Pheochromocytoma: recommendations for clinical practice from the First International Symposium

Nature Clinical Practice Endocrinology & Metabolism volume 3, pages92–102(2007)Cite this article

Abstract

The First International Symposium on Pheochromocytoma, held in October 2005, included discussions about developments concerning these rare catecholamine-producing tumors. Recommendations were made during the symposium for biochemical diagnosis, localization, genetics, and treatment. Measurement of plasma or urinary fractionated metanephrines, the most accurate screening approach, was recommended as the first-line test for diagnosis; reference intervals should favor sensitivity over specificity. Localization studies should only follow reasonable clinical evidence of a tumor. Preoperative pharmacologic blockade of circulatory responses to catecholamines is mandatory. Because approximately a quarter of tumors develop secondary to germ-line mutations in any one of five genes, mutation testing should be considered; however, it is not currently cost effective to test every gene in every patient. Consideration of tumor location, presence of multiple tumors, presence of metastases, and type of catecholamine produced is useful in deciding which genes to test. Inadequate methods to distinguish malignant from benign tumors and a lack of effective treatments for malignancy are important problems requiring further resolution.

Key Points

  • A pheochromocytoma is an intra-adrenal paraganglioma; the current WHO nomenclature reserves the term 'pheochromocytoma' for paragangliomas of adrenal origin

  • Measurements of plasma or urinary fractionated metanephrines are the most accurate screening procedures

  • Localization studies should only follow reasonable clinical and/or biochemical evidence of a tumor

  • Although CT and MRI have excellent sensitivity for detecting most catecholamine-producing tumors, these anatomic imaging approaches lack the specificity required to unequivocally identify a mass as a pheochromocytoma or paraganglioma

  • Functional imaging offers an approach to overcome the limitations of anatomic imaging—the test of choice currently is 123I-labeled meta-iodobenzylguanide scintigraphy

  • Laparoscopic surgery is the treatment of choice. Preoperative pharmacologic blockade of adrenergic receptors is mandatory

  • Genetic testing is not currently cost-effective for every gene in every patient; consideration of tumor location, presence of multiple tumors or metastases, and type of catecholamine produced could be useful in deciding which genes to test

  • Malignancy cannot currently be diagnosed by assessment of the primary tumor tissue and is defined by the presence of metastases

Access options

Rent or Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.

from$8.99

Rent or Buy

All prices are NET prices.

Figure 1: Scatterplots showing the distributions for plasma concentrations (A) or urinary outputs (B) of normetanephrine versus metanephrine in patients with confirmed pheochromocytoma or paraganglioma (gray squares) compared with patients in whom tumors were excluded (gray dots).
Figure 2: Algorithm for genetic testing for genes associated with pheochromocytoma.

References

  1. 1

    Bravo EL et al. (1979) Circulating and urinary catecholamines in pheochromocytoma. Diagnostic and pathophysiologic implications. N Engl J Med 301: 682–686

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  2. 2

    Rosano TG et al. (1991) Advances in catecholamine and metabolite measurements for diagnosis of pheochromocytoma. Clin Chem 37: 1854–1867

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. 3

    Young WF Jr (1997) Pheochromocytoma: issues in diagnosis & treatment. Compr Ther 23: 319–326

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. 4

    Eisenhofer G et al. (2003) Pheochromocytoma: rediscovery as a catecholamine-metabolizing tumor. Endocr Pathol 14: 193–212

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  5. 5

    Gardet V et al. (2001) Lessons from an unpleasant surprise: a biochemical strategy for the diagnosis of pheochromocytoma. J Hypertens 19: 1029–1035

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  6. 6

    Gerlo E and Sevens C (1994) Urinary and plasma catecholamines and urinary catecholamine metabolites in pheochromocytoma: diagnostic value in 19 cases. Clin Chem 40: 250–256

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. 7

    Guller U et al. (2006) Detecting pheochromocytoma: defining the most sensitive test. Ann Surg 243: 102–107

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. 8

    Lenders JW et al. (2002) Biochemical diagnosis of pheochromocytoma: which test is best? JAMA 287: 1427–1434

