ACRODAT and SAGIT for the assessment of disease activity in acromegaly: a multicenter study of the Veneto region in Italy
Authors' conclusion
Both ACRODAT® and SAGIT® instrument effectively assessed disease activity in acromegaly, without discrepancy with the expert clinician’s judgment.
Study context
- Population
- Patients with acromegaly, four centers of the Veneto region, north-east Italy
- Participants
- 162 patients
- Exposure
- ACRODAT® and SAGIT® vs clinician's judgment for acromegaly disease activity
- Outcome
- Disease activity classified by ACRODAT®, SAGIT® and clinician's judgment, compared
Methodological detailsreal-life
- Real-life
Main finding
As reported in the abstract
SAGIT® score by ACRODAT® category
Well-controlled
5.6
± 2.3
Partially-controlled
7.0
± 3.05
Active
8.3
± 2.4
P < 0.001
Observational data: associations, not effects.
Further findings
ACRODAT® categories
- Well-controlled
- 48%
- Partially-controlled
- 28%
- Active
- 24%
SAGIT® score below median of 7
- Patients with SAGIT® score below median 7
- 48%
Clinician's judgment
- Controlled disease per clinician
- 62%
- ACRODAT® and SAGIT® scores differed significantly among the four clinician's judgment categories
Between-center comparison
- Four centers showed similar acromegaly disease-related data
Original publication
ACRODAT and SAGIT for the assessment of disease activity in acromegaly: a multicenter study of the Veneto region in Italy. Pituitary. Published 22 June 2025. doi:10.
Composed by AI from the published abstract and checked against it. How Briefs are made →