Introduction
Nelson’s syndrome is a very challenging condition that can develop following bilateral adrenalectomy (BLA) for Cushing’s disease (CD), and is due to the development of a progressive tumor of the corticotroph cells in the pituitary [
1]. It occurs in up to 30% of patients with CD undergoing bilateral adrenalectomy [
2] although progression of the size of a corticotroph tumor as assessed by MRI is more common and is detected in 50% of patients within 10 years of BLA for CD [
3,
4]. The corticotroph tumor may be small in some cases but may also be extensive and locally invasive in others; patients can present with mass effects, headache, visual field defects, and external ophthalmoplegia [
5,
6]. The hallmarks of the syndrome are skin hyperpigmentation and high plasma adrenocorticotropic hormone (ACTH) levels that reflect the activity of the tumor and are used for monitoring [
7]. Treatment of Nelson’s is restricted to pituitary surgery and radiotherapy only when there is an amenable anatomic target and the patient’s condition allows [
8‐
10]. In many patients with Nelson’s syndrome these conditions are not met; the levels of ACTH continue to rise, the symptoms persist and there are limited treatment options.
There is currently no medical therapy that can consistently reduce plasma ACTH levels and corticotroph tumor growth, and there is a real need for an effective medical management for Nelson’s syndrome. The anti-epileptic sodium valproate was frequently used in the past with disappointing or variable results [
11‐
16] and dopamine agonists such as cabergoline only occasionally result in satisfactory response [
17‐
20]. Peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor gamma (PPARγ) agonists such as rosiglitazone have also been studied: one report showed biochemical response in two out of three patients, but one of these subsequently escaped [
21]. Our group previously showed that even high doses of rosiglitazone (12 mg/day) do not reduce plasma ACTH levels [
5]. Temozolomide is a medical treatment for aggressive pituitary tumors, but is associated with significant toxicity limiting its use [
22].
Pasireotide exerts its pharmacologic effects by binding and activating multiple somatostatin receptor subtypes (1, 2, 3, and 5). In vitro experiments have shown that pasireotide inhibits ACTH secretion in cultured corticotroph adenoma cells [
23] and prospective clinical trials have proved effectiveness in lowering cortisol levels in patients with active Cushing’s disease [
24‐
26]. More recently, pasireotide LAR was used to treat a patient with an invasive corticotroph tumor resulting in clinical improvement, and reductions in tumor size and plasma ACTH levels [
27].
In light of these data we have performed a prospective multicenter clinical study aiming to investigate the effects of pasireotide on circulating plasma ACTH and tumor size in patients with Nelson’s syndrome. In particular, the study was structured to assess: (1) the acute effects of pasireotide on circulating levels of plasma ACTH after a single 600 μg s.c. injection, and whether this would allow prediction of individual longer-term response, (2) the effects of 4-week of pasireotide s.c. on circulating plasma ACTH, (3) the effects of pasireotide LAR given monthly for 6 months on circulating plasma ACTH, and (4) the effect of pasireotide s.c. and LAR on tumor volume.
Discussion
Nelson’s syndrome affects a significant number of patients treated with bilateral adrenalectomy for the management of hypercortisolism associated with Cushing’s disease, and can be severely debilitating and life threatening. Although Nelson’s syndrome is a condition that may be anticipated to occur after BLA, it poses a significant clinical management challenge, as there is currently no medical treatment that works consistently. In this prospective clinical study we have shown that pasireotide significantly reduces plasma ACTH levels in patients with Nelson’s syndrome. All 7 patients treated with s.c. pasireotide (600 or 300 μg b.d.) had a significant reduction in plasma ACTH levels and 4 out of 5 patients who progressed to receive monthly LAR pasireotide treatment continued to show a biochemical response. Pasireotide could, therefore, be considered for the treatment of patients with Nelson’s syndrome especially if there is positive biochemical response to s.c. pasireotide after a short 4-week treatment trial. Following this period patients that respond could continue on s.c. treatment or change to monthly LAR administration.
In this 28-week study there were no conclusive changes in either skin pigmentation or tumor volume, although there was an indication of possible improvement in pigmentation in 3/7 patients and there was at least one patient with minimal improvement in tumor volume. It is reasonable to anticipate that a biochemical response would be followed by a reduction in tumor volume on long-term treatment and our negative findings could be due to the small patient numbers or the short duration of treatment. A reduction of tumor volume with pasireotide treatment has been documented in patients with CD [
24,
32] and a case report of a patient with Nelson’s syndrome treated with pasireotide LAR [
27]; similar to our findings, the reduction in ACTH in this case report was evident early, within 1 month of treatment with improvement of skin hyperpigmentation. Tumor shrinkage is also well documented in patients with acromegaly treated with first and second generation somatostatin analogs [
33]. A longer period of treatment is needed to fully assess the effects of pasireotide on tumor volume in Nelson’s syndrome.
