Familial Isolated Pituitary Adenomas Research Articles

Pituitary Disease in AIP Mutation-Positive Familial Isolated Pituitary Adenoma (FIPA): A Kindred-Based Overview.

Clinically-relevant pituitary adenomas occur in about 1:1000 of the general population, but only about 5% occur in a known genetic or familial setting. Familial isolated pituitary adenomas (FIPA) are one of the most important inherited settings for pituitary adenomas and the most frequent genetic cause is a germline mutation in the aryl hydrocarbon receptor-interacting protein (AIP) gene. AIP mutations lead to young-onset macroadenomas that are difficult to treat. Most are growth hormone secreting tumors, but all other secretory types can exist and the clinical profile of affected patients is variable. We present an overview of the current understanding of AIP mutation-related pituitary disease and illustrate various key clinical factors using examples from one of the largest AIP mutation-positive FIPA families identified to date, in which six mutation-affected members with pituitary disease have been diagnosed. We highlight various clinically significant features of FIPA and AIP mutations, including issues related to patients with acromegaly, prolactinoma, apoplexy and non-functioning pituitary adenomas. The challenges faced by these AIP mutation-positive patients due to their disease and the long-term outcomes in older patients are discussed. Similarly, the pitfalls encountered due to incomplete penetrance of pituitary adenomas in AIP-mutated kindreds are discussed.

The role of AIP variants in pituitary adenomas and concomitant thyroid carcinomas in the Netherlands: a nationwide pathology registry (PALGA) study

PurposeGermline mutations in the aryl-hydrocarbon receptor interacting protein (AIP) have been identified often in the setting of familial isolated pituitary adenoma (FIPA). To date there is no strong evidence linking germline AIP mutations to other neoplasms apart from the pituitary. Our primary objective was to investigate the prevalence of AIP gene mutations and mutations in genes that have been associated with neuroendocrine tumors in series of tumors from patients presenting with both pituitary adenomas and differentiated thyroid carcinomas (DTCs).MethodsPathology samples were retrieved from all pituitary adenomas in patients with concomitant DTCs, including one with a known germline AIP variant. Subsequently, two additional patients with known germline AIP variants were included, of which one presented only with a follicular thyroid carcinoma (FTC).ResultsIn total, 17 patients (14 DTCs and 15 pituitary adenomas) were investigated by targeted next generation sequencing (NGS). The pituitary tumor samples revealed no mutations, while among the thyroid tumor samples BRAF (6/14, 42.9%) was the most frequently mutated gene, followed by NRAS (3/11, 27.3%). In one AIP-mutated FIPA kindred, the AIP-variant c.853C>T; p.Q285* was confirmed in the FTC specimen, including evidence of loss of heterozygosity (LOH) at the AIP locus in the tumor DNA.ConclusionAlthough most observed variants in pituitary adenomas and DTCs were similar to those of sporadic DTCs, we confirmed in one AIP mutation-positive case the AIP-variant and LOH at this locus in an FTC specimen, which raises the potential role of the AIP mutation as a rare initiating event.

Clinical and Molecular Update on Genetic Causes of Pituitary Adenomas.

Pituitary adenomas are benign tumors with variable functional characteristics that can have a significant impact on patients. The majority arise sporadically, but an inherited genetic susceptibility is increasingly being recognized. Recent advances in genetics have widened the scope of our understanding of pituitary tumorigenesis. The clinical and genetic characteristics of pituitary adenomas that develop in the setting of germline-mosaic and somatic GNAS mutations (McCune-Albright syndrome and sporadic acromegaly), germline MEN1 mutations (multiple endocrine neoplasia type 1), and germline PRKAR1A mutations (Carney complex) have been well described. Non-syndromic familial cases of isolated pituitary tumors can occur as familial isolated pituitary adenomas (FIPA); mutations/deletions of the AIP gene have been found in a minority of these. Genetic alterations in GPR101 have been identified recently as causing X-linked acro-gigantism (X-LAG) leading to very early-onset pediatric gigantism. Associations of pituitary adenomas with other tumors have been described in syndromes like multiple endocrine neoplasia type 4, pheochromocytoma-paraganglioma with pituitary adenoma association (3PAs) syndrome and some of their genetic causes have been elucidated. The genetic etiologies of a significant proportions of sporadic corticotropinomas have recently been identified with the discovery of USP8 and USP48 mutations. The elucidation of genetic and molecular pathophysiology in pituitary adenomas is a key factor for better patient management and effective follow-up.

