Metyrapone Benefits Blood Pressure in Mild Hypercortisolism

TOPLINE:

A notable proportion of patients with mild hypercortisolism achieved blood pressure (BP) control with low-dose evening metyrapone, without requiring the intensification of antihypertensive therapy. The treatment was particularly beneficial for those with higher baseline systolic BP and was well tolerated, with no adverse events reported.

METHODOLOGY:

  • This prospective observational study assessed the impact of low-dose evening metyrapone on 24-hour ambulatory BP, glucose metabolism, and the cortisol circadian rhythm in 20 patients with mild hypercortisolism (median age, 70.5 years; 65% women).
  • Eligible patients had cortisol levels > 1.8 μg/dL after a 1-mg dexamethasone suppression test on at least two separate occasions, fewer than two specific Cushing syndrome‑related symptoms, and either hypertension or impaired glucose metabolism.
  • Patients received evening metyrapone 250 mg/d, with dose adjustments on the basis of clinical response and cortisol secretion; in 12 patients who showed no signs of hypoadrenalism after week 12, an additional 250-mg afternoon dose was given.
  • The primary endpoint was BP control, defined as a reduction in mean 24-hour systolic BP of ≥ 5 mm Hg without increasing antihypertensive medication; ambulatory BP monitoring was done at baseline and weeks 12 and 24.

TAKEAWAY:

  • At 24 weeks, 40% of patients had a clinically significant improvement in BP control without escalation of therapy, with reductions in both daytime and nighttime systolic BP; benefits were more pronounced in those with elevated baseline systolic BP.
  • Glucometabolic control improved in four patients at 24 weeks; those with poorly controlled type 2 diabetes at baseline achieved the most pronounced glycaemic benefits.
  • Salivary cortisol levels remained unchanged from baseline; no significant changes in hormonal, metabolic, or anthropometric parameters were observed from baseline, except for testosterone levels in women.
  • The treatment was well tolerated, with no side effects or reports of adrenal insufficiency.

IN PRACTICE:

“Our findings support the notion that metyrapone may offer clinical benefits in patients with mH [mild hypercortisolism], particularly those with uncontrolled comorbidities. The observed improvements in BP and glycaemic control, despite minimal changes in UFC [urinary free cortisol] levels, underscore the need to re-evaluate traditional therapeutic targets and to adopt a more holistic approach to disease management,” the authors of the study wrote.

SOURCE:

This study was led by Antonio Musolino, University of Milan, Milan, Italy. It was published online on October 16, 2025, in the European Journal of Endocrinology.

LIMITATIONS:

This study was limited by its relatively short treatment duration, potential adherence bias, and an older cohort age, which may have limited generalisability. The sample size, although adequate for the primary endpoint, was limited. The absence of a control group restricted the ability to definitively attribute improvements to metyrapone therapy.

DISCLOSURES:

This study received financial support through an investigator-initiated study grant from ESTEVE (formerly HRA RD). Two authors reported receiving speaker or consultancy fees or honoraria from Corcept Therapeutics.

This article was created using several editorial tools, including AI, as part of the process. Human editors reviewed this content before publication

https://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/metyrapone-benefits-blood-pressure-mild-hypercortisolism-2025a1000szc?form=fpf

Efficacy and Safety of Pasireotide in Patients With Cushing’s Disease

Abstract

Purpose

Pasireotide is the first pituitary-directed approved therapy for Cushing’s disease (CD), effective in reducing 24 h urine free cortisol (UFC) > 50% in more than half of patients, with beneficial effects and with a relatively high incidence of hyperglycemia. The aim of this study was to evaluate efficacy and safety of long-term treatment with pasireotide (PAS) in CD patients, also according to gender.

Methods

We retrospectively evaluated 19 consecutive CD patients (13F; age at diagnosis: 34.9 ± 11.7 yrs) treated with PAS, referred to and followed-up at the Endocrine Unit of the University Hospital of Messina, from 2013 to 2023. We evaluated and compared, in the whole cohort and after gender stratification, anthropometric, clinical, neuroradiological, hormonal and metabolic parameters, along with CD-related comorbidities, before PAS treatment and at last follow-up visit. Side-effects and adverse events related to treatment were also assessed.

