Abstract
The association between growth hormone (GH) treatment and cancer risk has not been thoroughly evaluated and there are questions about any increased risk of bone tumors. We examined cancer risk and especially bone tumor risk in a population‐based cohort study of 6874 patients treated with recombinant GH in France for isolated GH deficiency, short stature associated with low birth weight or length or idiopathic short stature. Adult mortality and morbidity data obtained from national databases and from questionnaires. Case ascertainment completeness was estimated with capture‐recapture methods. Standardized mortality and incidence ratios were calculated using national reference data. 111 875 person‐years of observation were analyzed and patients were followed for an average of 17.4 ± 5.3 years to a mean age of 28.4 ± 6.2 years. For cancer overall, mortality and incidence were not different from expected figures. Five patients developed bone tumors (chondrosarcoma, 1, Ewing sarcoma, 1, osteosarcoma, 3) of whom 3 died (Ewing sarcoma, 1, osteosarcoma, 2), whereas only 1.4 case and 0.6 deaths were expected: standardized mortality ratio, 5.0 and standardized incidence ratio from 3.5 to 3.8 accounting or not accounting for missed cases. Most patients received conventional doses of GH, although one patient with osteosarcoma had received high dose GH (60 μg/kg/d). This study confirms an increased risk of bone tumors but not overall cancer risk in subjects treated with GH in childhood for isolated GH deficiency or childhood short stature. Further work is needed to elucidate the mechanisms involved.
Highlights
Funding informationThe funding sources had no role in the study design, data collection, data interpretation, data analysis, or writing of the report
The risk of malignancy after growth hormone treatment during childhood remains unclear
Most of the low-r isk mortality and morbidity group (n = 6874) were patients treated for the indication of isolated growth hormone (GH) deficiency, based on GH stimulation tests (n = 4600, 67%) (Table 1)
Summary
The funding sources had no role in the study design, data collection, data interpretation, data analysis, or writing of the report
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.