About this Journal Submit a Manuscript Table of Contents
Case Reports in Obstetrics and Gynecology

Volume 2014 (2014), Article ID 285715, 3 pages

http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2014/285715
Letter to the Editor

Comment on “Complete Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome: Optimizing Diagnosis and Management”

1Department of Medical and Surgical Sciences, Pediatric Unit, Program of Endocrinology, University of Bologna, Italy

2Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Bologna, Italy

3Adolescent Medicine, Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Pediatrics, University Hospital, Pisa, Italy

4Clinical Psychology Unit, Department of Pediatrics, University of Bologna, Italy

5Pediatric Surgery, San Camillo-Forlanini Hospital, Roma, Italy

6Pediatric Urology Unit, IRCCS Ca' Granda, Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico, Milan, Italy

Received 15 April 2014; Accepted 27 April 2014; Published 12 May 2014

Academic Editor: Dan Hellberg

Copyright © 2014 Antonio Balsamo et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.


We read with interest the paper of Pizzo et al. [1], confirming that adolescence is a key period for the diagnosis of 46,XY disorders of sex development (DSD) [2].

However, in our opinion, some points should be better addressed. Among these, we have the following.(1)The authors stated that the reported girl showed “normal intellectual function,” but this information had little relevance because mental function is not impaired in females with 46,XY DSD, reaching adolescence without any clinical suspicions. Indeed, this statement might be stigmatizing for these persons.(2)The statement that this adolescent was affected by hypergonadotropic hypogonadism (HH) is correct, according to the high LH and FSH values shown in Table 1 [1]. Very low levels of both 17β-estradiol and testosterone were also shown [1]. This endocrine pattern is not typical of late adolescent and young adult females with complete androgen insensitivity syndrome (CAIS) and intact testes. On the contrary, these persons show high/normal levels of both 17β-estradiol (for a person with a 46,XY karyotype) and testosterone [35]. In addition, adolescent/young adult women with CAIS did not show HH: LH is in high normal range or slightly elevated (due to the androgen resistance at central level), but FSH is in normal range (due to unaffected inhibin secretion from Sertoli cells) [35]. In addition, SHBG was reported within adult male range by Pizzo et al. [1], suggesting a normal sensitivity to the low levels of androgens in this girl [6]. Indeed, SHBG is within normal female range in women with CAIS, due to peripheral androgen resistance [5]. All these findings show poor agreement with the affirmed diagnosis of CAIS [1].(3)The clinical phenotype of the reported girl did not match with the phenotype of adolescents with CAIS; in fact, the latter shows normal breast development related to the relatively high normal estrogen levels and unopposed androgen action [3, 4, 7] and does not show hypotrophic breasts [1].(4)It is quite surprising that hormonal replacement therapy was started before any diagnosis was established.(5)Histological findings do not completely agree with the diagnosis of CAIS, in particular the absence of Leydig cells, which are abundant in adolescent females with CAIS and sometimes formed aggregates up to 2 mm in diameter [8, 9].(6)46,XY karyotype, female phenotype, and absence of mullerian derivatives may be present in several 46,XY DSD; they should be excluded before diagnosis of CAIS by optimal clinical, endocrine, and genetic investigations [10]. For example, the testosterone/Δ4-androstenedione ratio in the adolescent reported by Pizzo et al. [1] is very low (0.13; normal values >0.8 [11]). Thus, diagnoses of 17β-hydroxysteroid-dehydrogenase deficiency type 3 or 46,XY gonadal dysgenesis [11, 12] must be considered in the diagnostic process.(7)Risk of gonadal cancer largely varies among 46,XY DSD. For example, in CAIS is very low at least during the first two decades of life [1315]. Thus, delayed gonadal removal can be recommended to permit both full sexual development [15] and better bone health [16]. If diagnosis of CAIS is certain, surgery can be postponed—at least until the legal age at which the propositus can participate in decision making [1, 15, 1719].(8)We are concerned and in complete disagreement with the decision to perform gonadectomy without full disclosure and assent of the adolescent [1719].

In conclusion, some findings are poorly consistent with a diagnosis of CAIS, which should be confirmed by molecular analysis of androgen receptor gene [2, 7]. In our experience, more than 25% of the females referred to our departments with clinical/endocrine diagnosis of CAIS did not have this diagnosis confirmed by genetic analysis [20].

Clinical approach should be changed according to the new guidelines for management of persons with 46,XY DSD and directly involving the girl in the decision process [2, 18, 21]. We also stress that multidisciplinary team evaluation in tertiary centers with documented experience in this field must be guaranteed to each person with 46,XY DSD for optimal holistic management [21], especially before performing irreversible surgical procedures.

Conflict of Interests

The authors declare that there is no conflict of interests regarding the publication of this paper.

Acknowledgment

We thank the Italian Network on Disorders of Sex Development (It-DSD) for scientific support. The constructive opinions of Italian and English Androgen Insensitivity Support Groups are also acknowledged.