Significant Benefits of AIP Testing and Clinical Screening in Familial Isolated and Young-onset Pituitary Tumors.

ContextGermline mutations in the aryl hydrocarbon receptor-interacting protein (AIP) gene are responsible for a subset of familial isolated pituitary adenoma (FIPA) cases and sporadic pituitary neuroendocrine tumors (PitNETs).ObjectiveTo compare prospectively diagnosed AIP mutation-positive (AIPmut) PitNET patients with clinically presenting patients and to compare the clinical characteristics of AIPmut and AIPneg PitNET patients.Design12-year prospective, observational study.Participants & SettingWe studied probands and family members of FIPA kindreds and sporadic patients with disease onset ≤18 years or macroadenomas with onset ≤30 years (n = 1477). This was a collaborative study conducted at referral centers for pituitary diseases.Interventions & Outcome AIP testing and clinical screening for pituitary disease. Comparison of characteristics of prospectively diagnosed (n = 22) vs clinically presenting AIPmut PitNET patients (n = 145), and AIPmut (n = 167) vs AIPneg PitNET patients (n = 1310).ResultsProspectively diagnosed AIPmut PitNET patients had smaller lesions with less suprasellar extension or cavernous sinus invasion and required fewer treatments with fewer operations and no radiotherapy compared with clinically presenting cases; there were fewer cases with active disease and hypopituitarism at last follow-up. When comparing AIPmut and AIPneg cases, AIPmut patients were more often males, younger, more often had GH excess, pituitary apoplexy, suprasellar extension, and more patients required multimodal therapy, including radiotherapy. AIPmut patients (n = 136) with GH excess were taller than AIPneg counterparts (n = 650).ConclusionsProspectively diagnosed AIPmut patients show better outcomes than clinically presenting cases, demonstrating the benefits of genetic and clinical screening. AIP-related pituitary disease has a wide spectrum ranging from aggressively growing lesions to stable or indolent disease course.

The Genetics of Pituitary Adenomas.

The genetic landscape of pituitary adenomas (PAs) is diverse and many of the identified cases remain of unclear pathogenetic mechanism. Germline genetic defects account for a small percentage of all patients and may present in the context of relevant family history. Defects in AIP (mutated in Familial Isolated Pituitary Adenoma syndrome or FIPA), MEN1 (coding for menin, mutated in Multiple Endocrine Neoplasia type 1 or MEN 1), PRKAR1A (mutated in Carney complex), GPR101 (involved in X-Linked Acrogigantism or X-LAG), and SDHx (mutated in the so called “3 P association” of PAs with pheochromocytomas and paragangliomas or 3PAs) account for the most common familial syndromes associated with PAs. Tumor genetic defects in USP8, GNAS, USP48 and BRAF are some of the commonly encountered tissue-specific changes and may explain a larger percentage of the developed tumors. Somatic (at the tumor level) genomic changes, copy number variations (CNVs), epigenetic modifications, and differential expression of miRNAs, add to the variable genetic background of PAs.

SAT-462 AIP Mutation-Positive Patients with Somatotropinomas End up Taller and Requiring Radiotherapy More Often Compared to AIP Mutation-Negative Patients: Data from 784 Familial and Young-Onset Cases

