Comparison of urinary prolactin and serum/urine prolactin ratio in hyperprolactinemic and macroprolactinemic patients

Biologically, the monomeric form of prolactin is the most active. In measurement methods, all forms of prolactin are included in the assay; therefore, the presence of macroprolactin, causes a false increase in prolactin and misdiagnosis of hyperprolactinemia. It seems that if an alternative method can be used to check macroprolactin, it would be helpful. The study aims to investigate the urinary level of prolactin and its relationship with serum levels in cases of suspected macroprolactinemia and determine whether these tests can serve as a novel, non-invasive, accessible, and cost-effective tool for diagnosing macroprolactinemia. In this cross-sectional study, patients who visited the Tabriz Imam Reza hospital clinic (2020–2021) with elevated prolactin levels. Prolactin and creatinine were checked in the urine and blood samples. After treating the serum with polyethylene glycol to precipitate macroprolactin, serum prolactin was measured again. The patients were divided into two groups. The first group, consisting of 19 individuals, with a recovery rate of more than 60%, formed the hyperprolactinemia group. The second group, comprising 36 individuals with a recovery rate of less than 60%, formed the macroprolactinemia group. The participants in this study were 50 individuals, comprising 10 men and 40 women. The mean urinary prolactin levels in the hyperprolactinemia group are 43.27 ± 15.53, and in the macroprolactinemia group, they are 32.58 ± 16.27. This difference was statistically significant. The median ratio of urinary prolactin to urinary creatinine is 0.03 in the hyperprolactinemia group and 0.02 in the macroprolactinemia group (p<0.05). The median ratio of serum prolactin to urinary prolactin in the hyperprolactinemia group is 32.6, and in the macroprolactinemia group, it is 45.5 (p < 0.01). Findings showed that the difference between urinary prolactin in true macroprolactinemic and hyperprolactinemic patients is significant, such that the amount of urinary prolactin in macroprolactinemic patients is less than in hyperprolactinemic patients, and the ratio of serum to urinary prolactin is higher. These parameters can be used to detect macroprolactin in cases of increased serum prolactin level, and this finding could provide a basis for the idea that these parameters can be used as an alternative to the PEG sedimentation test for diagnosing macroprolactin.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
BMC Endocrine Disorders
Published
2025-10-14
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12902-025-02052-6
Primary Topic
Pituitary Gland Disorders and Treatments
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Comparison of urinary prolactin and serum/urine prolactin ratio in hyperprolactinemic and macroprolactinemic patients

Jalil Houshyar, Mitra Niafar, Akbar Aliasgarzadeh, Azam Moslemi et al.
BMC Endocrine Disorders
Pituitary Gland Disorders and Treatments
article

Comparison of urinary prolactin and serum/urine prolactin ratio in hyperprolactinemic and macroprolactinemic patients

Jalil Houshyar, Mitra Niafar, Akbar Aliasgarzadeh, Azam Moslemi, Naser Aghamohammadzadeh, Halimeh Amirazad, Vahideh Sadra, Farzad Najafipour, Behnam Ein-Mozaffari
article en

Abstract

Biologically, the monomeric form of prolactin is the most active. In measurement methods, all forms of prolactin are included in the assay; therefore, the presence of macroprolactin, causes a false increase in prolactin and misdiagnosis of hyperprolactinemia. It seems that if an alternative method can be used to check macroprolactin, it would be helpful. The study aims to investigate the urinary level of prolactin and its relationship with serum levels in cases of suspected macroprolactinemia and determine whether these tests can serve as a novel, non-invasive, accessible, and cost-effective tool for diagnosing macroprolactinemia. In this cross-sectional study, patients who visited the Tabriz Imam Reza hospital clinic (2020–2021) with elevated prolactin levels. Prolactin and creatinine were checked in the urine and blood samples. After treating the serum with polyethylene glycol to precipitate macroprolactin, serum prolactin was measured again. The patients were divided into two groups. The first group, consisting of 19 individuals, with a recovery rate of more than 60%, formed the hyperprolactinemia group. The second group, comprising 36 individuals with a recovery rate of less than 60%, formed the macroprolactinemia group. The participants in this study were 50 individuals, comprising 10 men and 40 women. The mean urinary prolactin levels in the hyperprolactinemia group are 43.27 ± 15.53, and in the macroprolactinemia group, they are 32.58 ± 16.27. This difference was statistically significant. The median ratio of urinary prolactin to urinary creatinine is 0.03 in the hyperprolactinemia group and 0.02 in the macroprolactinemia group (p<0.05). The median ratio of serum prolactin to urinary prolactin in the hyperprolactinemia group is 32.6, and in the macroprolactinemia group, it is 45.5 (p < 0.01). Findings showed that the difference between urinary prolactin in true macroprolactinemic and hyperprolactinemic patients is significant, such that the amount of urinary prolactin in macroprolactinemic patients is less than in hyperprolactinemic patients, and the ratio of serum to urinary prolactin is higher. These parameters can be used to detect macroprolactin in cases of increased serum prolactin level, and this finding could provide a basis for the idea that these parameters can be used as an alternative to the PEG sedimentation test for diagnosing macroprolactin.

BMC Endocrine DisordersVol. 25(1)
Arak University of Medical Sciences (IR), Tabriz University of Medical Sciences (IR)
Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, University of Tabriz
Openalex Percentile: Top 61%
Pituitary Gland Disorders and Treatments
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.