SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

A systematic review and meta-analysis on impulse-control disorders in patients with pituitary adenomas exposed to dopamine agonists.

Front Endocrinol (Lausanne) · 2026-08-06

DOI: 10.3389/fendo.2026.1869083PMID: 42626033

Open accessMeta-Analysis; Systematic Review; systematic-review; Journal ArticleOriginal source ↗

Research overview

The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by

BackgroundPatients exposed to dopamine agonists (DAs) may develop impulse-control disorders (ICDs), as shown in Parkinson's Disease. Patients with pituitary adenomas treated with DAs may also have a higher frequency of ICDs.ObjectiveWe compared the frequency of ICDs or impulsiveness in patients with pituitary adenomas treated with DAs versus patients with pituitary adenomas not exposed to DAs or healthy controls.MethodsObservational studies published in any language up to June 30th, 2026 were searched for in PubMed, EMBASE, EBSCO, LiLACS, SCOPUS, and WOS databases. We compared the occurrence of ICDs and impulsiveness scale scores between patients exposed to and not exposed to DAs.ResultsOut of 14 studies identified, 10 reported the association between DAs and ICDs, and 6 reported the impact on the Barratt Impulsiveness Scale. DAs were significantly associated with ICDs (random-effects models, OR, 95% CI: 2.39, 1.78-3.21; I2 = 0%, n=1247; p2 = 0%) and punding (2.53, 1.34-4.78, p2 = 27.6%), but not with pathological gambling (1.94, 0.84-4.49, p=0.12, I2 = 0%) or compulsive shopping (1.46, 0.59-3.36, p=0.41, I2 = 61.3%).ConclusionPatients with pituitary adenomas treated with DAs showed a higher frequency of ICDs. Studies to confirm these findings and investigate the risk factors for ICDs in this patient population are warranted.

Scientific assessment

01

Research question

Assess the question within the original study’s scope.

02

Methods & sample

Check the source article for study design and sample details.

03

Key findings

An editorially approved findings summary is not yet published for this record.

04

Limitations

Generalizability, bias and clinical meaning require separate assessment.

Methods, samples and clinical conclusions are not inferred from bibliographic metadata.