Real-World Efficacy of Weekly Somatrogon on Growth and Bone Health in Pediatric Growth Hormone Deficiency: A 12-Month Retrospective Cohort Study.

Disclosure: B.S. Miller: Ascendis Pharma, BioMarin, Bristol Myers Squibb, EMD Serono, Endo Pharmaceuticals, Novo Nordisk, Pfizer, Provention Bio, Tolmar, Alexion, Abbvie, Aeterna Zenta, Amicus, Foresee Pharmaceuticals, Lumos Pharma, Lysogene, Novo Nordisk, OPKO Health, Pfizer, Prevail Therapeutics and Sangamo Therapeutics. C. Barbus: None. A. Forsythe: None. M.D. Evans: None. A. Olson: None. Background: Current standard of care for children with growth hormone (GH) deficiency (GHD) is GH replacement therapy (GHRT) with daily GH (DGH); however, efficacy is at times hindered by difficulties maintaining adherence. Once-weekly long-acting GH (LAGH) has been developed to improve adherence through reduced injection frequency, ultimately maximizing the efficacy of GHRT. Whether this desired effect truly exists has yet to be documented. This study aims to analyze the level of adherence to GHRT and clinical outcomes of children before and after they transition from DGH to LAGH. Methods: Children (ages 2-13y) who were actively receiving DGH for GHD were recruited to be in a prospective studying evaluating growth, body composition, insulin resistance, adherence, quality of life, and treatment satisfaction. Participants were seen roughly every 6 months for up to 2 years. Those who chose to transition to LAGH were seen a final time 6 months after initiating LAGH. Surveys were given to participants and caregivers to evaluate adherence at each visit. Anthropometric, biochemical, and treatment data were abstracted from the electronic medical record from routine clinic visits that occurred during the study. Fasting labs, including glucose, insulin levels, and hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) were also collected at each study visit. Results: 19 participants with GHD receiving DGH were enrolled in the study. 4 transitioned to LAGH during the time of the study. Those who switched from DGH to LAGH served as their own comparisons. There was no significant change in adherence when individuals transitioned from DGH to LAGH. Growth measures (height, weight, and BMI) were also not statistically different between children who transitioned to LAGH and those who did not. Similarly, no significant differences were observed between participants with adherence rates greater than 85% vs. those with rates below 85%. Likewise, fasting glucose, HbA1c, and insulin levels did not differ between those who transitioned to LAGH and those who did not. Conclusions: LAGH has been theorized to improve the efficacy of GHRT for patients with GHD through increasing adherence to the therapy. Such an effect was not observed as there was no change in adherence when patients switched from DGH and LAGH, nor differences in growth outcomes with increasing level of adherence. Previous reservations about LAGH have also postulated that the larger size of the LAGH molecules may limit their access to the target tissues leading to an imbalance of the linear growth and metabolic effects and that persistently elevated levels of GH from LAGH may also have a negative impact on metabolism. In patients previously on DGH, short-term LAGH use showed no evidence of altered metabolic function. Further studies are needed to better characterize the bioavailability of LAGH compared to DGH and its resulting impact on growth and metabolism over the long term. Presentation: Saturday, July 12, 2025

016–TransCon GH as a Long-Acting Growth Hormone for the Treatment of Pediatric Growth Hormone Deficiency