Results

Under PAS treatment: overall, 52.6% of patients achieved a normalization of UFCxULN from baseline without any difference in terms of UFC reduction and/or response to treatment according to gender; two females out of the 19 patients experienced tumor shrinkage. In the whole cohort, at last follow-up visit as compared to baseline: body weight, BMI, total cholesterol, LDL-cholesterol were significantly improved, while HbA1c significantly increased. Prevalence of CD-related comorbidities did not change significantly, while the number of patients with IGF-1 SDS below the sex/age adjusted normal range significantly increased. Stratifying patients by sex, at last follow-up visit vs. baseline, we observed lower total and LDL-cholesterol in men and lower waist circumference in women. Most common adverse events were related to hyperglycemia which led to treatment withdrawal in 3 cases, without any gender difference. Response to PAS correlated with younger age at diagnosis, longer duration of disease, lower Hb1Ac levels and absence of diabetes at baseline. Conclusion: PAS is effective in a significant number of patients with CD, regardless of gender, having a positive impact on lipid profile and on anthropometric parameters. Major adverse events are related to hyperglycemia which is more frequently associated with a worse baseline glycometabolic and lipid profile in both sexes.

 This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution  to check access.

Insights on Diagnosing and Managing Cushing’s Syndrome

Cushing’s syndrome, or endogenous hypercortisolemia, is a rare condition that both general practice clinicians and endocrinologists should be prepared to diagnose and treat. Including both the pituitary and adrenal forms of the disease, the Endocrine Society estimates that the disorder affects 10 to 15 people per million every year in the United States. It is more common in women and occurs most often in people between the ages of 20 and 50.

Even though Cushing’s remains a rare disease, cortisol recently made waves at the American Diabetes Association 84th Scientific Session. A highlight of the meeting was the initial presentation of data from the CATALYST trial, which assessed the prevalence of hypercortisolism in patients with difficult-to-control type 2 diabetes (A1c 7.5+).

CATALYST is a prospective, Phase 4 study with two parts. In the prevalence phase, 24% of 1,055 enrolled patients had hypercortisolism, defined as an overnight dexamethasone suppression test (ODST) value greater than 1.8 µg/dL and dexamethasone levels greater than 140 µg/dL. Results of CATALYST’s randomized treatment phase are expected in late 2024.

Elena Christofides, MD, FACE, founder of Endocrinology Associates, Inc., in Columbus, OH, believes the CATALYST results will be a wake-up call for both physicians and patients seeking to advocate for their own health. “This means that nearly 1 in 4 patients with type 2 diabetes have some other underlying hormonal/endocrine dysfunction as the reason for their diabetes, or significant contribution to their diabetes, and they should all be screened,” she said. “All providers need to get comfortable with diagnosing and treating hypercortisolemia, and you need to do it quickly because patients are going to pay attention as well.”

In Dr. Christofides’ experience, patients who suspect they have a hormonal issue may start with their primary care provider or they may self-refer to an endocrinologist. “A lot of Cushing’s patients are getting diagnosed and treated in primary care, which is completely appropriate. But I’ve also met endocrinologists who are uncomfortable diagnosing and managing Cushing’s because it is so rare,” she said. “The important thing is that the physician is comfortable with Cushing’s or is willing to put in the work get comfortable with it.”

According to Dr. Christofides, the widespread popular belief that “adrenal fatigue” is causing millions of Americans to feel sick, tired, and debilitated may be creating barriers to care for people who may actually have Cushing’s. “As physicians, we know that adrenal fatigue doesn’t exist, but we should still be receptive to seeing patients who raise that as a concern,” said Dr. Christofides. “We need to acknowledsalige their lived experience as being very real and it can be any number of diseases causing very real symptoms. If we don’t see these patients, real cases of hypercortisolemia could be left undiagnosed and untreated.”

Dr. Christofides, who also serves as a MedCentral Editor-at-Large, said she reminds colleagues that overnight dexamethasone suppression test (ODST) should always be the first test when you suspect Cushing’s. “While technically a screening test, the ODST can almost be considered diagnostic, depending on how abnormal the result is,” she noted. “But I always recommend that you do the ODST, the ACTH, a.m. cortisol, and the DHEAS levels at the same time because it allows you to differentiate more quickly between pituitary and adrenal problems.”

Dr. Christofides does see a place for 24-hour urine collection and salivary cortisol testing at times when diagnosing and monitoring patients with Cushing’s. “The 24-hour urine is only positive in ACTH-driven Cushing’s, so an abnormal result can help you identify the source, but too many physicians erroneously believe you can’t have Cushing’s if the 24-hour urine is normal,” she explained. “Surgeons tend to want this test before they operate and it’s a good benchmark for resolution of pituitary disease.” She reserves salivary cortisol testing for cases when the patient’s ODST is negative, but she suspects Cushing’s may be either nascent or cyclical.

Surgical resection has long been considered first-line treatment in both the pituitary and adrenal forms of Cushing’s. For example, data shared from Massachusetts General Hospital showed that nearly 90% of patients with microadenomas did not relapse within a 30-year period. A recent study found an overall recurrence rate of about 25% within a 10-year period. When reoperation is necessary, remission is achieved in up to 80% of patients.

