Hormone tests for diagnosis and therapeutic monitoring of growth hormone deficiency and acromegaly
by Dr Jacqueline Gosink
Growth hormone (GH), insulin like growth factor I (IGF 1) and IGF binding protein 3 (IGFBP 3) are central regulators of growth and metabolism. Measurement of these biomarkers supports the diagnosis of growth disorders such as GH deficiency in children and acromegaly in adults. The analytes also play an important role in monitoring treatment response and guiding dosage adjustments during therapy. Human GH (hGH), IGF 1 and IGFBP 3 can be reliably measured in serum or plasma using automated chemiluminescence immunoassays supported by clinically validated reference intervals.
Effects of growth hormone (GH)
(Shutterstock.com)
Key endocrine system
The growth hormone (GH)–insulin like growth factor I (IGF-1) axis is the principal endocrine system regulating linear growth during childhood [1,2]. Physiologically, the axis coordinates tissue growth and maintenance by promoting protein synthesis, cell proliferation and cell survival in target tissues, while also regulating protein, lipid, and glucose metabolism [1]. In adults, its predominant role shifts from driving growth to maintaining body composition and metabolic function [2].
Hormone circuit
GH is produced and secreted by the anterior pituitary gland [1]. Its release is stimulated by GH releasing hormone (GHRH) and inhibited by somatostatin, both of which are secreted by the hypothalamus [1]. GH, in turn, stimulates synthesis and secretion of IGF-1 and IGF binding protein 3 (IGFBP‑3) from the liver [1]. Increasing circulating IGF-1 concentrations suppress further GH secretion through a negative feedback loop [1]. In the circulation, IGF-1 is mainly bound to IGFBP-3 within a ternary complex which prolongs the half-life of both proteins while limiting their biological activity [1].
The GH–IGF-1 axis is further modulated by several hormones, including insulin, thyroid hormone, ghrelin, androgens and estrogens [1,2]. Nutritional disorders, such as coeliac disease and anorexia, as well as chronic inflammatory conditions, including Crohn’s disease, can disrupt normal axis function and should be taken into consideration when assessing growth disorders [1].
Role of laboratory biomarkers
Laboratory measurements of GH–IGF-1 axis biomarkers are fundamental to evaluation of disorders associated with GH deficiency or GH excess. Because GH secretion is episodic and pulsatile, with marked fluctuations through the day and very low concentrations between secretory pulses, random GH measurements have limited diagnostic value [2,3]. GH is usually measured after stimulation or suppression [2–4].
In contrast, IGF-1 and IGFBP-3 exhibit relatively stable circulating concentrations with minimal circadian variation [1]. IGF-1 is continuously produced, has a longer half-life than GH and reflects integrated GH secretion over approximately 24 hours [2]. Consequently, serum IGF-1 is widely used as a biochemical marker of GH secretory status [2].
GH deficiency: growth and metabolic disorders
GH deficiency is the most common pituitary hormone deficiency in children and may occur in isolation or together with deficiencies of other pituitary hormones [3].
In pediatric patients, GH deficiency typically presents as growth failure, sometimes accompanied by delayed tooth development [3]. Affected children generally have a height below the third percentile and reduced growth velocity [3]. Depending on the underlying cause, additional features may include delayed or absent puberty, increased adiposity or other endocrine abnormalities [3].
In adults, GH deficiency is associated with adverse metabolic consequences, including altered body composition, reduced bone mineral density and an increased risk of osteopenia, osteoporosis and cardiovascular disease [5].
Laboratory diagnosis of GH deficiency
When GH deficiency is suspected in children, evaluation of the GH–IGF-1 axis begins with measurement of serum IGF-1 and IGFBP 3 [1,3]. These biomarkers can help distinguish GH deficiency from other causes of short stature when interpreted alongside clinical factors [1]. Because IGF-1 levels are physiologically very low during infancy and early childhood, IGF-1 alone may not reliably discriminate normal from deficient GH secretion in younger children [1,3]. In these patients, IGFBP 3 may provide a better indicator of GH deficiency [1,3].