In the advent of personalized medicine, predicting which patients are more likely to benefit from pasireotide treatment is extremely desirable as it could avoid expensive unnecessary treatment trials and exposure of patients to potential side effects. A positive acute response to pasireotide test dose (i.e. reduction in plasma ACTH levels following a single 600 μg s.c. dose) may predict response to long-term treatment in the majority of patients, but a negative response does not exclude that a response will be seen; 5 out of 6 patients who had a consistent reduction in plasma ACTH after a test dose had a response to pasireotide treatment. Furthermore, patients that exhibited a decrease of plasma ACTH by at least 42% from baseline 4 to 6 h after a pasireotide test dose showed some response (partial or complete) to pasireotide treatment. Histopathological analysis of tissue samples in patients with prior pituitary surgery looking specifically at the expression of somatostatin receptors (SSTR) could be assessed as a factor for predicting responsiveness. Unfortunately the historical histological samples in this study were not available for re-examination but correlation of the SSTR expression patterns and biochemical response would have been interesting to examine and could help explain the differences in response between patients. However, it is also possible that SSTR expression from the original corticotroph tumor is different than the active Nelson’s tumor, and potentially this might be affected by other modalities of therapy, including radiotherapy. Furthermore, recent molecular studies in patients with CD suggest that there is enhanced SSTR5 mRNA expression in corticotroph adenomas harboring somatic mutations of the
USP8 gene, and it is possible that the presence of
USP8 mutations could help predict response to pasireotide treatment in Nelson’s tumors [
34]. In our study no clear dose response relationship was observed on the effect on plasma ACTH. This may be due to varying expression of somatostatin receptors in the tumors or their signaling. Interestingly, there does not appear to be a dose response relationship for the effects of pasireotide in Cushing’s disease.
The future place of pasireotide in patients with Nelson’s syndrome needs to be balanced by its side effects, especially hyperglycemia. Hyperglycemia was a frequent adverse event associated with pasireotide treatment in this study with six out of seven patients developing abnormal fasting glucose and either new or worsening diabetes. Fasting glucose and HbA1c continued to increase during treatment in spite of the clinicians’ attempts to treat this medically and one patient withdrew due to hyperglycemia. Similarly high rates of hyperglycemia were reported in 49% of patients treated with LAR pasireotide [
35] and 73% of patients treated with s.c. pasireotide (1200 or 1800 μg daily) for CD [
24]; in this study 6% of patients discontinued treatment due to a hyperglycemia related adverse event and 46% had to start a new anti-diabetic medication. The significant fall in insulin levels observed in our study is consistent with suppression of insulin secretion from beta cells of the pancreas, in keeping with the known action of pasireotide at the somatostatin subtype 5 receptors on these cells [
36]. The observed hyperglycemia following pasireotide treatment is due to the suppression of insulin and incretin response (glucagon-like peptide 1 and glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide) [
36]. Greater physician awareness of the pasireotide-associated hyperglycemia and more aggressive management of glucose-related AEs may make pasireotide more acceptable for managing this challenging condition [
37]. Active monitoring and management of glucose homeostasis is needed and patients counseled about this prior to therapy.
The main limitations of this study are the small patient numbers, with this reflecting on overall generalizability, and the fact that half the patients did not complete the study. Although the recruitment target was not met, the results confirm a statistically significant biochemical effect even in this small patient size. Plasma ACTH levels before the morning administration of glucocorticoid dose (ACTH 0 h) are most commonly used for monitoring of patients with Nelson’s syndrome and our results show statistically significant reductions during treatment with the robust GLM test. A non-significant trend of reduction of plasma ACTH levels 2 h post glucocorticoid dose with GLM is likely due to lack of power and lower baseline levels of ACTH after glucocorticoid administration (mean baseline ACTH 0 h 1823 ± 1286 ng/l vs. mean baseline ACTH 2 h 1100 ± 987 ng/l). Three of the patients who showed response received radiation therapy 6–16 years prior to study entry and in the absence of historic ACTH levels a small lasting effect of radiation treatment on ACTH levels cannot be definitely excluded, but given the rapid fall in ACTH seen on treatment and the very long time period from radiation administration a significant contributing effect of radiation is unlikely. Treatment for periods longer than this study protocol (7 months) are likely needed to investigate the effect of treatment in tumor volume. The strengths of the study lie in the prospective design and the statistically significant evidence of biochemical response to medical therapy.
In conclusion, pasireotide treatment (s.c. and LAR) was effective in reducing ACTH levels in Nelson’s syndrome and might represent a potential treatment on an individualized basis as treatment options are limited; the lack of complete consistency of response precludes making firm recommendations. If considered, active monitoring and management of glucose homeostasis is mandatory. The patients who responded did so soon after initiation of pasireotide, and thus it would be reasonable to consider a complete lack of response after 2 months of treatment as a failure of response and therapy be discontinued. The LAR preparation appears as effective as the s.c. preparation and is likely to be more acceptable to patients. It would seem reasonable to commence therapy at a lower dose and escalate if tolerated, as there appears to be no clear relationship between dose and effect. Our study is limited, however, by the small sample size and duration of therapy, precluding wide generalizability, and further studies are needed of longer duration (12–24 months) in greater numbers to formally assess the impact of pasireotide in Nelson’s syndrome.