70% of the stories we review fail to adequately address costs. This is one of them.
When a single injection may cost $700, we don’t know why that information is not included in the story. Reuters did – up high in its story. We also thought Reuters painted a far clearer picture of the limitations of the current research.
Earlier studies have suggested that GHRH and IGF-1 play important roles in the cognitive decline associated with normal aging and in patients with Alzheimers disease. Recent studies in otherwise healthy older adults have suggested that supplementation with GHRH may improve executive function. This study provides a bit of additional evidence that GHRH may play a role in the treatment of cognitive decline in older adults. But the story is far from clear and this work should be viewed as a preliminary step and not the end of the journey. There isn’t a proven intervention for mild cognitive impairment. So news stories about research in this field needs to be clear about the state of research.
Cost was never mentioned – a significant oversight since, as Reuters Health reported, a single shot may cost $700.
We were puzzled by the lack of clarity of the benefits. While benefits were not quantified, the impact of GHRH on IGF-1 was. We think that the statement in the Reuters story: “It’s unclear how the test differences will translate into real life,” provided a clear statement on benefit
The story mentioned spiked insulin levels. But it didn’t mention any of the side effects reported in the study:
“Adverse events primarily consisted of local skin
reactions (redness, itching, or stinging) and increased arthralgias.
Other adverse events reported, although less
frequently, included gastrointestinal upset, numbness or
tingling in the hands, weight gain, and fluid retention.
Although increased fluid retention can potentially precipitate
or exacerbate symptoms of congestive heart failure
and hypertension, coronary adverse events were not
observed in our study.”
The ending of the story included some evaluation of the evidence, including an independent perspective and this final sentence:
“The researchers said larger and longer trials are needed to assess the hormone’s therapeutic potential.”
No disease mongering at play here.
But, we were a bit troubled by the suggestion that people with mild cognitive impairment, “…don’t yet have Alzheimer’s disease…” While MCI is a precursor, not all people with it go on to develop Alzheimer’s disease.
One independent expert’s input was important at the end of the story.
There wasn’t the kind of clear context and background as provided in the Reuters story:
“…researchers have failed so far to come up wiht effective drugs to treat mild cognitive impairment, just as there is no known treatment to stave off the normal memory decline that comes with age.”
There could have been a line or two about how GHRH is used now in medicine and whether there is much off-label use of the injections.
The story at least established that the same team had done prior work with GHRH.
There’s no sign that the story relied on a news release.