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  9. 9

    Raber W et al. (2000) Diagnostic efficacy of unconjugated plasma metanephrines for the detection of pheochromocytoma. Arch Intern Med 160: 2957–2963

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  10. 10

    Sawka AM et al. (2003) A comparison of biochemical tests for pheochromocytoma: measurement of fractionated plasma metanephrines compared with the combination of 24-hour urinary metanephrines and catecholamines. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 88: 553–558

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  11. 11

    Unger N et al. (2006) Diagnostic value of various biochemical parameters for the diagnosis of pheochromocytoma in patients with adrenal mass. Eur J Endocrinol 154: 409–417

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  12. 12

    Eisenhofer G et al. (2003) Biochemical diagnosis of pheochromocytoma: how to distinguish true- from false-positive test results. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 88: 2656–2666

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  13. 13

    Furuta N et al. (1999) Diagnosis of pheochromocytoma using [123I]- compared with [131I]-metaiodobenzylguanidine scintigraphy. Int J Urol 6: 119–124

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  14. 14

    van der Harst E et al. (2001) [(123)I]metaiodobenzylguanidine and [(111)In]octreotide uptake in benign and malignant pheochromocytomas. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 86: 685–693

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. 15

    O'Riordain DS et al. (1996) Clinical spectrum and outcome of functional extraadrenal paraganglioma. World J Surg 20: 916–921

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  16. 16

    Hoegerle S et al. (2002) Pheochromocytomas: detection with 18F DOPA whole body PET—initial results. Radiology 222: 507–512

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. 17

    Ilias I et al. (2002) 6-[18F]-fluorodopamine positron emission tomography versus [131I]-metaiodobenzylguanidine scintigraphy in the evaluation of patients with pheochromocytoma. Abstract P3-511. Presented at the 84th Annual Meeting of the Endocrine Society: 2002 June 19–22; San Fransisco, CA

  18. 18

    Mann GN et al. (2006) [(11)C]metahydroxyephedrine and [(18)f]fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography improve clinical decision making in suspected pheochromocytoma. Ann Surg Oncol 13: 187–197

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. 19

    Pacak K et al. (2001) 6-[18F]fluorodopamine positron emission tomographic (PET) scanning for diagnostic localization of pheochromocytoma. Hypertension 38: 6–8

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  20. 20

    Shulkin B et al. (1992) PET scanning with hydroxyephedrine: A new approach to the localization of pheochromocytoma. J Nucl Med 33: 1125–1131

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. 21

    Trampal C et al. (2004) Pheochromocytomas: detection with 11C hydroxyephedrine PET. Radiology 230: 423–428

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. 22

    Shulkin BL et al. (1999) Pheochromocytomas: Imaging with 2-[Fluorine-18]fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose PET. Nucl Med 212: 35–41

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. 23

    Ilias I and Pacak K (2004) Current approaches and recommended algorithm for the diagnostic localization of pheochromocytoma. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 89: 479–491

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  24. 24

    Mamede M et al. (2006) Discordant localization of 2-[18F]-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose in 6-[18F]-fluorodopamine- and [123I]-metaiodobenzylguanidine-negative metastatic pheochromocytoma sites. Nucl Med Commun 27: 31–36

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. 25

    Astuti D et al. (2001) Germline SDHD mutation in familial phaeochromocytoma. Lancet 357: 1181–1182

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  26. 26

    Astuti D et al. (2001) Gene mutations in the succinate dehydrogenase subunit SDHB cause susceptibility to familial pheochromocytoma and to familial paraganglioma. Am J Hum Genet 69: 49–54

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  27. 27

    Baysal BE et al. (2000) Mutations in SDHD, a mitochondrial complex II gene, in hereditary paraganglioma. Science 287: 848–851

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  28. 28

    Baysal BE et al. (2002) Prevalence of SDHB, SDHC, and SDHD germline mutations in clinic patients with head and neck paragangliomas. J Med Genet 39: 178–183

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  29. 29

    Gimenez-Roqueplo AP et al. (2003) Mutations in the SDHB gene are associated with extra-adrenal and/or malignant phaeochromocytomas. Cancer Res 63: 5615–5621

