SEARCH

SEARCH BY CITATION

FilenameFormatSizeDescription
cen12207-sup-0001-AppendixS1-TableS1-S10.docWord document353K

Appendix S1. Further details of the Register Database and Data-Processing Algorithms.

Table S1. Discrepancies in on-treatment flags in the GH export table.

Table S2. Summary of GH levels and control of GH and IGF1 in Periods of Care, stratified by Treatment Status and Era.

Table S3. Responses of GH and IGF1 to treatment with SMS and DA in treatment courses during the 2000s: (a) Percentages achieving biochemical control. (b) Distribution of GH levels.

Table S4. Responses of GH and IGF1 during treatment courses with different types of somatostatin analogue in the 1990s and 2000s: (a) Percentages achieving biochemical control, (b) Distribution of GH levels.

Table S5. Patient characteristics and pre-treatment GH levels in courses of lanreotide autogel compared to octreotide LAR.

Table S6. (a) Summary Dose Information for Lanreotide Autogel courses in the 2000s.

Table S7. Responses of GH and IGF1 during treatment courses with bromocriptine and cabergoline: (a) Percentages achieving biochemical control. (b) Distribution of GH levels.

Table S8. Sequence of use of different classes of GH-lowering drugs in individual patients analysed at the point of last period of care on medical treatment, and stratified by the era of that treatment course.

Table S9. Control of GH and IGF1 by DA and SMS in 1990s and 2000s, stratified by the mean GH level in the period of care off treatment prior to the current treatment course.

Table S10. Control of GH and IGF1 by DA and SMS in 1990s and 2000s, stratified by the mean GH level in the period of care before any medical, surgical or radiotherapy treatment.

Please note: Wiley Blackwell is not responsible for the content or functionality of any supporting information supplied by the authors. Any queries (other than missing content) should be directed to the corresponding author for the article.