Evidence Hub

Bone marrow hypoplasia responsive to testosterone therapy in a patient with panhypopituitarism: need for adherence to androgen replacement

Badawi MA, Salih F, Al-Humaidi AA, El Khalifa MY, Elhadd TA

Endocrine practice : official journal of the American College of Endocrinology and the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists, 2008

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To describe the case of a young Saudi male patient with long-term panhypopituitarism and pancytopenia attributable to poor adherence to androgen replacement therapy, which resolved after institution of testosterone treatment and recurred after another interval of poor adherence to recommended therapy.

METHODS: We present the clinical and laboratory data before and after treatment with testosterone. In addition, the corresponding histologic changes in the bone marrow are illustrated.

RESULTS: After resection of a hypothalamic glioma, panhypopituitarism developed in a 14-year-old Saudi boy. At age 22 years, he had shunt-related meningitis. He was then noted to have pancytopenia, with a platelet count of 54 x 10(3)/microL, a hemoglobin concentration of 6.9 g/dL, and a leukocyte count of 2.7 x 10(3)/microL. After treatment of sepsis, the pancytopenia persisted. No underlying cause was detected. Bone marrow biopsy showed a hypocellular marrow with dysplastic megakaryocytes. The patient's family indicated that he had not been taking his testosterone therapy. Testosterone decanoate (250 mg) was administered intramuscularly daily for 3 days. His platelet count increased to 74 x 10(3)/microL. Maintenance therapy with testosterone once weekly for 3 weeks and then once every 3 weeks resulted in improved hematologic findings. Repeated bone marrow biopsy after 6 weeks showed normocellular marrow, with disappearance of the megakaryocytic dysplasia. The patient again…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a case report, done in people. Its evidence level is 5 of 5 (Very low · case / narrative / animal / in vitro / in silico). Case reports, narrative reviews, and animal, cell or computer-model studies give the weakest evidence for human health.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free