We have located links that may give you full text access.
Development of diagnostic algorithm for Cushing's syndrome: a tertiary centre experience.
Journal of Endocrinological Investigation 2024 March 28
PURPOSE: No consensus exists as the gold standard for Cushing's Syndrome (CS) screening. This study aimed to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy and utility of late-night salivary cortisol (LNSC) and cortisone (LNSE), overnight dexamethasone suppression test (ODST), and urinary free cortisol (UFC) in developing a screening algorithm for CS.
METHODS: A retrospective, single-centre analysis on 93 adult patients referred to the Oxford Centre for Diabetes, Endocrinology, and Metabolism for CS evaluation (2017-2022). Data were analysed using binomial logistic regression and area under the receiver-operating curve (AUROC).
RESULTS: Fifty-three patients were diagnosed with CS. LNSC (sensitivity 87.5%, specificity 64.9%, AUC 0.76), LNSE (sensitivity 72.4%, specificity 85.7%, AUC 0.79), and ODST (sensitivity 94.7%, specificity 52.1%; AUC 0.74) demonstrated comparable effectiveness for CS diagnosis. Their combined application increased diagnostic accuracy (AUC 0.91). UFC was not statistically significant. Pre-test clinical symptom inclusion improved screening test performance (AUC LNSC: 0.83; LNSE: 0.84; ODST: 0.82). For CD diagnosis, LNSE + LNSC (AUC 0.95) outperformed ODST. Combining these with ACTH levels < 12.6 pmol/L perfectly distinguished MACS (AUC 1.00). ODST (AUC 0.76) exhibited superior performance (sensitivity 100.0%, specificity 52.2%) in MACS detection.
CONCLUSIONS: LNSC, LNSE, and ODST are robust tools for CS screening, with their combined use offering the highest diagnostic precision. LNSE, especially when used with LNSC, is highly effective for CD diagnosis, exceeding ODST accuracy. ODST is preferable for MACS identification. Integrating ACTH levels markedly improves differentiation between CD and MACS. Conversely, UFC shows limited diagnostic utility.
METHODS: A retrospective, single-centre analysis on 93 adult patients referred to the Oxford Centre for Diabetes, Endocrinology, and Metabolism for CS evaluation (2017-2022). Data were analysed using binomial logistic regression and area under the receiver-operating curve (AUROC).
RESULTS: Fifty-three patients were diagnosed with CS. LNSC (sensitivity 87.5%, specificity 64.9%, AUC 0.76), LNSE (sensitivity 72.4%, specificity 85.7%, AUC 0.79), and ODST (sensitivity 94.7%, specificity 52.1%; AUC 0.74) demonstrated comparable effectiveness for CS diagnosis. Their combined application increased diagnostic accuracy (AUC 0.91). UFC was not statistically significant. Pre-test clinical symptom inclusion improved screening test performance (AUC LNSC: 0.83; LNSE: 0.84; ODST: 0.82). For CD diagnosis, LNSE + LNSC (AUC 0.95) outperformed ODST. Combining these with ACTH levels < 12.6 pmol/L perfectly distinguished MACS (AUC 1.00). ODST (AUC 0.76) exhibited superior performance (sensitivity 100.0%, specificity 52.2%) in MACS detection.
CONCLUSIONS: LNSC, LNSE, and ODST are robust tools for CS screening, with their combined use offering the highest diagnostic precision. LNSE, especially when used with LNSC, is highly effective for CD diagnosis, exceeding ODST accuracy. ODST is preferable for MACS identification. Integrating ACTH levels markedly improves differentiation between CD and MACS. Conversely, UFC shows limited diagnostic utility.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Haemodynamic monitoring during noncardiac surgery: past, present, and future.Journal of Clinical Monitoring and Computing 2024 April 31
2024 AHA/ACC/AMSSM/HRS/PACES/SCMR Guideline for the Management of Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy: A Report of the American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines.Circulation 2024 May 9
Obesity pharmacotherapy in older adults: a narrative review of evidence.International Journal of Obesity 2024 May 7
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app