Gender Differences in Multiple Endocrine Neoplasia Type 1: Implications for Screening?
Gender
Multiple endocrine neoplasia type 1
Screening
Journal
Visceral medicine
ISSN: 2297-4725
Titre abrégé: Visc Med
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101681546
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Feb 2020
Feb 2020
Historique:
received:
26
11
2019
accepted:
17
12
2019
entrez:
29
2
2020
pubmed:
29
2
2020
medline:
29
2
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Some gender-related differences have been reported in multiple endocrine neoplasia type 1 (MEN1), although not all reports are conclusive. This systematic review with analysis of the own MEN1 cohort evaluates gender differences and potential consequences for screening. A systematic review of the literature between 1990 and 2019 with the search terms "MEN1" or "multiple endocrine neoplasia type 1" and "gender" or "sex" was performed. In addition, the prospectively collected data of a genetically confirmed MEN1 cohort of the Philipps University Marburg were retrospectively analyzed. Review of the literature identified five retrospective case series with original data of 1,057 MEN1 patients. One series suggested a higher frequency of pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms (NEN), especially gastrinomas, in men (61 vs. 54%) and a higher frequency of pituitary tumors in women (47 vs. 30%), but others did not. Only thymic NEN occurred predominantly in men throughout all studies. Women with MEN1 were found to have an increased risk of breast cancer. In the own series consisting of 116 MEN1 patients (male = 58, female = 58), thymic lesions were also more frequently detected in male patients (male = 5, female = 1). No gender difference was found with regard to the other manifestations. Regarding the typical MEN1 tumor manifestations, gender-adapted diagnostic and therapeutic approaches cannot be recommended. Female MEN1 patients should be encouraged to participate in breast cancer screening programs.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Some gender-related differences have been reported in multiple endocrine neoplasia type 1 (MEN1), although not all reports are conclusive. This systematic review with analysis of the own MEN1 cohort evaluates gender differences and potential consequences for screening.
METHODS
METHODS
A systematic review of the literature between 1990 and 2019 with the search terms "MEN1" or "multiple endocrine neoplasia type 1" and "gender" or "sex" was performed. In addition, the prospectively collected data of a genetically confirmed MEN1 cohort of the Philipps University Marburg were retrospectively analyzed.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Review of the literature identified five retrospective case series with original data of 1,057 MEN1 patients. One series suggested a higher frequency of pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms (NEN), especially gastrinomas, in men (61 vs. 54%) and a higher frequency of pituitary tumors in women (47 vs. 30%), but others did not. Only thymic NEN occurred predominantly in men throughout all studies. Women with MEN1 were found to have an increased risk of breast cancer. In the own series consisting of 116 MEN1 patients (male = 58, female = 58), thymic lesions were also more frequently detected in male patients (male = 5, female = 1). No gender difference was found with regard to the other manifestations.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
Regarding the typical MEN1 tumor manifestations, gender-adapted diagnostic and therapeutic approaches cannot be recommended. Female MEN1 patients should be encouraged to participate in breast cancer screening programs.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32110650
doi: 10.1159/000505498
pii: vis-0036-0003
pmc: PMC7036590
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Review
Langues
eng
Pagination
3-9Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2020 by S. Karger AG, Basel.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors have nothing to disclose.
Références
Neuroendocrinology. 2012;95(2):120-34
pubmed: 22261872
J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2014 Nov;99(11):E2387-91
pubmed: 25210877
Clin Endocrinol (Oxf). 2007 Oct;67(4):613-22
pubmed: 17590169
N Engl J Med. 2014 Aug 7;371(6):583-4
pubmed: 25099597
QJM. 1996 Sep;89(9):653-69
pubmed: 8917740
J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2014 Sep;99(9):3325-33
pubmed: 24915123
J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2015 Sep;100(9):3288-96
pubmed: 26126205
Eur J Endocrinol. 2013 Jul;169(1):133-7
pubmed: 23828958
Endocr Pract. 2017 Jun;23(6):641-648
pubmed: 28225311
Science. 1997 Apr 18;276(5311):404-7
pubmed: 9103196
World J Surg. 2000 Nov;24(11):1437-41
pubmed: 11038219
Endocr Relat Cancer. 2017 Oct;24(10):T209-T225
pubmed: 28790162
Clin Endocrinol (Oxf). 2013 Feb;78(2):248-54
pubmed: 22690831
J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2012 Sep;97(9):2990-3011
pubmed: 22723327
World J Surg. 2017 Aug;41(8):2026-2032
pubmed: 28321559
Best Pract Res Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2019 Oct;33(5):101318
pubmed: 31521501
Clin Endocrinol (Oxf). 2001 Nov;55(5):689-93
pubmed: 11894982
World J Surg. 2010 Feb;34(2):249-55
pubmed: 19949948
Handb Clin Neurol. 2014;124:185-95
pubmed: 25248588
World J Surg. 2017 Jun;41(6):1521-1527
pubmed: 28138732
World J Surg. 2009 Jun;33(6):1197-207
pubmed: 19294466
World J Surg. 2019 Feb;43(2):552-558
pubmed: 30288555
Eur J Endocrinol. 2011 Jul;165(1):97-105
pubmed: 21551167