Objective: Abnormalities of glucose metabolism are common findings of acromegaly. However, robust evidence on whether therapy with somatostatin analogs (SSAs) or pegvisomant (PEG) differently affects glucose metabolism is lacking. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effects of therapy with SSAs, PEG, or their combination on glucose metabolism in a large series of acromegalic patients. Design: This was a historical-prospective study. Among 50 consecutive acromegalic patients under SSA therapy, acromegaly in 19 patients was controlled. PEG used in combination with SSA therapy allowed the control of acromegaly in the remaining 31 patients and was then continued as monotherapy in 18 patients. Methods: The following parameters were evaluated at the diagnosis of acromegaly and during different treatments: fasting plasma glucose (FPG) and insulin concentrations, insulin sensitivity (QUICK-I), homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance (HOMA2-IR), and plasma glucose and insulin concentrations during the oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT). Comparison was made using analysis for paired data. Results: Insulin resistance improved when acromegaly was controlled with therapy with SSAs, PEG, or SSACPEG. However, FPG concentrations were higher during SSA therapy (alone or combined with PEG) than at the diagnosis of acromegaly, even when corrected for disease activity, whereas they were reduced during PEG therapy. Mean glucose concentrations during the OGTT were higher in patients receiving SSA therapy than in those receiving PEG therapy. In addition, the prevalence of diabetes or impaired glucose tolerance was higher during SSA therapy than at diagnosis or during PEG therapy and was not influenced by disease control. Conclusions: Medical therapies for acromegaly reduce insulin resistance and increase insulin sensitivity; on the contrary, glucose indexes may be differently affected by SSA or PEG therapy.

Objective: Acromegalic patients have an increased risk of mortality. The objective of this study was to compare the effect of different therapies for acromegaly on mortality. Design and methods: The mortality rate of 438 consecutive acromegalic patients was compared with that of the general population using the standardized mortality ratio (SMR); the effect of different therapies on survival was evaluated using Cox regression analysis. Results: Twenty patients (4.5%) died between 1999 and 2009. Age-and sex-adjusted SMR was 0.70 (95% CI 0.43-1.08). The Cox regression analysis revealed that, in the whole population, both general risk factors (age and physical status) and specific factors for acromegaly (macroadenoma, hypopituitarism and uncontrolled disease) were associated with death. The most compromised patients at diagnosis had a higher mortality rate (PZ0.001), which also occurred in patients with controlled acromegaly. Death occurred in 2.4% (adenomectomy), 2.6% (adenomectomy followed by somatostatin analogue (SSA) therapy) and 11.4% (SSA therapy as the primary therapy) of the patients. The risk of death was higher in patients receiving SSA therapy as the primary therapy (hazard ratio (HR) 5.52, 95% CI 1.06-28.77, PZ0.043) than in all patients submitted to adenomectomy; however, a higher risk of death occurred only in diabetic patients treated with SSAs alone (HR 21.94, 95% CI 1.56-309.04, PZ0.022). Radiotherapy was associated with an increased risk of mortality, which occurred in patients with the more locally advanced disease. Conclusions: Therapies for acromegaly and comorbidities have lowered the risk of mortality to the level of the general population; the effect of SSA therapy alone or that following pituitary adenomectomy was comparable to that of curative neurosurgery on survival in non-diabetic patients; on the contrary, SSA therapy as the primary therapy may be less effective than adenomectomy in reducing mortality rate in diabetic patients.

Among NF-pNET, large neoplasms were associated with worse outcomes; however, small NF-pNET do not seem to have an invariable benign behavior. Whether surgery should be avoided in all patients with small NF-pNET is questionable.