental heights, avoiding too low or high GH doses. Methods: Short prepubertal children with either isolated GHD or ISS participated in a 2-year randomized trial of either individualized GH treatment (range, 17–100 μg/kg/day) or a unchanged (USD) standard dose. After achieving near mid-parental height, children with individualized dosage were randomized to either reduced individualized dose (RID, n=28) (i.e. 50% decreased dose) or unchanged individualized dose (UID, n=37) for 2 more years. The 33 children randomized to the USD (43 μg/kg/day) at start of treatment remained unchanged. Objective and hypotheses: To evaluate if bisection of the reduced individualized GH dose (RID) diminishes the variation in the metabolic parameters measured during maintenance growth compared to reduced individualized GH dose. Hypothesis: Reduction of GH dosage reduces the range of metabolic outcomes without decreasing growth velocity during the maintenance growth phase. Results: : We observed a narrower variation in fasting insulin levels (-50%) and in insulin sensitivity as assessed by homoeostasis model assessment, HOMA (-55.1%), lean soft tissue, LST (-27.8%) and bone mineral content, BMC (-31.3%), in RID compared to UID (p<0.05).
|
|