Macroprolactinemia as a diagnostic pitfall in hyperprolactinemia: a systematic review and quantitative synthesis

Clicks: 2
ID: 318224
2026
Free PDF
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Emerging

Ranked #353 of 367 articles by views in the journal of clinical endocrinology & metabolism

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale. Only the 120 most-read articles are drawn; the journal has 367 in total.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Sign in to mint
Abstract
CONTEXT: Macroprolactinemia is a well-recognized cause of hyperprolactinemia and an important diagnostic pitfall in endocrine practice. However, interpretation of published quantitative prolactin data remains sparse as studies vary in confirmation method, assay platform, polyethylene glycol (PEG) recovery cutoff, and reporting of prolactin measurement. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, the Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar were systematically searched. Eligible studies reported macroprolactinemia-specific quantitative prolactin data in patients with confirmed macroprolactinemia defined by PEG precipitation, gel filtration chromatography (GFC), or both. Two reviewers independently performed study selection, data extraction, and quality assessment. Findings were summarized using study-level descriptive synthesis. The review was prospectively registered in PROSPERO and conducted in accordance with PRISMA 2020. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Forty-five studies encompassing 2,853 macroprolactinemia cases from 21,413 screened patients with hyperprolactinemia across 22 countries were included. Among 33 studies eligible for primary quantitative analysis, the median study-level central total prolactin attributed to macroprolactinemia was 61.4 ng/mL ([IQR] 42.0-80.0; range 28.1-137.6), and the median study-level post-PEG monomeric prolactin was 11.7 ng/mL (IQR 8.3-13.2; range 4.0-38.0).). The median study-level maximum total prolactin was 264.5 ng/mL (IQR 97.0-425.5; range 81.8-663.0); extreme elevations were attributable to coexisting prolactinomas. CONCLUSIONS: In confirmed macroprolactinemia, total prolactin elevation is typically moderate, and post-PEG monomeric prolactin is usually within or near the normal range. The post-PEG monomeric prolactin value, rather than percent recovery alone, is the most informative parameter for distinguishing isolated macroprolactinemia from coexisting true hyperprolactinemia. These quantitative benchmarks may help clinicians to avoid unnecessary investigation or treatment.
Reference Key
openalex_W7165565183 Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors Prashant Yadav, Amir H. Hamrahian, Roberto Salvatori
Journal the journal of clinical endocrinology & metabolism
Year 2026
DOI
10.1210/clinem/dgag244
URL
https://doi.org/10.1210/clinem/dgag244
Keywords Keywords not found

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

Comments

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.