References

  1. A. Pizzo, A. S. Laganà, I. Borrielli, and N. Dugo, “Complete androgen insensitivity syndrome: a rare case of disorder of sex development,” Case Reports in Obstetrics and Gynecology, vol. 2013, Article ID 232696, 3 pages, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  2. I. A. Hughes, C. Houk, S. F. Ahmed, and P. A. Lee, “Consensus statement on management of intersex disorders,” Archives of Disease in Childhood, vol. 91, no. 7, pp. 554–563, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  3. K. F. S. Melo, B. B. Mendonca, A. E. C. Billerbeck et al., “Clinical, hormonal, behavioral, and genetic characteristics of androgen insensitivity syndrome in a Brazilian cohort: five novel mutations in the androgen receptor gene,” Journal of Clinical Endocrinology and Metabolism, vol. 88, no. 7, pp. 3241–3250, 2003. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  4. L. Audi, M. Fernández-Cancio, A. Carrascosa et al., “Novel (60%) and recurrent (40%) androgen receptor gene mutations in a series of 59 patients with a 46,XY disorder of sex development,” Journal of Clinical Endocrinology and Metabolism, vol. 95, no. 4, pp. 1876–1888, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  5. U. Doehnert, S. Bertelloni, A. Richter-Unruh, R. Werner, and O. Hiort, “Hormone profiles in adolescents and adults with complete androgen insensitivity syndrome,” in Proceedings of the 3rd International Symposium on Disorders of Sex Development, Lübech, Denmark, May 2011.
  6. G. Sinnecker and S. Köhler, “Sex hormone-binding globulin response to the anabolic steroid stanozolol: evidence for its suitability as a biological androgen sensitivity test,” Journal of Clinical Endocrinology and Metabolism, vol. 68, no. 6, pp. 1195–1200, 1989. View at Scopus
  7. I. A. Hughes, J. D. Davies, T. I. Bunch, V. Pasterski, K. Mastroyannopoulou, and J. MacDougall, “Androgen insensitivity syndrome,” The Lancet, vol. 380, no. 9851, pp. 1419–1428, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  8. S. E. Hannema, I. S. Scott, E. Rajpert-de Meyts, N. E. Skakkebæk, N. Coleman, and I. A. Hughes, “Testicular development in the complete androgen insensitivity syndrome,” Journal of Pathology, vol. 208, no. 4, pp. 518–527, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  9. J. Kaprova-Pleskacova, H. Stoop, H. Brüggenwirth et al., “Complete androgen insensitivity syndrome: factors influencing gonadal histology including germ cell pathology,” Modern Pathology, vol. 2013, article 193, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  10. S. F. Ahmed, J. C. Achermann, W. Arlt et al., “UK guidance on the initial evaluation of an infant or an adolescent with a suspected disorder of sex development,” Clinical Endocrinology, vol. 75, no. 1, pp. 12–26, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  11. A. L. M. Boehmer, A. O. Brinkmann, L. A. Sandkuijl et al., “17β-Hydroxysteroid dehydrogenase-3 deficiency: diagnosis, phenotypic variability, population genetics, and worldwide distribution of ancient and de novo mutations,” Journal of Clinical Endocrinology and Metabolism, vol. 84, no. 12, pp. 4713–4721, 1999. View at Scopus
  12. S. Faisal Ahmed, A. Iqbal, and I. A. Hughes, “The testosterone: androstenedione ratio in male undermasculinization,” Clinical Endocrinology, vol. 53, no. 6, pp. 697–702, 2000. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  13. J. Pleskacova, R. Hersmus, J. W. Oosterhuis et al., “Tumor risk in disorders of sex development,” Sexual Development, vol. 4, no. 4-5, pp. 259–269, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  14. R. Deans, S. M. Creighton, L.-M. Liao, and G. S. Conway, “Timing of gonadectomy in adult women with complete androgen insensitivity syndrome (CAIS): patient preferences and clinical evidence,” Clinical Endocrinology, vol. 76, no. 6, pp. 894–898, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  15. L. Wünsch, P. M. Holterhus, L. Wessel, and O. Hiort, “Patients with disorders of sex development (DSD) at risk of gonadal tumour development: management based on laparoscopic biopsy and molecular diagnosis,” BJU International, vol. 110, pp. E958–E965, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  16. S. Bertelloni, G. I. Baroncelli, and S. Mora, “Bone health in disorders of sex differentiation,” Sexual Development, vol. 4, no. 4-5, pp. 270–284, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  17. F. D'Alberton, “Disclosing disorders of sex development and opening the doors,” Sexual Development, vol. 4, no. 4-5, pp. 304–309, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  18. C. Wiesemann, “Ethical guidelines for the clinical management of intersex,” Sexual Development, vol. 4, no. 4-5, pp. 300–303, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  19. M. L. Cull and M. Simmonds, “Importance of support groups for intersex (disorders of sex development) patients, families and the medical profession,” Sexual Development, vol. 4, no. 4-5, pp. 310–312, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  20. S. Bertelloni, E. Dati, F. Baldinotti et al., “NR5A1 gene mutations: clinical, endocrine and genetic features in two girls with 46, XY disorder of sex development,” Hormone Research in Paediatrics, vol. 81, no. 2, pp. 104–108, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  21. C. E. Brain, S. M. Creighton, I. Mushtaq et al., “Holistic management of DSD,” Best Practice & Research: Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism, vol. 24, no. 2, pp. 335–354, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus