Background. Hypothyroidism is common, however, aspects of its treatment remain controversial. Our survey aimed at documenting treatment choices of European thyroid specialists and exploring how patients’ persistent symptoms, clinician demographics, and geo-economic factors relate to treatment choices. Methods. 17,247 thyroid specialists from 28 countries were invited to participate in an online questionnaire survey. The survey included respondent demographic data and treatment choices for hypothyroid patients with persistent symptoms. Geo-economic data for each country were included in the analyses. Results. The response rate was 32.9% (6,058 respondents out of 17,247 invitees). Levothyroxine (LT4) was the initial treatment preferred by the majority (98.3%). Persistent symptoms despite normal serum thyrotropin (TSH) while receiving LT4 treatment were reported to affect up to 10.0% of patients by 75.4% of respondents, while 28.4% reported an increasing such trend in the past five years. The principal explanations offered for patients’ persistent symptoms were psychosocial factors (77.1%), comorbidities (69.2%), and unrealistic patient expectations (61.0%). Combination treatment with LT4 + liothyronine (LT3) was chosen by 40.0% of respondents for patients who complained of persistent symptoms despite a normal TSH. This option was selected more frequently by female thyroid specialists, with high-volume practice, working in countries with high gross national income per capita. Conclusions. The perception of patients’ dissatisfaction reported by physicians seems lower than that described by hypothyroid patients in previous surveys. LT4+LT3 treatment is used frequently by thyroid specialists in Europe for persistent hypothyroid-like symptoms even if they generally attribute such symptoms to non-endocrine causes and despite the evidence of non-superiority of the combined over the LT4 therapy. Pressure by dissatisfied patients on their physicians for LT3-containing treatments is a likely explanation. The association of the therapeutic choices with the clinician demographic characteristics and geo-economic factors in Europe is a novel information and requires further investigation.

Purpose: The use of thyroid hormones (TH) to treat obesity is unsupported by evidence as reflected in international guidelines. We explored views about this practice, and associations with respondent characteristics among European thyroid specialists. Methods: Specialists from 28 countries were invited to a survey via professional organisations. The relevant question was whether “Thyroid hormones may be indicated in biochemically euthyroid patients with obesity resistant to lifestyle interventions”. Results: Of 17,232 invitations 5695 responses were received (33% valid response rate; 65% women; 90% endocrinologists). Of these, 290 (5.1%) stated that TH may be indicated as treatment for obesity in euthyroid patients. This view was commoner among non-endocrinologists (8.7% vs. 4.7%, p < 0.01), private practice (6.5% vs. 4.5%, p < 0.01), and varied geographically (Eastern Europe, 7.3%; Southern Europe, 4.8%; Western Europe, 2.7%; and Northern Europe, 2.5%). Respondents from Northern and Western Europe were less likely to use TH than those from Eastern Europe (p < 0.01). Gross national income (GNI) correlated inversely with this view (OR 0.97, CI: 0.96–0.97; p < 0.001). Having national guidelines on hypothyroidism correlated negatively with treating obesity with TH (OR 0.71, CI: 0.55–0.91). Conclusions: Despite the lack of evidence, and contrary to guidelines’ recommendations, about 5% of respondents stated that TH may be indicated as a treatment for obesity in euthyroid patients resistant to life-style interventions. This opinion was associated with (i) respondent characteristics: being non-endocrinologist, working in private practice, treating a small number of hypothyroid patients annually and (ii) national characteristics: prevalence of obesity, Eastern Europe, low GNI and lack of national hypothyroidism guidelines.