Disclosure: B.S. Miller: Consulting Fee; Self; Abbvie, Ascendis Pharma, BioMarin, Bristol-Myers Squibb, EMD Serono, Endo Pharmaceuticals, Novo Nordisk, Orchard Therapeutics, Pfizer, Provention Bio, Tolmar. Grant Recipient; Self; Alexion, Abbvie, Aeterna Zentaris, Amgen, Amicus, Lumos Pharma, Lysogene, Novo Nordisk, OPKO Health Pfizer, Prevail Therapeutics, Sangamo Therapeutics. J.C. Blair: Advisory Board Member; Self; Novo Nordisk. Speaker; Self; Novo Nordisk, Ipsen. Other; Self; Novo Nordisk. M. Højby Rasmussen: Employee; Self; Novo Nordisk. Stock Owner; Self; Novo Nordisk. A. Maniatis: Research Investigator; Self; Novo Nordisk, Ascendis, OPKO, Pfizer. J. Mori: Advisory Board Member; Self; Novo Nordisk. Consulting Fee; Self; JCR. Speaker; Self; Novo Nordisk, Pfizer, JCR. V. Böttcher: Advisory Board Member; Self; Merck. Speaker; Self; Novo Nordisk, Merck. Other; Self; Ferring, Lilly, Merck, Novo Nordisk. H. Kim: None. M. Polak: Advisory Board Member; Self; Ipsen, Novo Nordisk, Pfizer. Grant Recipient; Self; Ipsen, Novo Nordisk, Pfizer, Sandoz, Merck, Sanofi. Speaker; Self; Novo Nordisk, Pfizer, Ipsen. R. Horikawa: Advisory Board Member; Self; Novo Nordisk, Pfizer, Ascendis, Lumos Pharma. Grant Recipient; Self; Sandoz. Speaker; Self; Novo Nordisk, Pfizer, JCR. Growth hormone (GH) replacement therapy for children with GH deficiency (GHD) traditionally required daily subcutaneous injections. Somapacitan (Novo Nordisk A/S) is a reversible albumin-binding GH derivative administered once-weekly and the only long-acting GH (LAGH) approved for the treatment of both adults and children with GHD. REAL4 is a randomized, open-label, multi-national, phase 3 trial, consisting of a 52-week main phase and a three-year (week 52 to 208) extension period (NCT03811535). The trial included 200 GH-treatment-naïve, prepubertal children with GHD. Participants received either once-weekly somapacitan (0.16 mg/kg; n=132) or once-daily GH (Norditropin® 0.034 mg/kg; n=68) for 52 weeks. Afterwards, participants receiving daily GH switched to 0.16 mg/kg/week somapacitan (switch group), while those receiving somapacitan continued treatment (soma/soma group). Growth-related endpoints included height velocity (HV), HV standard deviation score (SDS), height SDS, and bone age. The 3-year (156-week) results are presented here. A total of 188 participants (125 in the soma/soma group and 63 in the switch group) completed 3 years of treatment. Improvements in HV, HV SDS, height SDS, and bone age were similar between the groups. In year 3 (week 104 to 156), mean (SD) HV was 7.4 (1.5) cm/year in the soma/soma group and 7.8 (1.4) cm/year in the switch group. The mean (SD) change in height SDS from baseline to week 156 was 2.04 (0.85) in the soma/soma group and 2.38 (1.14) in the switch group, with mean (SD) height SDS at week 156 of -0.95 (0.98) and -1.08 (0.93) in the soma/soma and switch groups, respectively. Mean BMI SDS remained within normal range in both groups at week 156. No safety or tolerability issues were identified. During the extension period (week 52 to 156), a low proportion of the participants reported injection site reactions. No neutralizing antibodies were detected at any of the visits. In conclusion, once-weekly somapacitan showed sustained efficacy and tolerability for three years, as well as for two years following the switching from daily GH treatment in this pivotal phase 3 REAL4 trial. The safety profile of somapacitan was similar to the well-known safety profile of daily GH. Presentation: 6/3/2024

Current treatment for growth hormone (GH) deficiency (GHD) requires daily injections, which can be burdensome for the patients/caregivers. Once-weekly somapacitan is a long-acting GH derivative currently in phase 3 for use in children with GHD and phase 2 for short children born small for gestational age. A phase 2, multinational, randomized, open-label, controlled trial (NCT02616562) investigated the efficacy and safety of somapacitan in children compared with daily GH (Norditropin®). GH-treatment-naïve prepubertal children with GHD received 0.04 (n=16), 0.08 (n=15) or 0.16 mg/kg/week (n=14) subcutaneous (s.c.) somapacitan, or s.c. daily GH 0.034 mg/kg/day (0.24 mg/kg/week; n=14) for 52 weeks, followed by a 104-week safety extension. In the extension phase, all patients on somapacitan received 0.16 mg/kg/week; daily GH dose remained unaltered. The 52-week efficacy and safety results have been reported previously. We report here the efficacy results after 104 weeks of GH treatment. At week 104, mean (standard deviation [SD]) height velocity (HV) in the first year of the safety extension was: 10.6 (1.4), 10.0 (1.6) and 9.2 (1.7) cm/year for 0.04/0.16 mg/kg/week (n=13), 0.08/0.16 mg/kg/week (n=15) and 0.16/0.16 mg/kg/week (n=14) somapacitan, respectively, versus 9.0 (2.3) cm/year for daily GH (n=11). Mean (SD) change from baseline in HV standard deviation score (SDS) was 8.04 (2.52), 6.21 (2.90) and 6.40 (3.04) for somapacitan, respectively, versus 6.58 (3.15) for daily GH. Compared with week 52, mean HV and HV SDS at week 104 were increased in children in the somapacitan 0.04/0.16 mg/kg/week and 0.08/0.16 mg/kg/week treatment groups. Height SDS values improved during the second year of treatment with somapacitan and daily GH, with the greatest change from baseline in the somapacitan 0.16/0.16 mg/kg/week treatment group. The mean (SD) change in height SDS from baseline to week 104 was 1.73 (0.76), 1.87 (0.81) and 2.18 (1.18) for somapacitan, respectively, versus 1.72 (0.65) for daily GH. The observed mean (SD) change in insulin-like growth factor-I (IGF-I) SDS from baseline was similar between the somapacitan 0.08/0.16 and 0.16/0.16 mg/kg/week treatment groups (3.15 [1.17] and 3.21 [1.12], respectively), and slightly higher compared with IGF-I SDS in the 0.04/0.16 mg/kg/week group (2.99 [1.05]) and the daily GH group (3.06 [1.26]). Mean IGF-I SDS values remained below the upper limit (+2) of the normal range for all treatment groups throughout the 104-week trial duration. Somapacitan was well tolerated at all doses investigated, with no new safety or local tolerability issues identified during the 104 weeks of treatment. In conclusion, at week 104, height-based outcomes were similar between somapacitan 0.16/0.16 mg/kg/week and daily GH, with comparable mean change in IGF-I SDS. Furthermore, the key improvements observed in the first year were maintained in the second year of the study.