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. 30

    Maher ER et al. (1991) Von Hippel-Lindau disease: a genetic study. J Med Genet 28: 443–447

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  31. 31

    Neumann HPH et al. (2002) Germ-line mutations in nonsyndromic pheochromocytoma. New Engl J Med 346: 1459–1466

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  32. 32

    Bryant J et al. (2003) Pheochromocytoma: the expanding genetic differential diagnosis. J Natl Cancer Inst 95: 1196–1204

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  33. 33

    Gagel RF et al. (1988) The clinical outcome of prospective screening for multiple endocrine neoplasia type 2a. An 18-year experience. N Engl J Med 318: 478–484

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  34. 34

    Mulligan LM et al. (1993) Germ-line mutations of the RET proto-oncogene in multiple endocrine neoplasia type 2A. Nature 363: 458–460

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  35. 35

    Zeiger MA et al. (1995) Loss of heterozygosity on the short arm of chromosome 3 in sporadic, von Hippel-Lindau disease-associated, and familial pheochromocytoma. Genes Chromosomes Cancer 13: 151–156

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  36. 36

    Jimenez C et al. (2006) Should patients with apparently sporadic pheochromocytomas or paragangliomas be screened for hereditary syndromes? J Clin Endocrinol Metab 91: 2851–2858

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  37. 37

    Elder EE et al. (2005) Pheochromocytoma and functional paraganglioma syndrome: no longer the 10% tumor. J Surg Oncol 89: 193–201

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. 38

    Lenders JW et al. (2005) Phaeochromocytoma. Lancet 366: 665–675

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. 39

    Neumann HP et al. (2002) Germ-line mutations in nonsyndromic pheochromocytoma. N Engl J Med 346: 1459–1466

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  40. 40

    Amar L et al. (2005) Genetic testing in pheochromocytoma or functional paraganglioma. J Clin Oncol 23: 8812–8818

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  41. 41

    Benn DE et al. (2005) Clinical presentation and penetrance of pheochromocytoma/paraganglioma syndromes. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 91: 790–792

    Google Scholar 

  42. 42

    Barontini M et al. (2006) Characteristics of pheochromocytoma in a 4- to 20-year-old population. Ann NY Acad Sci 1073: 30–37

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. 43

    Weinhausel A et al. (2003) Long-term follow up of a “sporadic” unilateral pheochromocytoma revealing multiple endocrine neoplasia MEN2A-2 in an elderly woman. Endocr Pathol 14: 375–382

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  44. 44

    Astuti D et al. (2003) Genetic analysis of mitochondrial complex II subunits SDHD, SDHB and SDHC in paraganglioma and phaeochromocytoma susceptibility. Clin Endocrinol (Oxf) 59: 728–733

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  45. 45

    Eisenhofer G et al. (1999) Plasma normetanephrine and metanephrine for detecting pheochromocytoma in von Hippel-Lindau disease and multiple endocrine neoplasia type 2. N Engl J Med 340: 1872–1879

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  46. 46

    Bravo EL and Tagle R (2003) Pheochromocytoma: state-of-the-art and future prospects. Endocr Rev 24: 539–553

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  47. 47

    Kinney MA et al. (2002) Perioperative management of pheochromocytoma. J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth 16: 359–369

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. 48

    Pacak K et al. (2001) Recent advances in genetics, diagnosis, localization, and treatment of pheochromocytoma. Ann Intern Med 134: 315–329

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  49. 49

    Prys-Roberts C (2000) Phaeochromocytoma—recent progress in its management. Br J Anaesth 85: 44–57

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  50. 50

    Proye C et al. (1989) Exclusive use of calcium channel blockers in preoperative and intraoperative control of pheochromocytomas: hemodynamics and free catecholamine assays in ten consecutive patients. Surgery 106: 1149–1154

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. 51

    Plouin PF et al. (1997) Tumor recurrence and hypertension persistence after successful pheochromocytoma operation. Hypertension 29: 1133–1139

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  52. 52

    Janetschek G et al. (1998) Laparoscopic surgery for pheochromocytoma: adrenalectomy, partial resection, excision of paragangliomas. J Urol 160: 330–334