Összefoglaló. Bevezetés: A pajzsmirigy-alulműködés gyakori betegség. Kezelésében a levotiroxin (LT4)-pótlás a szokásos eljárás, mely tabletta vagy gélkapszula formájában áll rendelkezésre Magyarországon. A nemzetközi trendeknek megfelelően az esetek korai felismerése miatt már a kevésbé kifejezett hormonális eltérések idején elindul a kezelés. Az endokrinológusok hypothyreosiskezelési szokásaival kapcsolatban Magyarországon és Európában felmérés eddig nem történt. Célkitűzés: A THESIS (Treatment of Hypothyroidism in Europe by Specialists: an International Survey) célja, hogy felmérjük az európai és közte jelen munkánkban a magyar endokrinológusok hypothyreosiskezelési szokásait és az LT4 esetleges alkalmazását pajzsmirigy-működészavarral nem járó állapotokban. Módszer: A Magyar Endokrinológiai és Anyagcsere Társaság (MEAT) tagjainak e-mailben meghívót küldtünk az online kérdőíves vizsgálathoz. Eredmények: 165 magyar endokrinológus válaszai alapján végeztük az elemzést. A válaszadók többsége, 99,4%-uk első kezelésként LT4-pótlást alkalmaz. Az LT4 + LT3 kombinációt elsősorban olyan betegeknél alkalmazzák, akik LT4 szedése mellett euthyreoid hormonértékek ellenére hypothyreosisra jellemző tüneteket mutatnak (36,1%). Euthyreoid hormonértékek mellett, magas antitestszint és infertilitás esetén 60,3% megfontolná LT4 indítását, amit evidenciák jelenleg nem indokolnak. Számos kórállapot befolyásolja az LT4 felszívódását, ezekben az esetekben a magyar endokrinológusok 66,4%-a preferálja a lágy kapszula alkalmazását, jobb eredményt várva a gyógyszerformák közötti váltástól. Következtetés: A pajzsmirigy-alulműködés kezelésében a magyar endokrinológusok elsődlegesen az LT4-et választják. Az LT4 + LT3 kombinált alkalmazását a pajzsmirigy-stimuláló hormon normális szintjének elérése után perzisztáló hypothyreosisos tünetek esetén fontolják meg. Az újabb gyógyszerformákat a többség preferálja, ha az LT4 hagyományos tablettás formájának alacsonyabb biohasznosulása várható. Orv Hetil. 2022; 163(12): 463–472. Summary. Introduction: Hypothyroidism has a high prevalence in the adult population. Levothyroxine (LT4) supplementation is considered to be the gold-standard treatment method. In Hungary, LT4 tablets and soft gel capsules are the available formulations. Similarly to the international trends, hypothyroidism is earlier recognised, leading to early LT4 supplementation. Up till now, there has been no survey on the treatment of hypothyroidism among Hungarian endocrinologists. Objective: THESIS (Treatment of Hypothyroidism in Europe by Specialists: an International Survey) had been conducted to assess treatment preferences among European endocrinologists. Here we report the results on the use of thyroid hormones in hypothyroid patients and euthyroid individuals in Hungary. Method: An e-mail invitation to participate, containing the link to the online survey was sent to members of the Hungarian Society for Endocrinology and Metabolism. Results: There were 165 responses with full demographics which were included in the analysis. By the majority (99.4%) of them, LT4 was the first treatment of choice. LT4 + LT3 combination was considered an option in patients with persistent symptoms despite biochemical euthyroidism while on LT4 (36,1%). In euthyroid individuals, 60.3% of the respondents would consider starting LT4 in euthyroid infertile women with high antibody levels, which is hardly supported by evidence. In the presence of comorbidities and interfering medications which may hinder LT4 absorption, 66.4% of Hungarian endocrinologist anticipate significant improvement after switching from tablets to soft gel capsules. Conclusion: The treatment of choice for hypothyroidism is LT4 in Hungary. Combination therapy with LT4 + LT3 was considered for patients with persistent symptoms. In the presence of diseases and interfering medications affecting bioavailability, a high number of Hungarian endocrinologists prefer the new LT4 formulation. The administration of LT4 in euthyroid conditions awaits explanation and calls for intensive discussions at local conferences and courses. Orv Hetil. 2022; 163(12): 463–472.

Familial hypercholesterolemia (FH) is the most common monogenic metabolic disorder characterized by considerably elevated low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels leading to enhanced atherogenesis, early cardiovascular disease (CVD), and premature death. However, the wide phenotypic heterogeneity in FH makes the cardiovascular risk prediction challenging in clinical practice to determine optimal therapeutic strategy. Beyond the lifetime LDL-C vascular accumulation, other genetic and non-genetic risk factors might exacerbate CVD development. Besides the most frequent variants of three genes (LDL-R, APOB, and PCSK9) in some proband variants of other genes implicated in lipid metabolism and atherogenesis are responsible for FH phenotype. Furthermore, non-genetic factors, including traditional cardiovascular risk factors, metabolic and endocrine disorders might also worsen risk profile. Although some were extensively studied previously, others, such as common endocrine disorders including thyroid disorders or polycystic ovary syndrome are not widely evaluated in FH. In this review, we summarize the most important genetic and non-genetic factors that might affect the risk prediction and therapeutic strategy in FH through the eyes of clinicians focusing on disorders that might not be in the center of FH research. The review highlights the complexity of FH care and the need of an interdisciplinary attitude to find the best therapeutic approach in FH patients.