Treatment of persistent short stature in children born small for gestational age (SGA) requires daily growth hormone (GH) injections that can be burdensome for patients and caregivers. Once-weekly somapacitan is a long-acting GH currently in phase 3 development for replacement therapy in children with GH deficiency. We report the 26-week results of the first phase 2, multinational, randomized, open-label, controlled, dose-finding trial (NCT03878446) investigating the efficacy and safety of somapacitan as treatment for short stature in children born SGA compared with daily GH (Norditropin®, Novo Nordisk A/S). A total of 62 (35.5% female) GH-treatment-naïve, prepubertal children received 0.16, 0.20 or 0.24 mg/kg/week subcutaneous (s.c.) somapacitan, or 0.035 or 0.067 mg/kg/day s.c. daily GH for 26 weeks (main phase). All children are subsequently included in an extension to this trial.The primary outcome was annualized height velocity (HV). At week 26, the estimated mean HV was: 8.9, 11.0 and 11.3 cm/year for 0.16 mg/kg/week (n=12), 0.20 mg/kg/week (n=13) and 0.24 mg/kg/week (n=12) somapacitan, respectively, versus 10.3 and 11.9 cm/year for 0.035 mg/kg/day (n=12) and 0.067 mg/kg/day (n=13) daily GH, respectively. A dose-dependent response in the estimated mean HV was observed with both somapacitan and daily GH. The effect of somapacitan on HV was not statistically significantly different compared with daily GH. A similar pattern was observed for change from baseline in height standard deviation score (SDS) and change from baseline in HV SDS. Consistent dose-dependent increases were observed in insulin-like growth factor-I (IGF-I) SDS with both somapacitan and daily GH. Exposure-response modeling of somapacitan exposure versus HV and IGF-I SDS vs. HV indicated an exposure-dependent increase in HV for both these parameters.Somapacitan was well tolerated at all doses investigated, with no safety or local tolerability issues identified. There were no clinically relevant findings with respect to glucose metabolism, and no detection of anti-drug antibodies in any of the dose groups.In conclusion, all investigated doses of weekly somapacitan were efficacious and well tolerated throughout the study period. Based on the totality of data on improvements in height-based parameters combined with exposure-response analyses, a somapacitan dose of 0.24 mg/kg/week appears as the most efficacious dose, providing similar efficacy, safety and tolerability to daily GH 0.067 mg/kg/day after 26 weeks of treatment.Presentation: Monday, June 13, 2022 12:30 p.m. - 2:30 p.m., Monday, June 13, 2022 12:51 p.m. - 12:56 p.m.

