Liver fat in adults with GH deficiency: comparison to matched controls and the effect of GH replacement

CONTEXT: Existing data regarding the association between growth hormone deficiency (GHD) and liver fat content are conflicting. OBJECTIVE: We aimed i) to assess intrahepatocellular lipid (IHCL) content in hypopituitary adults with GHD compared to matched controls and ii) to evaluate the effect of growth hormone (GH) replacement on IHCL content. DESIGN: Cross-sectional comparison and controlled intervention study. PATIENTS, PARTICIPANTS: Cross-sectional comparison: 22 hypopituitary adults with GHD and 44 healthy controls matched for age, BMI, gender and ethnicity. Intervention study: 9 GHD patients starting GH replacement (GH Rx group), 9 GHD patients not starting replacement therapy (non-GH Rx group). INTERVENTION: Intervention study:GH replacement for 6 months in the GH Rx group, dosage was titrated to achieve normal IGF-1 levels. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: IHCL content determined by proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy (1 H MRS). RESULTS: Cross-sectional comparison: There was no difference in IHCL content between GHD patients and healthy controls (1.89% (0.30, 4.03) vs. 1.14% (0.22, 2.32); p=0.2), the prevalence of patients with hepatic steatosis (IHCL of ≥ 5.56%) was similar in the two groups (22.7% vs. 15.9%; chi square probability = 0.4). Intervention study: The change in IHCL content over 6 months did not differ between the GH Rx group and the non-GH Rx group (-0.63 ± 4.53% vs. +0.11 ± 1.46%; p=0.6). CONCLUSIONS: In our study liver fat content and the prevalence of hepatic steatosis did not differ between hypopituitary adults with GHD and matched controls. In GHD patients GH replacement had no effect on liver fat content.

Who controls whom? Interaction dynamics and success of university-industry initiatives

This chapter looks into the importance of having a clear identity of a boundary spanner in determining the role of the partners in a university-industry knowledge transfer programme. It highlights issues around the relationship between the business and the graduate as the boundary spanner, where the university's level of control differs between two programmes: Knowledge Transfer Partnership (KTP) and Knowledge Exchange and Enterprise Network (KEEN) programme. The four case studies illustrate interesting points since the university is the employer for the KTPs associate and the business is the employer for the KEEN associate, whilst successful KTP and KEEN projects rely on a full understanding of the role of the graduate within the business.