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  53. 53

    Brunt LM et al. (2002) Adrenalectomy for familial pheochromocytoma in the laparoscopic era. Ann Surg 235: 713–720

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. 54

    Lee J et al. (1996) Cortical-sparing adrenalectomy for patients with bilateral pheochromocytoma. Surgery 120: 1064–1070

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  55. 55

    Nambirajan T et al. (2005) Laparoscopic adrenal surgery for recurrent tumours in patients with hereditary phaeochromocytoma. Eur Urol 47: 622–626

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. 56

    Yip L et al. (2004) Surgical management of hereditary pheochromocytoma. J Am Coll Surg 198: 525–534

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. 57

    Koch CA et al. (2002) Pheochromocytoma in von Hippel-Lindau disease: Distinct histopathologic phenotype compared to pheochromocytoma in multiple endocrine neoplasia type 2. Endocr Pathol 13: 17–27

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  58. 58

    DeLellis RA et al. (Eds; 2004) Tumours of Endocrine Organs. Lyon: IARC Press

    Google Scholar 

  59. 59

    Kimura N et al. (2005) Histological grading of adrenal and extra-adrenal pheochromocytomas and relationship to prognosis: a clinicopathological analysis of 116 adrenal pheochromocytomas and 30 extra-adrenal sympathetic paragangliomas including 38 malignant tumors. Endocr Pathol 16: 23–32

    Article  Google Scholar 

  60. 60

    Linnoila RI et al. (1990) Histopathology of benign versus malignant sympathoadrenal paragangliomas: clinicopathologic study of 120 cases including unusual histologic features. Hum Pathol 21: 1168–1180

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  61. 61

    Thompson LD (2002) Pheochromocytoma of the Adrenal gland Scaled Score (PASS) to separate benign from malignant neoplasms: a clinicopathologic and immunophenotypic study of 100 cases. Am J Surg Pathol 26: 551–566

    Article  Google Scholar 

  62. 62

    Lack EE et al. (2003) Recommendations for the reporting of extra-adrenal paragangliomas. The Association of Directors of Anatomic and Surgical Pathology. Hum Pathol 34: 112–113

    Article  Google Scholar 

  63. 63

    Association of Directors of Anatomic and Surgical Pathology [http://www.adasp.org] (accessed 15 September 2006)

  64. 64

    Lack EE (1999) Recommendations for the reporting of tumors of the adrenal cortex and medulla. Association of Directors of Anatomic and Surgical Pathology. Virchows Arch 435: 87–91

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  65. 65

    The Royal College of Pathologists [http://www.rcpath.org] (accessed 15 September 2006)

  66. 66

    Eisenhofer G et al. (2004) Malignant pheochromocytoma: current status and initiatives for future progress. Endocr Relat Cancer 11: 423–436

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  67. 67

    August C et al. (2004) CGH and CD 44/MIB-1 immunohistochemistry are helpful to distinguish metastasized from nonmetastasized sporadic pheochromocytomas. Mod Pathol 17: 1119–1128

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  68. 68

    Goldstein RE et al. (1999) Clinical experience over 48 years with pheochromocytoma. Ann Surg 229: 755–764

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  69. 69

    John H et al. (1999) Pheochromocytomas: can malignant potential be predicted? Urology 53: 679–683

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  70. 70

    Proye CA et al. (1994) “The” pheochromocytoma: a benign, intra-adrenal, hypertensive, sporadic unilateral tumor. Does it exist? World J Surg 18: 467–472

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  71. 71

    Whalen RK et al. (1992) Extra-adrenal pheochromocytoma. J Urol 147: 1–10

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  72. 72

    Mundschenk J and Lehnert H (1998) Malignant pheochromocytoma. Exp Clin Endocrinol Diabetes 106: 373–376

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  73. 73

    Brouwers FM et al. (2005) Low molecular weight proteomic information distinguishes metastatic from benign pheochromocytoma. Endocr Relat Cancer 12: 263–272

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  74. 74

    Averbuch SD et al. (1988) Malignant pheochromocytoma: effective treatment with a combination of cyclophosphamide, vincristine, and dacarbazine. Ann Intern Med 109: 267–273