The current treatment for growth hormone deficiency (GHD) requires daily subcutaneous injections, which can be burdensome. Somapacitan is a long-acting growth hormone (GH) derivative in development for once-weekly use in children with GHD.REAL 3 (NCT02616562) is an ongoing, phase 2, multinational, randomised, open-label, controlled trial designed to investigate the efficacy and safety of somapacitan compared with daily GH (Norditropin®). Prepubertal children with GHD who were naïve to GH treatment received 0.04 (n=16), 0.08 (n=15) or 0.16 mg/kg/week (n=14) somapacitan, or daily GH 0.034 mg/kg/day (equivalent to 0.238 mg/kg/week; n=14) for 1 year. This was followed by a 2-year safety extension, in which all patients on somapacitan (n=45) received 0.16 mg/kg/week, while patients receiving daily GH remained on daily GH. In a further, ongoing 4-year long-term safety extension, patients treated with somapacitan remained on somapacitan (somapacitan/somapacitan, n=39) and all patients on daily GH switched to somapacitan 0.16 mg/kg/week (daily GH/somapacitan, n=11). Here, we present efficacy and safety results from the first year of the 4-year long-term safety extension.At year 4, the mean (SD) height velocity (HV) was 7.4 (1.6) cm/year for the somapacitan/somapacitan group and 6.6 (1.6) cm/year for the daily GH/somapacitan group, compared with 8.3 (1.7) and 7.6 (2.0) cm/year for the somapacitan/somapacitan and daily GH groups, respectively, at year 3. The mean (SD) HV standard deviation score (SDS) was 1.55 (1.70) for the somapacitan/somapacitan group and 0.88 (1.61) for the daily GH/somapacitan group, and the mean (SD) change in height SDS from baseline was 2.85 (1.25) and 2.28 (0.97), respectively. The mean (SD) insulin-like growth factor-I SDS at year 4 was 1.29 (1.23) and 0.94 (1.60) for the somapacitan/somapacitan and daily GH/somapacitan groups, respectively.During year 4, 20 patients (51.3%) experienced 84 adverse events (AEs) in the somapacitan/somapacitan group, and eight patients (72.7%) experienced 12 AEs in the daily GH/somapacitan group. The most common AE was nasopharyngitis, occurring in four patients (10.3%) in the somapacitan/somapacitan group and one patient (9.1%) in the daily GH/somapacitan group; all other AEs occurred in <10% of patients in either group. Most AEs were mild or moderate and unlikely related to GH treatment. One severe AE (surgery for elbow fracture) occurred in the somapacitan/somapacitan group. No serious AEs were reported in year 4. Since previously reported in year 3, one patient in the somapacitan/somapacitan group experienced five injection-site reactions; none occurred in the daily GH/somapacitan group.In conclusion, these year 4 data support the efficacy and safety results of somapacitan observed in the previous 3 years of the trial. In year 4, height-related outcomes were similar for patients who continued treatment with somapacitan and those who switched from daily GH to somapacitan. Somapacitan was well tolerated, and no safety signals were identified.Presentation: Monday, June 13, 2022 12:30 p.m. - 2:30 p.m., Monday, June 13, 2022 12:44 p.m. - 12:49 p.m.

Growth hormone (GH) replacement has been offered to GH-deficient (GHD) children for approximately 40 years whereas it has only been a licensed indication for the treatment of GHD adults since 1996. Nonetheless, the advent of GH replacement for adult GHD patients (Jorgensen et al., 1989; Salomon et al., 1989) has proved informative about the overall management of the GHD child and teenager; equally, the longstanding experience of the paediatric endocrinologist with GH replacement has provided some guidance about potential pitfalls in the diagnosis and management of the adult GHD patient. It is the knowledge exchange at this professional interface that forms the focus of this article.

Long-acting growth hormone (LAGH) has the potential to improve adherence and outcomes over daily somatropin in growth hormone deficiency (GHD). Whereas daily somatropin products are molecularly identical, LAGHs are molecularly distinct; additional moieties or mechanisms that prolong LAGH action confer unique pharmacodynamic/pharmacokinetic properties that could affect efficacy and safety. Only one LAGH available in the United States and Europe (lonapegsomatropin) delivers unmodified somatropin. With no head-to-head clinical trials of LAGHs available, this systematic literature review and network meta-analysis were conducted to compare the relative efficacy and safety of LAGHs in pediatric GHD.Five trials were eligible for inclusion in a Bayesian network meta-analysis; 3 contributed to the base case network, including 3 LAGHs (lonapegsomatropin, somapacitan, and somatrogon) and daily somatropin. Treatment with lonapegsomatropin was associated with statistically significantly higher annualized height velocity and change from baseline in height SD score (SDS) at week 52 compared to daily somatropin and somapacitan; no other significant differences in these outcomes were found. The change from baseline in average insulin-like growth factor-1 (IGF-1) SDS at week 52 was significantly higher for somatrogon vs all comparators and for lonapegsomatropin vs daily somatropin and somapacitan; average IGF-1 SDS was within normal range in all trials. No significant differences were seen in progression in bone age-to-chronological age ratio or serious adverse events (SAEs). Sensitivity analyses were consistent with the base case.In this network meta-analysis, lonapegsomatropin was the only LAGH associated with better growth outcomes. No significant differences were detected regarding SAEs; other safety outcomes could not be analyzed.