Introduction: Germline mutations in the aryl hydrocarbon receptor-interacting protein gene (AIP) are responsible for up to 50% of familial isolated pituitary adenoma (FIPA) kindreds affected only with somatotropinomas. AIP mutation-positive (AIPmut) somatotropinomas present earlier, more aggressively and are often more resistant to therapy. We aimed to further characterise AIPmut somatotropinomas in terms of clinical features and outcomes. Methods: We studied AIPmut somatotropinomas which presented clinically; prospectively-diagnosed AIPmut somatotropinomas (i.e. somatotropinomas diagnosed following genetic and clinical screening) were excluded from the analysis. Indications for AIP genetic testing were: i) FIPA patients, ii) sporadic pituitary GH-secreting macroadenomas with disease onset <30y, or iii) GH-secreting microadenomas with age of onset <18y. Results: Out of 784 patients with somatotropinomas included in our study, 139 had an AIP mutation (17.7%). In comparison to AIP mutation-negative somatotropinomas (AIPneg), patients with AIPmut somatotropinomas had a younger age at first symptoms (18.9±9.0 vs 26.1±11.7y; p<0.001) and at diagnosis (24.1±10.5 vs 30.1±12.4y; p<0.001), higher rates of pituitary apoplexy (9.5 vs 1.9%; p<0.001), suprasellar extension (66.1 vs 45.3%; p=0.003), extrasellar extension (81.2 vs 68.3%; p=0.032) and a higher mean number of pituitary deficiencies at diagnosis (0.4±0.9 vs 0.2±0.6, p=0.020). The clinical diagnosis of most AIPmut patients was gigantism (55.4 vs 18.4%, p<0.001). The mean final height was higher in the AIPmut somatotropinoma subgroup (187.2±18.4 vs 177.2±19.6cm; p<0.001). AIPmut male patients ended up taller than AIPneg males (193.0±17.7 vs 183.0±23.1cm; p=0.002); similarly, AIPmut female patients were taller than AIPneg ones (175.5±13.0 vs 169.2±8.6cm; p=0.007). Both AIPmut and AIPneg groups had more male patients (60.4% in AIPmut and 52.7% in AIPneg groups). The mean number of overall treatments (2.34±1.65 vs 2.32±1.45; p=0.896) or surgical operations (1.05±0.78 vs 1.07±0.63; p=0.745) did not differ significantly between AIPmut and AIPneg somatotropinomas; however, AIPmut patients were more often treated with radiotherapy (41.7 vs 28.0%; p=0.020). Conclusions:AIPmut somatotropinomas present earlier and more often with pituitary apoplexy, suprasellar and extrasellar extensions, and had a higher number of pituitary deficiencies. The remarkably higher final height in the AIPmut setting, both in males and females, likely reflects the earlier onset of disease, but also emphasizes the management challenges as suggested by the increased proportion of patients requiring radiotherapy.

AIP and MEN1 mutations and AIP immunohistochemistry in pituitary adenomas in a tertiary referral center.

BackgroundPituitary adenomas have a high disease burden due to tumor growth/invasion and disordered hormonal secretion. Germline mutations in genes such as MEN1 and AIP are associated with early onset of aggressive pituitary adenomas that can be resistant to medical therapy.AimsWe performed a retrospective screening study using published risk criteria to assess the frequency of AIP and MEN1 mutations in pituitary adenoma patients in a tertiary referral center.MethodsPituitary adenoma patients with pediatric/adolescent onset, macroadenomas occurring ≤30 years of age, familial isolated pituitary adenoma (FIPA) kindreds and acromegaly or prolactinoma cases that were uncontrolled by medical therapy were studied genetically. We also assessed whether immunohistochemical staining for AIP (AIP-IHC) in somatotropinomas was associated with somatostatin analogs (SSA) response.ResultsFifty-five patients met the study criteria and underwent genetic screening for AIP/MEN1 mutations. No mutations were identified and large deletions/duplications were ruled out using MLPA. In a cohort of sporadic somatotropinomas, low AIP-IHC tumors were significantly larger (P = 0.002) and were more frequently sparsely granulated (P = 0.046) than high AIP-IHC tumors. No significant relationship between AIP-IHC and SSA responses was seen.ConclusionsGermline mutations in AIP/MEN1 in pituitary adenoma patients are rare and the use of general risk criteria did not identify cases in a large tertiary-referral setting. In acromegaly, low AIP-IHC was related to larger tumor size and more frequent sparsely granulated subtype but no relationship with SSA responsiveness was seen. The genetics of pituitary adenomas remains largely unexplained and AIP screening criteria could be significantly refined to focus on large, aggressive tumors in young patients.

