LEARNING POINTS: There is a broad range of differential diagnosis for acromegaloid features such as acromegaly, pseudoacromegaly with severe insulin resistance, Marfan's syndrome, McCune-Albright and a rare condition called pachydermoperiostosis.Once a patient is suspected to have acromegaly, the first step is biochemical testing to confirm the clinical diagnosis, followed by radiologic testing to determine the cause of the excess growth hormone (GH) secretion. The cause is a somatotroph adenoma of the pituitary in over 95 percent of cases.The first step is measurement of a serum insulin-like growth factor 1 (IGF1). A normal serum IGF1 concentration is strong evidence that the patient does not have acromegaly.If the serum IGF1 concentration is high (or equivocal), serum GH should be measured after oral glucose administration. Inadequate suppression of GH after a glucose load confirms the diagnosis of acromegaly.Once the presence of excess GH secretion is confirmed, the next step is pituitary magnetic resonance imaging (MRI).Atypical presentation warrants revision of the diagnosis. This patient presented with clubbing with no gigantism, which is expected in adolescent acromegalics as the growth spurt and epiphyseal plate closure have not taken place yet.
Methods: We describe a 22-year-old woman with xanthomatous hypophysitis (XH), its clinical progression over 8 years as well as the treatment effects of prednisolone and azathioprine. Our patient was first referred for severe short stature and delayed puberty at the age of 14 years.
Results: Investigations revealed multiple pituitary deficiencies. Magnetic resonance imaging showed a pituitary mass whereby a partial resection was performed. A full resection was not feasible due to the location of the mass. The histopathologic analysis of the tissue was consistent with XH. The results of secondary workout for neoplasm, infection, autoimmune, and inflammatory disorders were negative. After surgery, a progressive enlargement of the mass was observed. Two courses of prednisolone were administered with a significant reduction in the mass size. Azathioprine was added due to the unsustained effects of prednisolone when tapered off and the concern of steroid toxicity with continued use. No further increase in the mass size was noted after 6 months on azathioprine.
Conclusion: Glucocorticoid and immunotherapy are treatment options for XH; however, more cases are needed to better understand its pathogenesis and clinical progression.
OBJECTIVE: To determine the efficacy of ivermectin in preventing progression to severe disease among high-risk patients with COVID-19.
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: The Ivermectin Treatment Efficacy in COVID-19 High-Risk Patients (I-TECH) study was an open-label randomized clinical trial conducted at 20 public hospitals and a COVID-19 quarantine center in Malaysia between May 31 and October 25, 2021. Within the first week of patients' symptom onset, the study enrolled patients 50 years and older with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19, comorbidities, and mild to moderate disease.
INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive either oral ivermectin, 0.4 mg/kg body weight daily for 5 days, plus standard of care (n = 241) or standard of care alone (n = 249). The standard of care consisted of symptomatic therapy and monitoring for signs of early deterioration based on clinical findings, laboratory test results, and chest imaging.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary outcome was the proportion of patients who progressed to severe disease, defined as the hypoxic stage requiring supplemental oxygen to maintain pulse oximetry oxygen saturation of 95% or higher. Secondary outcomes of the trial included the rates of mechanical ventilation, intensive care unit admission, 28-day in-hospital mortality, and adverse events.
RESULTS: Among 490 patients included in the primary analysis (mean [SD] age, 62.5 [8.7] years; 267 women [54.5%]), 52 of 241 patients (21.6%) in the ivermectin group and 43 of 249 patients (17.3%) in the control group progressed to severe disease (relative risk [RR], 1.25; 95% CI, 0.87-1.80; P = .25). For all prespecified secondary outcomes, there were no significant differences between groups. Mechanical ventilation occurred in 4 (1.7%) vs 10 (4.0%) (RR, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.13-1.30; P = .17), intensive care unit admission in 6 (2.4%) vs 8 (3.2%) (RR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.27-2.20; P = .79), and 28-day in-hospital death in 3 (1.2%) vs 10 (4.0%) (RR, 0.31; 95% CI, 0.09-1.11; P = .09). The most common adverse event reported was diarrhea (14 [5.8%] in the ivermectin group and 4 [1.6%] in the control group).
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In this randomized clinical trial of high-risk patients with mild to moderate COVID-19, ivermectin treatment during early illness did not prevent progression to severe disease. The study findings do not support the use of ivermectin for patients with COVID-19.
TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04920942.