IntroductionSince direct comparisons of long-acting growth hormones (LAGHs) are lacking, analyses were performed to indirectly compare the efficacy and safety of somapacitan versus somatrogon and lonapegsomatropin in children with growth hormone deficiency (GHD).MethodsA systematic literature review (SLR) identified studies of once-weekly LAGHs for the treatment of pediatric GHD. Indirect comparisons (ICs) using a Bayesian hierarchical network meta-analysis and a random effects model were performed using daily growth hormone (GH) 0.034 mg/kg/day (base case) or 0.024–0.034 mg/kg/day (alternative analyses) as the common comparator to compare height outcomes to 52 weeks [annualized height velocity, height velocity standard deviation score (SDS), and height SDS]. Identified evidence did not allow IC of safety or longer-term efficacy outcomes so these were qualitatively described.ResultsThe SLR identified two somapacitan trials, three somatrogon trials (one included in alternative analyses only), and one lonapegsomatropin trial comparing the LAGH with daily GH in treatment-naïve pre-pubertal children for IC. ICs revealed no differences at 52 weeks between somapacitan versus somatrogon and lonapegsomatropin, as well as daily GH, with respect to all growth outcomes considered in children with GHD. All three LAGHs had sustained efficacy and were generally well tolerated, with comparable efficacy and safety to daily GH, with the exception of observed injection site pain for somatrogon.ConclusionNo efficacy and safety differences were identified in comparisons of once weekly somapacitan versus somatrogon and lonapegsomatropin, as well as daily GH. All treatments were generally well tolerated, with the exception of observed injection site pain for somatrogon.Supplementary InformationThe online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s12325-024-02966-y.

Titration of growth hormone dose using insulin-like growth factor-1 measurements: Is it feasible in children?

BackgroundThe study aimed to compare the growth responses to 3 years of growth hormone (GH) treatment in children and adolescents with GH deficiency (GHD) according to idiopathic, organic, isolated (IGHD), and multiple pituitary hormone deficiency (MPHD).MethodsTotal 163 patients aged 2–18 years (100 males and 63 females; 131 idiopathic and 32 organic GHD; 129 IGHD and 34 MPHD) were included from data obtained from the LG Growth Study. Parameters of growth responses and biochemical results were compared during the 3-year GH treatment.ResultsThe baseline age, bone age (BA), height (Ht) standard deviation score (SDS), weight SDS, mid-parental Ht SDS, predicted adult Ht (PAH) SDS, and insulin like growth factor-1 (IGF-1) SDS were significantly higher in the organic GHD patients than in the idiopathic GHD patients, but peak GH on the GH-stimulation test, baseline GH dose, and mean 3-year-GH dosage were higher in the idiopathic GHD patients than in the organic GHD patients. The prevalence of MPHD was higher in the organic GHD patients than in the idiopathic GHD patients. Idiopathic MPHD subgroup showed the largest increase for the ΔHt SDS and ΔPAH SDS during GH treatment, and organic MPHD subgroup had the smallest mean increase after GH treatment, depending on ΔIGF-1 SDS and ΔIGF binding protein-3 (IGFBP-3) SDS. The growth velocity and the parental-adjusted Ht gain were greater in the idiopathic GHD patients than the organic GHD patients during the 3-year GH treatment, which may have been related to the different GH dose, ΔIGF-1 SDS, and ΔIGFBP-3 SDS between two groups. Multiple linear regression analysis revealed that baseline IGF-1 SDS, BA, and MPH SDS in idiopathic group and baseline HT SDS in organic group are the most predictable parameters for favorable 3-year-GH treatment.ConclusionThe 3-year-GH treatment was effective in both idiopathic and organic GHD patients regardless of the presence of MPHD or underlying causes, but their growth outcomes were not constant with each other. Close monitoring along with appropriate dosage of GH and annual growth responses, not specific at baseline, are more important in children and adolescents with GHD for long-term treatment.Trial RegistrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01604395