Three Novel MEN1 Variants in AIP-Negative Familial Isolated Pituitary Adenoma Patients

Objectives: Pituitary adenomas (PAs) may rarely occur in well-defined hereditary conditions, like multiple endocrine neoplasia type 1 (MEN1) syndrome and familial isolated pituitary adenoma (FIPA) associated with germline mutations in MEN1 and AIP, respectively. This study aimed to assess MEN1 genetic abnormalities in AIP mutation-negative FIPA patients, not associated with MEN1 components. Methods: Among 20 patients evaluated in 13 FIPA families, 12 were previously reported as AIP mutation-negative. In this study, 6 new families with 8 patients were recruited. All patients were subjected to multiplex ligation-dependent probe amplification to detect copy number variations in AIP and MEN1, and AIP sequencing was performed in additional patients. AIP mutation-negative patients were subjected to MEN1 sequencing. Results: Our cohort revealed only 3 novel heterozygous MEN1 variants including c.1846T>A p.(*616Argext*21), rs778272737:T>C, and rs972128957:C>T in 2 families, with patients diagnosed with Cushing disease, nonfunction al adenoma, and acromegaly, respectively. Among them, c.1846T>A p. (*616Argext*21) is a stop codon read-through, whereas the others are 3′UTR variations. MEN1 variation frequency was detected as 15%. Conclusions: MEN1 alterations can be of significance in FIPA patients and screening could be offered to AIP mutation-negative patients without MEN1 features. Further studies are needed to clarify the role of MEN1 in FIPA patients.

A Novel Mutation of Aryl Hydrocarbon Receptor Interacting Protein Gene Associated with Familial Isolated Pituitary Adenoma Mediates Tumor Invasion and Growth Hormone Hypersecretion

Germline mutations in the aryl hydrocarbon receptor-interacting protein (AIP) gene were identified in nearly 20% of families with familial isolated pituitary adenoma. Some variants of AIP have been confirmed to induce tumor cell proliferation and invasiveness; however, the mechanism is still unclear. A novel missense mutation (c.512C>T, p.T171I) was discovered in 3 patients from a Chinese family with familial isolated pituitary adenoma. In silico and multiplex ligation-dependent probe amplification analysis predicted the mutation to be pathogenic. GH3 and 293FT cell lines were used to verify the variant's effect on cell proliferation (Cell Counting Kit-8), invasiveness (Transwell) and growth hormone (GH) secretion (enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay) by transfection with different vectors: control, blank vector, wild-type AIP, p.T171I variant (experimental group), p.Q315* variant, and AIP small interfering RNA. Furthermore, Zac1, Sstr2, interleukin (IL)-6, and Stat3/phosphorylation-Stat3 expression (reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction, Western blot) in each group was also evaluated. The experimental group, p.Q315* variant group, and AIP small interfering RNA-overexpressing group promoted cell proliferation at 24 and 48 hours, respectively (compared with the control group; P < 0.01 for both). Similarly, the cells in the experimental group manifested more invasion and GH secretion compared with the control group (P < 0.01 and P < 0.05, respectively). Furthermore, the experimental group cells expressed less Sstr2 (a prerequisite for the responsiveness to somatostatin analogues) and Zac1 (tumor suppressor gene), but more IL-6 and phosphorylated-Stat3 (GH-secretion related). The novel AIP mutation c.512C>T (p.T171I) is a pathogenic variant that promoted cell proliferation, invasiveness, and GH secretion through regulation of Sstr2, Zac1, and IL-6/phosphorylated-Stat3 expression.

Reduced protein expression of the phosphodiesterases PDE4A4 and PDE4A8 in AIP mutation positive somatotroph adenomas.

Type 4 phosphodiesterases (PDE4s) of the large PDE enzyme superfamily have unique specificity for cAMP and may, therefore, be relevant for somatotroph tumorigenesis. Somatotroph adenomas typically overexpress PDEs probably as part of a compensatory mechanism to reduce cAMP levels. The rat PDE4A5 isoform (human homolog PDE4A4) interacts with the AIP protein, coded by a tumour suppressor gene mutated in a subgroup of familial isolated pituitary adenomas (FIPAs). PDE4A8 is the closest related isoform of PDE4A4. We aimed to evaluate the expression of both PDE4A4 and PDE4A8 in GH cells of AIP-mutated adenomas and compare their expression with that in GH cells from sporadic AIP-mutation negative GH-secreting adenomas, where we had shown previously that both PDE4A4 and PDE4A8 isoforms had been over-expressed. Confocal immunofluorescence analysis showed that both PDE4A8 and PDE4A4 had lower expression in AIP-mutated somatotropinoma samples compared to sporadic GH-secreting tumours (P < 0.0001 for both). Based on the association of low PDE4A4 and PDE4A8 expression with germline AIP-mutations positive samples we suggest that lack of AIP hinders the upregulation of PDE4A8 and PDE4A4 protein seen in sporadic somatotrophinomas. These data point to a unique disturbance of the cAMP-PDE pathway in AIP-mutation positive adenomas, which may help to explain their well-described poor response to somatostatin analogues.