GH levels after stimulation are measured for diagnostic confirmation [1,3]. However, these tests should not be used alone for diagnosis of GH deficiency due to ill-defined thresholds [3,6]. Stimulation testing (also called provocation testing] is performed using agents such as insulin, arginine, clonidine, levodopa or glucagon, with serial GH measurements obtained following administration [3]. Two stimulation tests are typically performed on the same day to improve diagnostic accuracy [3,6]. In adults, serum IGF-1 measurements and confirmatory GH stimulation tests are also employed to support diagnosis of GH deficiency [5,7].
Treatment and monitoring of GH deficiency
Administration of recombinant human GH is the standard treatment for children with short stature and confirmed GH deficiency [3,6]. Measuring baseline IGF-1 and IGFBP-3 concentrations may help predict treatment responsiveness, whereby patients with the lowest levels will generally have a better response to treatment [1]. During GH therapy, IGF-1 and IGFBP-3 measurements are used to assess treatment adherence and guide dose adjustment [1]. The therapeutic dosage is typically titrated to maintain serum IGF-1 within the age-specific normal range [1,6]. IGF-1 measurements during long-term treatment also provide a safety reference to avoid overdosing [1].
Similarly, in adults receiving GH replacement therapy, doses are titrated to normalize serum IGF-1 within the age-adjusted reference interval [5,7]. Once a stable maintenance dose has been established, IGF-1 should generally be monitored every six to twelve months [5,7].
Effects of differing amounts of growth hormone (GH)
(Shutterstock.com)
GH excess: gigantism and acromegaly
Excess GH secretion leads to gigantism or acromegaly and is nearly always caused by a pituitary adenoma [4,8–10]. Gigantism is a rare condition that develops when GH hypersecretion occurs before closure of the epiphyses, resulting in increased skeletal growth velocity and ultimate stature, but little skeletal deformity [4]. Acromegaly develops most commonly between the ages of 20 and 40 years and is characterized by progressive enlargement of the hands and feet, soft-tissue overgrowth and coarsening of facial features [4]. Persistent GH excess is associated with various comorbidities, such as hypertension, diabetes mellitus, arthritis, obstructive sleep apnea and gastrointestinal cancer [4,8–10].
Diagnosis and treatment of GH excess
Diagnosis of GH excess is based on clinical findings, imaging procedures and biochemical testing [4,8,10]. In patients with characteristic clinical features of acromegaly, an IGF-1 concentration exceeding 1.3 times the upper limit of normal for age can confirm the diagnosis [8]. IGF-1 values aid in determining disease severity at the time of diagnosis and are also associated with the presence of comorbidities [11]. GH measurement after overnight fasting may be useful for prognosis [8,11]. In patients with equivocal results, an oral glucose tolerance test with GH measurement may additionally be helpful [8].
The first-line therapy for acromegaly is transphenoidal surgical removal of the pituitary tumour [9]. Post-operative IGF-1 and GH measurements are used to assess biochemical remission [4,8,9,11]. When surgery is unsuccessful or contraindicated, various pharmacotherapies are available, for example octreotide and lanreotide to suppress GH secretion or pegvisomant, a GH analogue, to block GH-induced IGF-1 secretion [4,8]. Serial IGF-1 measurements are central to evaluating treatment effectiveness and optimizing dosage [4,8].
Assay requirements
Laboratory measurement of GH–IGF-1 axis biomarkers presents several analytical challenges. Results can vary substantially between assay platforms owing to differences in antibody specificity, calibration procedures and interference from circulating binding proteins [5,12]. Nowadays, assays should conform to defined quality criteria, which encompass international reference standards, specificity, long-term stability and age-stratified normative data [13]. As reference intervals are assay-specific [5,8,9], the same assay should be used throughout a patient’s evaluation and follow-up [5,8,9,11]
Clinically established assay panel
Automated chemiluminescence immunoassays [ChLIAs; Immuno-diagnostic Systems (IDS)], calibrated against WHO standards and meeting all consensus criteria, demonstrate high analytical sensitivity, specificity and precision [12,14]. The assays are supported by an extensive body of scientific evidence and data from numerous clinical trials in the USA and other countries. Notably, measurements obtained using IDS assays have supported the regulatory approval of new therapies for both GH deficiency and acromegaly [15–17].
