OBJECTIVES: To assess the benefits and safety of growth hormone therapy in people with thalassaemia.
SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Haemoglobinopathies Trials Register, compiled from electronic database searches and handsearching of journals and conference abstract books. We also searched the reference lists of relevant articles, reviews and clinical trial registries. Our database and trial registry searches are current to 10 August 2017 and 08 August 2017, respectively.
SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials comparing the use of growth hormone therapy to placebo or standard care in people with thalassaemia of any type or severity.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently selected trials for inclusion. Data extraction and assessment of risk of bias were also conducted independently by two authors. The quality of the evidence was assessed using GRADE criteria.
MAIN RESULTS: One parallel trial conducted in Turkey was included. The trial recruited 20 children with homozygous beta thalassaemia who had short stature; 10 children received growth hormone therapy administered subcutaneously on a daily basis at a dose of 0.7 IU/kg per week and 10 children received standard care. The overall risk of bias in this trial was low except for the selection criteria and attrition bias which were unclear. The quality of the evidence for all major outcomes was moderate, the main concern was imprecision of the estimates due to the small sample size leading to wide confidence intervals. Final height (cm) (the review's pre-specified primary outcome) and change in height were not assessed in the included trial. The trial reported no clear difference between groups in height standard deviation (SD) score after one year, mean difference (MD) -0.09 (95% confidence interval (CI) -0.33 to 0.15 (moderate quality evidence). However, modest improvements appeared to be observed in the following key outcomes in children receiving growth hormone therapy compared to control (moderate quality evidence): change between baseline and final visit in height SD score, MD 0.26 (95% CI 0.13 to 0.39); height velocity, MD 2.28 cm/year (95% CI 1.76 to 2.80); height velocity SD score, MD 3.31 (95% CI 2.43 to 4.19); and change in height velocity SD score between baseline and final visit, MD 3.41 (95% CI 2.45 to 4.37). No adverse effects of treatment were reported in either group; however, while there was no clear difference between groups in the oral glucose tolerance test at one year, fasting blood glucose was significantly higher in the growth hormone therapy group compared to control, although both results were still within the normal range, MD 6.67 mg/dL (95% CI 2.66 to 10.68). There were no data beyond the one-year trial period.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: A small single trial contributed evidence of moderate quality that the use of growth hormone for a year may improve height velocity of children with thalassaemia although height SD score in the treatment group was similar to the control group. There are no randomised controlled trials in adults or trials that address the use of growth hormone therapy over a longer period and assess its effect on final height and quality of life. The optimal dosage of growth hormone and the ideal time to start this therapy remain uncertain. Large well-designed randomised controlled trials over a longer period with sufficient duration of follow up are needed.
METHODS: We performed a single-blind, cross-over design study. Twenty-five healthy young men performed three exercise protocols as follows: 1) no blood flow restriction exercise (control group), 2) resistance exercise at 40% of arterial occlusion pressure (AOP) (low group), and 3) resistance exercise at 70% of AOP (high group). Blood lactate, GH, testosterone, and IGF-1 levels were measured at four time points.
RESULTS: There were no differences in the indices before exercise. The blood flow restriction exercise under different pressures had different effects on each index and there was an interactive effect. GH levels were significantly higher in the high group than in the other groups after exercise. Immediately after exercise, IGF-1 and testosterone levels were significantly higher in the high group than in the other groups. At 15 minutes after exercise, testosterone levels were significantly higher in the high group than in the other groups.
CONCLUSIONS: Low-intensity resistance exercise combined with blood flow restriction effectively increases GH, IGF-1, and testosterone levels in young men. Increasing the cuff pressure results in greater levels of hormone secretion.
OBJECTIVE: Our objective was to create a framework that can guide future implementation and research on the use of eHealth tools to support patients with growth disorders who require growth hormone therapy.
METHODS: A total of 12 pediatric endocrinologists with experience in eHealth, from a wide geographical distribution, participated in a series of online discussions. We summarized the discussions of 3 workshops, conducted during 2020, on the use of eHealth in the management of growth disorders, which were structured to provide insights on existing challenges, opportunities, and solutions for the implementation of eHealth tools across the patient journey, from referral to the end of pediatric therapy.
RESULTS: A total of 815 responses were collected from 2 questionnaire-based activities covering referral and diagnosis of growth disorders, and subsequent growth hormone therapy stages of the patient pathway, relating to physicians, nurses, and patients, parents, or caregivers. We mapped the feedback from those discussions into a framework that we developed as a guide to integration of eHealth tools across the patient journey. Responses focused on improved clinical management, such as growth monitoring and automation of referral for early detection of growth disorders, which could trigger rapid evaluation and diagnosis. Patient support included the use of eHealth for enhanced patient and caregiver communication, better access to educational opportunities, and enhanced medical and psychological support during growth hormone therapy management. Given the potential availability of patient data from connected devices, artificial intelligence can be used to predict adherence and personalize patient support. Providing evidence to demonstrate the value and utility of eHealth tools will ensure that these tools are widely accepted, trusted, and used in clinical practice, but implementation issues (eg, adaptation to specific clinical settings) must be addressed.
CONCLUSIONS: The use of eHealth in growth hormone therapy has major potential to improve the management of growth disorders along the patient journey. Combining objective clinical information and patient adherence data is vital in supporting decision-making and the development of new eHealth tools. Involvement of clinicians and patients in the process of integrating such technologies into clinical practice is essential for implementation and developing evidence that eHealth tools can provide value across the patient pathway.