Interaction of AIP with protein kinase A (cAMP-dependent protein kinase).

Germline mutations in the aryl hydrocarbon receptor-interacting protein (AIP) gene cause mostly somatotropinomas and/or prolactinomas in a subset of familial isolated pituitary adenomas (FIPA). AIP has been shown to interact with phosphodiesterases (PDEs) and G proteins, suggesting a link to the cyclic AMP (cAMP)-dependent protein kinase (PKA) pathway. Upregulation of PKA is seen in sporadic somatotropinomas that carry GNAS mutations, and those in Carney complex that are due to PRKAR1A mutations. To elucidate the mechanism of AIP-dependent pituitary tumorigenesis, we studied potential functional and physical interactions of AIP with PKA's main subunits PRKAR1A (R1α) and PRKACA (Cα). We found that AIP physically interacts with both R1α and Cα; this interaction is enhanced when all three components are present, but maintained during Cα-R1α dissociation by PKA activation, indicating that AIP binds Cα/R1α both in complex and separately. The interaction between AIP and R1α/Cα is reduced when the frequent AIP pathogenic mutation p.R304* is present. AIP protein levels are regulated both by translation and the ubiquitin/proteasome pathway and Cα stabilizes both AIP and R1α protein levels. AIP reduction by siRNA leads to an increase of PKA activity, which is disproportionately enhanced during PDE4-inhibition. We show that AIP interacts with the PKA pathway on multiple levels, including a physical interaction with both the main regulatory (R1α) and catalytic (Cα) PKA subunits and a functional interaction with PDE4-dependent PKA activation. These findings provide novel insights on the mechanisms of AIP-dependent pituitary tumorigenesis.

Emergence of Pituitary Adenoma in a Child during Surveillance: Clinical Challenges and the Family Members’ View in anAIPMutation-Positive Family

Introduction Germline aryl hydrocarbon receptor-interacting protein (AIP) mutations are responsible for 15–30% of familial isolated pituitary adenomas (FIPAs). We report a FIPA kindred with a heterozygous deletion in AIP, aiming to highlight the indications and benefits of genetic screening, variability in clinical presentations, and management challenges in this setting. Patients An 18-year-old male was diagnosed with a clinically nonfunctioning pituitary adenoma (NFPA). Two years later, his brother was diagnosed with a somatolactotrophinoma, and a small Rathke's cleft cyst and a microadenoma were detected on screening in their 17-year-old sister. Following amenorrhoea, their maternal cousin was diagnosed with hyperprolactinaemia and two distinct pituitary microadenomas. A 12-year-old niece developed headache and her MRI showed a microadenoma, not seen on a pituitary MRI scan 3 years earlier. Discussion Out of the 14 members harbouring germline AIP mutations in this kindred, 5 have pituitary adenoma. Affected members had different features and courses of disease. Bulky pituitary and not fully suppressed GH on OGTT can be challenging in the evaluation of females in teenage years. Multiple pituitary adenomas with different secretory profiles may arise in the pituitary of these patients. Small, stable NFPAs can be present in mutation carriers, similar to incidentalomas in the general population. Genetic screening and baseline review, with follow-up of younger subjects, are recommended in AIP mutation-positive families.

Frequency of familial pituitary adenoma syndromes among patients with functioning pituitary adenomas in a reference outpatient clinic.

Pituitary adenomas (PA) occur mainly as sporadic disease, but familial syndromes are found in approximately 5% of cases. Identification of these syndromes is important in order to diagnose individuals at risk at an earlier stage. To evaluate the frequency of familial PA in a reference outpatient clinic devoted to PA treatment and to identify family members suspected to have pituitary disease. Patients with PA were interviewed with respect to the presence of family members with diagnosis of PA or with signs or symptoms suggestive of them. The family members who had a clinical picture suggestive of pituitary disease were further evaluated in an attempt to identify new PA cases. In families with familial disease, the AIP gene was sequenced. 262 patients were evaluated and familial syndrome was found in 13 (5%). Ten (3.8%) patients had familial isolated PA (FIPA) and three (1.2%) had multiple endocrine neoplasia type 1. After evaluation of family members' symptomatology, 110 were considered suspected of having pituitary disease, but only 24 participated in the study. Of these 24, 1 was diagnosed with a corticotropinoma. AIP mutations were found in 20% of FIPA families. We found a frequency of familial PA similar to that previously described, as well as a similar frequency of AIP mutations among FIPA families. An active search of the affected family members was able to identify one case of Cushing´s disease. Patients should be aware of pituitary disease's clinical picture to identify possibly affected family members.