The IDS Human GH ChLIA offers a unique specificity that addresses known limitations of other GH assays, including heterogeneity of measured GH isoforms and interfering factors [12]. The assay uses high-affinity monoclonal antibodies that measure the main 22 kDa GH isoform while avoiding interference from GH binding protein and cross reactions with pegvisomant, the GH analogue used in acromegaly treatment [12]. The assay also shows no cross-reactivity with placental GH, enabling assessment of pituitary-derived GH during pregnancy [12]. Specific diagnostic cut-offs for most dynamic tests (GH stimulation or suppression) have been established in children and adults, with specific cut-offs described for both sexes and across various BMI groups [12,18–20].
The IDS IGF-1 and IGFBP-3 ChLIAs similarly employ highly specific monoclonal antibodies. The IGF-1 ChLIA demonstrates no measurable interference from any of the six IGFBPs, even at supraphysiological concentrations [14]. Method-specific reference intervals for both assays were determined using a uniquely large cohort comprising 15 000 healthy subjects from the USA, Canada and Europe encompassing all age groups and both sexes [14,21]. Data from a further 1.5 million subjects in the USA verified the appropriateness of the IGF-1 reference intervals [22]. Today, clinical guidelines, clinical study reports and reference laboratories worldwide refer to these reference intervals [22].
Summary
GH, IGF-1 and IGFBP-3 are crucial biomarkers in disorders associated with GH deficiency and excess. Their measurement supports diagnosis, guides therapeutic decisions and enables ongoing monitoring of treatment effectiveness and safety. Highly specific automated ChLIAs, designed to minimize analytical interference and supported by robust age- and sex-specific reference intervals and diagnostic cut-offs, provide reliable tools for longitudinal patient management and optimization of therapy.
The author
Jacqueline Gosink PhD
Euroimmun, 23560 Lübeck, Germany
For further information see: www.euroimmun.com
References
1. Blum WF, Alherbish A, Alsagheir A et al. The growth hormone-insulin-like growth factor-I axis in the diagnosis and treatment of growth disorders. Endocr Connect. 2018;7(6):R212–R222. PMID: 29724795 (https://doi.org/10.1530/ec-18-0099).
2. Yuen KCJ, Hjortebjerg R, Ganeshalingam AA et al. Growth hormone/insulin-like growth factor I axis in health and disease states: an update on the role of intra-portal insulin. Front. Endocrinol. 2024;15:1456195. PMID: 39665021 (https://doi.org/10.3389/fendo.2024.1456195).
3. Growth hormone deficiency in children. MSD Manual: professional version. June 2026 (https://shorturl.at/8BJ9R).
4. Gigantism and acromegaly. MSD Manual: professional version. June 2025 (https://shorturl.at/UAbJt).
5. Yuen KCJ, Biller BMK, Radovick S et al. American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists and American College of Endocrinology guidelines for management of growth hormone deficiency in adults and patients transitioning from pediatric to adult care. Endocr Pract. 2019;25(11):1191–1232. PMID: 31760824 (https://doi.org/10.4158/gl-2019-0405).
6. Grimberg A, DiVall SA, Polychronakos C et al; Drug and Therapeutics Committee and Ethics Committee of the Pediatric Endocrine Society. Guidelines for growth hormone and insulin-like growth factor-I treatment in children and adolescents: growth hormone deficiency, idiopathic short stature, and primary insulin-like growth factor-I deficiency. Horm Res Paediatr. 2016;86(6):361–397. PMID: 27884013 (https://doi.org/10.1159/000452150).
7. Molitch ME, Clemmons DR, Malozowski S et al. Evaluation and treatment of adult growth hormone deficiency: an endocrine society clinical practice guideline. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2011;96(6):1587–1609. PMID: 21602453 (https://doi.org/10.1210/jc.2011-0179).
8. Giustina A, Biermasz N, Casanueva FF et al; Acromegaly Consensus Group. Consensus on criteria for acromegaly diagnosis and remission. Pituitary. 2024;27(1):7–22. PMID: 37923946 (https://doi.org/10.1007/s11102-023-01360-1). Erratum in: Pituitary. 2024;27(1):88 (https://doi.org/10.1007/s11102-023-01373-w).