Thalassaemia is a recessively-inherited blood disorder that leads to anaemia of varying severity. In those affected by the more severe forms, regular blood transfusions are required which may lead to iron overload. Accumulated iron from blood transfusions may be deposited in vital organs including the heart, liver and endocrine organs such as the pituitary glands which can affect growth hormone production. Growth hormone deficiency is one of the factors that can lead to short stature, a common complication in people with thalassaemia. Growth hormone replacement therapy has been used in children with thalassaemia who have short stature and growth hormone deficiency. This review on the role of growth hormone was originally published in September 2017 and updated in April 2020. To assess the benefits and safety of growth hormone therapy in people with thalassaemia. We searched the Cochrane Haemoglobinopathies Trials Register, compiled from electronic database searches and handsearching of journals and conference abstract books. Date of latest search: 14 November 2019. We also searched the reference lists of relevant articles, reviews and clinical trial registries. Date of latest search: 06 January 2020. 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. Two authors independently selected trials for inclusion. Data extraction and assessment of risk of bias were also conducted independently by two authors. The certainty of the evidence was assessed using GRADE criteria. We included one parallel trial conducted in Turkey. 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 certainty 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-certainty evidence). However, modest improvements appeared to be observed in the following key outcomes in children receiving growth hormone therapy compared to control (moderate-certainty 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. A small single trial contributed evidence of moderate certainty 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.

Thalassaemia is a recessively-inherited blood disorder that leads to anaemia of varying severity. In those affected by the more severe forms, regular blood transfusions are required which may lead to iron overload. Accumulated iron from blood transfusions may be deposited in vital organs including the heart, liver and endocrine organs such as the pituitary glands which can affect growth hormone production. Growth hormone deficiency is one of the factors that can lead to short stature, a common complication in people with thalassaemia. Growth hormone replacement therapy has been used in children with thalassaemia who have short stature and growth hormone deficiency. To assess the benefits and safety of growth hormone therapy in people with thalassaemia. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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.

Effect of growth hormone therapy on Taiwanese children with growth hormone deficiency

In children, GH secretion and sensitivity to GH are influenced by developmental changes. It is not clear whether the response to GH in very young children with GH deficiency (GHD) is the same as that in older, prepubertal children. A cohort of 265 children (180 males and 85 females) with idiopathic GHD from KIGS (Pfizer International Growth Database), with treatment started at less than 3 yr of age (mean age, 1.9 yr; group I) was compared with a cohort of 509 children (331 males and 178 females; group II) with treatment started at 7-8 yr of age (mean age, 7.5 yr). The following differences (P < 0.01) were found (given in mean values) between groups I and II at the start of GH treatment: 9% vs. 5% breech delivery, 38% vs. 14% multiple pituitary hormone deficiency, 4.2 vs. 5.9 ng/ml maximum GH in response to tests, -0.1 vs. -0.8 midparental height (MPH) sd score (SDS), -3.1 vs. -2.5 height SDS, 0.83 vs. 0.66 IU/kg.wk GH dose. After the first year of GH, the results were: 13.3 vs. 8.6 cm/yr height velocity, and 1.7 vs. 0.6 maximum change in height SDS. Using the previously developed growth prediction models for prepubertal children with idiopathic GHD more than 2 yr of age, our analysis revealed differences in the indexes of responsiveness in prediction models (Studentized residuals SDS, 0.7 vs.-0.3) and strikingly higher responsiveness to treatment among the young cohort, but with large scatter. Thus, new prediction models of height velocity (centimeters per year) were derived by means of multiple regression analysis for the young cohort, either involving (model A) or excluding (model B) the GH peak in tests. Model A explained 54% of the total variability with an error sd of 2.1 cm. Height velocity correlated with (parameters in order of importance) age (-), maximum GH (-), GH dose (+), weight SDS (+), height SDS minus MPH SDS (-), and birth weight SDS (+). Model B explained 45% of the total variability with an error sd of 2.3 cm. Height velocity correlated with (parameters in order of importance) age (-), GH dose (+), birth weight SDS (+), height SDS minus MPH SDS (-), and weight SDS (+). The predictors were qualitatively the same as those in the total prepubertal model involving all children more than 2 yr of age, but their quantitative impact in terms of partial contribution and the order of their importance were different for the young cohort. In particular, the partial contribution of the GH dose was higher, suggesting a greater gain in height per GH dose unit in the very young than in the older children. However, the rank order of the GH dose in the new models was lower, which suggests a slightly low sensitivity to GH in toddlers after the phase of severe GH insensitivity during early infancy. The early detection and GH treatment of congenital GHD is advantageous as a cost-effective strategy for achieving greater improvement of absolute height and growth velocity.