AIP mutations and gigantism

AIP mutations are rare in sporadic acromegaly but they are seen at a higher frequency among certain specific populations of pituitary adenoma patients (pituitary gigantism cases, familial isolated pituitary adenoma (FIPA) kindreds, and patients with macroadenomas who are diagnosed ≤30 years). AIP mutations are most prevalent in patients with pituitary gigantism (29% of this group were found to have mutations in AIP gene). These data support targeted genetic screening for AIP mutations/deletions in these groups of pituitary adenoma patients. Earlier diagnosis of AIP-related acromegaly-gigantism cases enables timely clinical evaluation and treatment, thereby improving outcomes in terms of excessive linear growth and acromegaly comorbidities.

Advances in Diagnosis and Management of Familial Pituitary Adenomas

Familial pituitary adenomas account for approximately 5–8% of all pituitary adenomas. Besides the adenomas occurring as part of syndromic entities that group several endocrine or nonendocrine disorders (multiple endocrine neoplasia type 1 or 4, Carney complex and McCune–Albright syndrome), 2–3% of familial pituitary adenomas fit into the familial isolated pituitary adenomas (FIPA) syndrome, an autosomal dominant condition with incomplete penetrance. About 20% of FIPA cases are due to mutations in the AIP gene and have distinct clinical characteristics. Recent findings have isolated a new non-AIP FIPA syndrome called X-linked acrogigantism, resulting from a microduplication that always includes the GPR101 gene. These new advances in the field of pituitary disease are opening up a new challenging domain to both clinicians and researchers. This review will focus on these recent findings and their contribution to the diagnosis and the management of familial pituitary adenomas.

A novel truncating AIP mutation, p.W279*, in a familial isolated pituitary adenoma (FIPA) kindred

Familial isolated pituitary adenomas (FIPA) constitute 2-3% of pituitary tumours. AIP is the most commonly mutated gene in FIPA. We herein report a novel germline mutation of the AIP gene in a family with FIPA. We present two patients, a father and his 12-year-old daughter, diagnosed clinically and using laboratory measures with acromegaly-gigantism. Both underwent transsphenoidal hypophyseal surgery for macroadenomas. We initially detected a novel heterozygous germline AIP mutation, c.836G>A (p.W279*), in the father's DNA. We then found the same mutation in his affected daughter. Pituitary adenomas associated with AIP mutations mostly present as FIPA (68%) at an early age (78% occur at <30 years old). They are often growth hormone (GH) - or prolactin - secreting macroadenomas (88%) that have already extended beyond the sella at the time of diagnosis. Acromegalic cases are resistant to somatostatin analogues and multimodal management is frequently essential to control the disease. Our patients had normalized GH/IGF-1 values soon after surgery, although enough time may not have elapsed to reach final cure. While penetrance of the disease can be as low as 10% in FIPA, especially children and young patients with somatotropinoma and prolactinoma should be surveyed for inactivating mutations or deletions in AIP. Determining the causative mutations may be of assistance in early diagnosis, treatment success, and genetic counseling.

Cyclopes and Giants: From Homer's Odyssey to contemporary genetic diagnosis.