As new medications for Cushing’s syndrome have become available, Dr. Christofides said she favors medical intervention prior to surgery. “The best part about medical therapy is you can easily stop it if you’re wrong,” she noted. “I would argue that every patient with confirmed Cushing’s deserves nonsurgical medical management prior to a consideration of surgery to improve their comorbidities and surgical risk management, and give time to have a proper informed consent discussion.”

In general, medications to treat Cushing’s disease rely on either cortisol production blockade or receptor blockade, said Dr. Christofides. Medications that directly limit cortisol production include ketoconazoleosilodrostat (Isturisa), mitotane (Lysodren), levoketoconazole (Recorlev), and metyrapone (Metopirone). Mifepristone (Korlym, Mifeprex) is approved for people with Cushing’s who also have type 2 diabetes to block the effects of cortisol. Mifepristone does not lower the amount of cortisol the body makes but limits its effects. Pasireotide (Signifor) lowers the amount of ACTH from the tumor. Cabergoline is sometimes used off-label in the US for the same purpose.

Following surgery, people with Cushing’s need replacement steroids until their adrenal function resumes, when replacement steroids must be tapered. But Dr. Christofides said she believes that all physicians who prescribe steroids should have a clear understanding of when and how to taper patients off steroids.

“Steroid dosing for therapeutic purposes is cumulative in terms of body exposure and the risk of needing to taper. A single 2-week dose of steroids in a year does not require a taper,” she said. “It’s patients who are getting repeated doses of more than 10 mg of prednisone equivalent per day for 2 or more weeks multiple times per year who are at risk of adrenal failure without tapering.”

Physicians often underestimate how long a safe, comfortable taper can take, per Dr. Christofides. “It takes 6 to 9 months for the adrenals to wake up so if you’re using high-dose steroids more frequently, that will cause the patient to need more steroids more frequently,” she explained. “If you’re treating an illness that responds to steroids and you stop them without tapering, the patient’s disease will flare, and then a month from then to 6 weeks from then you’ll be giving them steroids again, engendering a dependence on steroids by doing so.”

When developing a steroid taper plan for postoperative individuals with Cushing’s (and others), Dr. Christofides suggests basing it on the fact that 5 mg of prednisone or its equivalent is the physiologic dose. “Reduce the dose by 5 mg per month until you get to the last 5 mg, and then you’re going to reduce it by 1 mg monthly until done,” she said. “If a patient has difficulty during that last phase, consider a switch to hydrocortisone because a 1 mg reduction of hydrocortisone at a time may be easier to tolerate.”

Prednisone, hydrocortisone, and the other steroids have different half-lives, so you’ll need to plan accordingly, adds Dr. Christofides. “If you do a slower taper using hydrocortisone, the patient might feel worse than with prednisone unless you prescribe it BID.” She suggests thinking of the daily prednisone equivalent of hydrocortisone as 30 mg to allow for divided dosing, rather than the straight 20 mg/day conversion often used.

What happens after a patient’s Cushing’s has been successfully treated? Cushing’s is a chronic disease, even in remission, Dr. Christofides emphasized. “Once you have achieved remission, my general follow-up is to schedule visits every 6 months to a year with scans and labs, always with the instruction if the patient feels symptomatic, they should come in sooner,” she said.

More on Cushing’s diagnosis and therapies.

https://www.medcentral.com/endocrinology/cushings-syndrome-a-clinical-update

Day 20, Cushing’s Awareness Challenge

And today, we talk about pink jeeps and ziplines…

How in the world did we get here in a Cushing’s Challenge?  I’m sliding these in because earlier I linked (possibly!) my growth hormone use as a cause of my cancer – and I took the GH due to Cushing’s issues.  Clear?  LOL

I had found out that I had my kidney cancer on Friday, April 28, 2006 and my surgery on May 9, 2006.  I was supposed to go on a Cushie Cruise to Bermuda on May 14, 2006.  My surgeon said that there was no way I could go on that cruise and I could not postpone my surgery until after that cruise.

I got out of the hospital on the day that the other Cushies left for the cruise and realized that I wouldn’t have been much (ANY!) fun and I wouldn’t have had any.

An especially amusing thread from that cruise is The Adventures of Penelopee Cruise (on the Cushing’s Help message boards).  Someone had brought a UFC jug and  decorated her and had her pose around the ship.

The beginning text reads:

Penelopee had a lovely time on Explorer of the Seas which was a five day cruise to Bermuda. She needed something to cheer her up since her brother, Tom, went off the deep end, but that’s another story!

Penelopee wanted to take in all of the sights and sounds of this lovely vessel. Every day she needed to do at least one special thing. Being a Cushie, she didn’t have enough spoons to do too much every day.