9. Katznelson L, Laws ER Jr, Melmed S et al; Endocrine Society. Acromegaly: an endocrine society clinical practice guideline. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2014;99(11):3933–3951. PMID: 25356808 (https://doi.org/10.1210/jc.2014-2700).
10. Yogi-Morren D, Chanson P. Acromegaly diagnosis. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2026;111(Suppl 1):S38–S50. PMID: 42056759 (https://doi.org/10.1210/clinem/dgag189).
11. Clemmons DR, Bidlingmaier M. Interpreting growth hormone and IGF-I results using modern assays and reference ranges for the monitoring of treatment effectiveness in acromegaly. Front Endocrinol (Lausanne). 2023;14:1266339. PMID: 38027199
(https://doi.org/10.3389/fendo.2023.1266339).
12. Manolopoulou J, Alami Y, Petersenn S et al. Automated 22-kD growth hormone-specific assay without interference from Pegvisomant. Clin Chem. 2012;58(10):1446–1456. PMID: 22908135 (https://doi.org/10.1373/clinchem.2012.188128).
13. Clemmons DR. Consensus statement on the standardization and evaluation of growth hormone and insulin-like growth factor assays. Clin Chem. 2011;57(4):555–559. PMID: 21285256 (https://doi.org/10.1373/clinchem.2010.150631).
14. Bidlingmaier M, Friedrich N, Emeny RT et al. Reference intervals for insulin-like growth factor-1 (igf-i) from birth to senescence: results from a multicenter study using a new automated chemiluminescence IGF-I immunoassay conforming to recent international recommendations. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2014;99(5):1712–1721. PMID: 24606072 (https://doi.org/10.1210/jc.2013-3059).
15. Strasburger CJ, Karavitaki N, Störmann S et al. Patient-reported outcomes of parenteral somatostatin analogue injections in 195 patients with acromegaly. Eur J Endocrinol 2016;174;355–362. PMID: 26744896 (https://doi.org/10.1530/eje-15-1042).
16. Muhammad A, Coopmans EC, Gatto F et al. Pasireotide responsiveness in acromegaly is mainly driven by somatostatin receptor subtype 2 expression. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2019;104:915–924. PMID: 30346538 (https://doi.org/10.1210/jc.2018-01524).
17. Otsuka F, Takahashi Y, Tahara S et al. Similar safety and efficacy in previously treated adults with growth hormone deficiency randomized to once-weekly somapacitan or daily growth hormone. Clin Endocrinol (Oxf). 2020;93:620–628. PMID: 32603494 (https://doi.org/10.1111/cen.14273).
18. Schilbach K, Gar C, Lechner A et al. Determinants of the growth hormone nadir during oral glucose tolerance test in adults. Eur J Endocrinol 2019;181:55–67. PMID: 31096183 (https://doi.org/10.1530/eje-19-0139).
19. Deutschbein T, Bidlingmaier M, Schopohl J et al. Anthropometric factors have significant influence on the outcome of the GHRH-arginine test: establishment of normative data for an automated immunoassay specifically measuring 22 kDa human growth hormone. Eur J Endocrinol. 2017;176:273–281. PMID: 27932410 (https://doi.org/10.1530/eje-16-0668).
20. Garcia JM, Biller BMK, Korbonits M et al. Sensitivity and specificity of the macimorelin test for diagnosis of AGHD. Endocr Connect. 2021;10:76–83. PMID: 33320108 (https://doi.org/10.1530/ec-20-0491).
21. Friedrich N, Wolthers OD, Arafat AM et al. Age- and sex-specific reference intervals across life span for insulin-like growth factor binding protein 3 (IGFBP-3) and the IGF-I to IGFBP-3 ratio measured by new automated chemiluminescence assays. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2014;99(5):1675–1686. PMID: 24483154 (https://doi.org/10.1210/jc.2013-3060).
22. Bidlingmaier M, Valcour A, Schilbach K et al. Differences in the distribution of IGF-I concentrations between European and US populations. J Endocr Soc. 2022;6(7):bvac081. PMID: 24483154 (https://doi.org/10.1210/jc.2013-3060).




