Searchable abstracts of presentations at key conferences in endocrinology
Endocrine Abstracts (2023) 93 OC22 | DOI: 10.1530/endoabs.93.OC22

EYES2023 ESE Young Endocrinologists and Scientists (EYES) 2023 Oral communication 4: Pituitary and Neuroendocrinology (8 abstracts)

Comparative evaluation of diagnostic performance of the most commonly used screening tests for pathological hypercortisolism: A single centre analysis

Agathoklis Efthymiadis 1 , Helen Loo 2 , Brian Shine 3 , Jeremy Tomlinson 4 , Aparna Pal 2 & Riccardo Pofi 5


1Oxford Centre for Diabetes, Endocrinology and Metabolism, Oxford University Hospitals NHS Trust, Churchill Hospital, Oxford, Endocrinology, Oxford, UK; 2Oxford Centre for Diabetes, Endocrinology and Metabolism, Oxford University Hospitals NHS Trust, Churchill Hospital, Oxford, UK; 3Department of Clinical Biochemistry, Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Oxford, UK, UK; 4Oxford Centre for Diabetes, Endocrinology and Metabolism, Nihr Oxford Biomedical Research Centre, University of Oxford, Churchill Hospital, Oxford, UK., Oxford, UK; 5Oxford Centre for Diabetes, Endocrinology and Metabolism, Nihr Oxford Biomedical Research Centre, University of Oxford, Churchill Hospital, Oxford, UK.


Background: To date, there is no consensus as to the gold-standard screening test for diagnosing Cushing’s Syndrome (CS).

Objectives: This study aimed to: a) compare the ability of late-night salivary cortisol (LNSC) against overnight dexamethasone suppression test (ONDT) and urinary free cortisol (UFC) as screening test for pathological hypercortisolism (PH); b) test the performance of those tests in diagnosing Cushing’s disease (CD) or mild autonomous cortisol secretion (MACS); c) refine the screening algorithm by adding clinical symptoms.

Methods: We retrospectively reviewed all consecutive adult patients referred to the Oxford Centre for Diabetes, Endocrinology and Metabolism for evaluation of PH who had LNSC measured from January 2017 to November 2022. A binomial logistic regression (LR) was performed to ascertain the ability of each test in diagnosing PH, and compute receiver-operating-characteristic curve analysis. A stepwise backward LR was run to assess the utility of symptoms to predict PH.

Results: LNSC had the best sensitivity, 100.0% (95%CI 80.5–100.0), specificity, 64.9%, (95%CI 47.5–79.8) in distinguishing CD from the absence of PH (AUC 0.82, 95%CI 0.72–0.93, P<0.001). ODST proved to be the best test in differentiating between MACS and absence of PH (AUC of 0.76, 95%CI 0.66–1.00, P=0.004) with sensitivity of 100.0% (95%CI 82.4–100.0), specificity of 52.2% (95%CI 30.6–73.2). UFC did not reach statistical significance in diagnosing PH (P=0.26). Combining AUCs of pre-test signs, symptoms (hypertension, interscapular fat, facial plethora, striae myopathy, easy bruising) with those of screening tests significantly improved diagnostic performance of LNSC (AUC of 0.83, 95%CI 0.74–0.92, P<0.001), ONDST (0.82, 95% CI 0.71–0.93, P<0.001).

Conclusions: When diagnosing CD, LNSC performed better than ONDST, whereas the opposite was true for patients with MACS. UFCs had the lowest diagnostic accuracy across all PH subgroups. Assessing pre-test clinical probability through the presence of specific symptoms suggesting PH significantly improved the diagnostic accuracy of screening tests.

Volume 93

ESE Young Endocrinologists and Scientists (EYES) 2023

European Society of Endocrinology 

Browse other volumes

Article tools

My recent searches

No recent searches.