On the first day, she went sunning on the Libido deck……she didn’t last too long, only about 10 minutes. Goodness, look at her color! Do you think maybe her ACTH is too high?

Although I missed this trip, I was feeling well enough to go to Sedona, Arizona in August, 2006.  I convinced everyone that I was well enough to go off-road in a pink jeep,  DH wanted to report me to my surgeon but I survived without to much pain and posed for the header image.

In 2009, I figured I have “extra years” since I survived the cancer and I wanted to do something kinda scary, yet fun. So, somehow, I decided on ziplining. Tom wouldn’t go with me but Michael would so I set this up almost as soon as we booked a Caribbean cruise to replace the Cushie Cruise to Bermuda.

Each person had a harness around their legs with attached pulleys and carabiners. Women had them on their chests as well. In addition, we had leather construction gloves and hard hats.

We climbed to the top of the first platform and were given brief instructions and off we went. Because of the heavy gloves, I couldn’t get any pictures. I had thought that they would take some of us on the hardest line to sell to us later but they didn’t. They also didn’t have cave pictures or T-Shirts. What a missed opportunity!

This was so cool, so much fun. I thought I might be afraid at first but I wasn’t. I just followed instructions and went.

Sometimes they told us to break. We did that with the right hand, which was always on the upper cable.

After the second line, I must have braked too soon because I stopped before I got to the platform. Michael was headed toward me. The guide on the end of the platform wanted me to do some hand over hand maneuver but I couldn’t figure out what he was saying so he came and got me by wrapping his legs around me and pulling me to the platform.

After that, no more problems with braking!

The next platform was very high – over 70 feet in the air – and the climb up was difficult. It was very hot and the rocks were very uneven. I don’t know that I would have gotten to the next platform if Michael hadn’t cheered me on all the way.

We zipped down the next six lines up to 250-feet between platforms and 85-feet high in the trees, at canopy level. It seemed like it was all over too soon.

But, I did it! No fear, just fun.

Enough of adventures – fun ones like these, and scary ones like transsphenoidal surgery and radical nephrectomy!

Cushing’s Disease Patients are More Likely to Have Ocular Hypertension

The following is the summary of “Increased Risk of Ocular Hypertension in Patients With Cushing’s Disease” published in the December 2022 issue of Glaucoma by Ma, et al.


Ocular hypertension was more common in people with Cushing’s illness. The usage of steroids in the body is a major contributor to high intraocular pressure (IOP). Topical or systemic glucocorticoid use may increase the prevalence of ocular hypertension in the general population from 30–40%. The prevalence of ocular hypertension in endogenous hypercortisolemia and the ophthalmological consequences following endocrine remission after surgical resection are unknown. During the period of January 2019 through July 2019, all patients with Cushing’s disease (CD) who were hospitalized at a tertiary pituitary facility for surgical intervention had their intraocular pressure (IOP), vision field, and peripapillary retinal nerve fiber layer thickness recorded.

Nonfunctioning pituitary adenoma (NFPA) patients and acromegaly patients from the same time period were used as comparison groups. Researchers showed postoperative changes in IOP, estimated the odds ratio (OR), and identified risk variables for the development of ocular hypertension. About 52 patients with CD were included in the study (mean age 38.4±12.4 years). Patients with CD had an IOP that was 19.4±5.4 mm Hg in the left eye and 20.0±7.1 mm Hg in the right eye, which was significantly higher than that of patients with acromegaly (17.5±2.3 mm Hg in the left eye and 18.6±7.0 mm Hg in the right eye, P=0.033) and NFPA (17.8±2.6 mm Hg in the left eye and 17.4±2.4 mm Hg in the right eye, Ocular hypertension was diagnosed in 21 eyes (20.2%) of CD patients, but only 4 eyes (4.7%) of acromegaly patients and 4 eyes (4.5%) of NFPA patients. Patients with CD had an odds ratio (OR) of 5.1 [95% CI, 1.3-25.1, P=0.029] and 6.6 [95% CI, 1.8-30.3, P=0.007] for developing ocular hypertension compared with the 2 control groups.

Higher levels of urine-free cortisol were associated with an increased risk of ocular hypertension in CD patients (OR=19.4, 95% CI, 1.7-72.6). Patients with CD saw a decrease in IOP at 1 month following surgery, and this improvement was maintained for another 2 months. Researchers conclude that endogenous hypercortisolemia should be included as part of the glaucoma assessment due to the increased risk of ocular hypertension in CD. Ophthalmologists and neuroendocrinologists should use their judgment in light of this finding.

Source:  journals.lww.com/glaucomajournal/Fulltext/2022/12000/Increased_Risk_of_Ocular_Hypertension_in_Patients.3.aspx