Giants are humanlike creatures of prodigious size and strength present in the myths and legends of many cultures. Cyclopes were a race of giants depicted in ancient Greek mythology and literature. Apart from their extraordinary stature, they were also characterised by the presence of one single eye, located in the centre of their forehead. One of them, Polyphemus, plays a central role in one of the most exiting episodes of Homer’s Odyssey. Besides, descriptions of cases of extremely tall individuals appear in the medical literature as early as in the 16 th century A.D. Post mortem evidence of pituitary tumors were identified in most of these cases, pointing towards acromegaly / gigantism as the most likely cause. More recent case reports on real life giants enriched with the use of radiographic imaging have yielded similar results and even familial cases have been identified. Today, pituitary adenomas over secreting growth hormone (GH) are recognised as the most common cause of acromegaly and advances have been made in understanding their aetiology and pathogenesis. Medical interpretation of the case of Cyclopes covers the differential diagnosis of familial tall stature concurrent with vision impairment in the form of bitemporal hemianopia. Combining textual evidence from Homer’s Odyssey with current scientific data has led us to the conclusion that gigantism in the context of Familial Isolated Pituitary Adenoma (FIPA) or X-linked acro-gigantism (X-LAG) due to mutations either in AIP or GPR101 is the possible culprit: a change in DNA sequence functioning as a link between myth and reality, proving not only that Cyclopes could have really existed, but also that giants are still living among us.

Whole-exome identifies RXRG and TH germline variants in familial isolated prolactinoma

Familial isolated pituitary adenoma (FIPA) is a rare genetic disorder. In a subset of FIPA families AIP germline mutations have been reported, but in most FIPA cases the exact genetic defect remains unknown. The present study aimed to determine the genetic basis of FIPA in a Brazilian family. Three siblings presented with isolated prolactin genes. Further mutation screening was performed using whole-exome sequencing and all likely causative mutations were validated by Sanger sequencing. In silico analysis and secreting pituitary adenoma diagnosed through clinical, biochemical and imaging testing. Sanger sequencing was used to genotype candidate prolactinoma-mutated additional predictive algorithms were applied to prioritize likely pathogenic variants. No mutations in the coding and flanking intronic regions in the MEN1, AIP and PRLR genes were detected. Whole-exome sequencing of three affected siblings revealed novel, predicted damaging, heterozygous variants in three different genes: RXRG, REXO4 and TH. In conclusion, the RXRG and TH possibly pathogenic variants may be associated with isolated prolactinoma in the studied family. The possible contribution of these genes to additional FIPA families should be explored.

CAMP-specific PDE4 phosphodiesterases and AIP in the pathogenesis of pituitary tumors.

PDE4 cyclic nucleotide phosphodiesterases regulate cAMP abundance in cells and therefore regulate numerous processes, including cell growth and differentiation. The rat PDE4A5 isoform (human homolog PDE4A4) interacts with the AIP protein (also called XAP2 or ARA-9). Germline mutations in AIP occur in approximately 20% of patients with Familial Isolated Pituitary Adenoma (FIPA) and 20% of childhood-onset simplex somatotroph adenomas. We therefore examined the protein expression of PDE4A4 and the closely related isoform PDE4A8 in normal human pituitary tissue and in pituitary adenomas. PDE4A4 had low expression in normal pituitary but was significantly overexpressed in somatotroph, lactotroph, corticotroph and clinically nonfunctioning gonadotroph adenomas (P<0.0001 for all subtypes). Likewise, PDE4A8 was expressed in normal pituitary and was also significantly overexpressed in the adenoma subtypes (P<0.0001 for all). Among the different adenoma subtypes, corticotroph and lactotroph adenomas were the highest and lowest expressed for PDE4A4, respectively, whereas the opposite was observed for PDE4A8. Naturally occurring oncogenic variants in AIP were shown by a two-hybrid assay to disrupt the ability of AIP to interact with PDE4A5. A reverse two-hybrid screen identified numerous additional variants in the tetratricopeptide repeat (TPR) region of AIP that also disrupted its ability to interact with PDE4A5. The expression of PDE4A4 and PDE4A8 in normal pituitary, their increased expression in adenomatous pituitary cells where AIP is meant to participate, and the disruption of the PDE4A4-AIP interaction by AIP mutants may play a role in pituitary tumorigenesis.

Pituitary gigantism: Causes and clinical characteristics

Acromegaly and pituitary gigantism are very rare conditions resulting from excessive secretion of growth hormone (GH), usually by a pituitary adenoma. Pituitary gigantism occurs when GH excess overlaps with the period of rapid linear growth during childhood and adolescence. Until recently, its etiology and clinical characteristics have been poorly understood. Genetic and genomic causes have been identified in recent years that explain about half of cases of pituitary gigantism. We describe these recent discoveries and focus on some important settings in which gigantism can occur, including familial isolated pituitary adenomas (FIPA) and the newly described X-linked acrogigantism (X-LAG) syndrome.