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  75. 75

    Rose B et al. (2003) High-dose 131I-metaiodobenzylguanidine therapy for 12 patients with malignant pheochromocytoma. Cancer 98: 239–248

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  76. 76

    Safford SD et al. (2003) Iodine-131 metaiodobenzylguanidine is an effective treatment for malignant pheochromocytoma and paraganglioma. Surgery 134: 956–962

    Article  Google Scholar 

  77. 77

    Takahashi K et al. (1999) Malignant pheochromocytoma with multiple hepatic metastases treated by chemotherapy and transcatheter arterial embolization. Intern Med 38: 349–354

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  78. 78

    Loh KC et al. (1997) The treatment of malignant pheochromocytoma with iodine-131 metaiodobenzylguanidine (131I-MIBG): a comprehensive review of 116 reported patients. J Endocrinol Invest 20: 648–658

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  79. 79

    Mukherjee JJ et al. (2001) Treatment of metastatic carcinoid tumours, phaeochromocytoma, paraganglioma and medullary carcinoma of the thyroid with (131)I-meta-iodobenzylguanidine [(131)I-mIBG]. Clin Endocrinol (Oxf) 55: 47–60

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  80. 80

    Chan EC and Ho PC (2000) High-performance liquid chromatography/atmospheric pressure chemical ionization mass spectrometric method for the analysis of catecholamines and metanephrines in human urine. Rapid Commun Mass Spectrom 14: 1959–1964

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  81. 81

    Crockett DK et al. (2002) Rapid analysis of metanephrine and normetanephrine in urine by gas chromatography-mass spectrometry. Clin Chem 48: 332–337

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  82. 82

    Lagerstedt SA et al. (2004) Measurement of plasma free metanephrine and normetanephrine by liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry for diagnosis of pheochromocytoma. Clin Chem 50: 603–611

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  83. 83

    Taylor RL and Singh RJ (2002) Validation of liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry method for analysis of urinary conjugated metanephrine and normetanephrine for screening of pheochromocytoma. Clin Chem 48: 533–539

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

  1. K Pacak is a senior investigator at the National Institute of Child Health and Development, NIH, Bethesda, MD, USA.

    Karel Pacak

  2. G Eisenhofer is a staff scientist at the NIH.

    Graeme Eisenhofer

  3. H Ahlman is Professor of Endocrine Surgery at the Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden.

    Håkan Ahlman

  4. Department of Medicine, SR Bornstein is Professor and Chair of Medicine at the Carl Gustav Carus University Hospital, Dresden, Germany.

    Stefan R Bornstein

  5. A-P Gimenez-Roqueplo is an Associate Professor in Genetics at the Assistance Publique des Hopitaux de Paris, Hospital Européen Georges Pompidou, Universite Paris Descartes, Paris, France.

    Anne-Paule Gimenez-Roqueplo

  6. AB Grossman is Professor of Neuroendocrinology in the Department of Endocrinology at the St Bartholomew's Hospital, Barts and the London School of Medicine, London, UK.

    Ashley B Grossman

  7. N Kimura is a pathologist and investigator at the Tohoku Rosai Hospital, Sendai, Japan.

    Noriko Kimura

  8. M Mannelli is a Professor of Endocrinology at the Department of Clinical Pathophysiology, University of Florence, Florence, Italy.

    Massimo Mannelli

  9. AM McNicol is a reader in pathology at the University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK.

    Anne Marie McNicol

  10. AS Tischler is Professor of Pathology at the Tufts University School of Medicine, Boston, MA, USA.

    Arthur S Tischler

Authors
  1. Karel Pacak
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Graeme Eisenhofer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Håkan Ahlman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Stefan R Bornstein
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Anne-Paule Gimenez-Roqueplo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Ashley B Grossman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Noriko Kimura
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Massimo Mannelli
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Anne Marie McNicol
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Arthur S Tischler
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Arthur S Tischler.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing financial interests.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Pacak, K., Eisenhofer, G., Ahlman, H. et al. Pheochromocytoma: recommendations for clinical practice from the First International Symposium. Nat Rev Endocrinol 3, 92–102 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1038/ncpendmet0396

Download citation

Further reading

Search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing