ArticlePituitary2025
A post-hoc internal validation of arginine-stimulated copeptin cut-offs for diagnosing AVP deficiency (central diabetes insipidus).
Article in Pituitary, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT00757276 (Copeptin in the Diagnosis and Differential Diagnosis of Diabetes Insipidus. The CoSIP-Study), which is not on this map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Copeptin in the Diagnosis and Differential Diagnosis of Diabetes Insipidus. The CoSIP-Study
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Arginine Vasopressin Deficiency and Oxytocin Deficiency in the Endocrine Clinic.The Journal of clinical endocrinology and metabolism · 2026Review
- [Analysis of stimulating factors for serum copeptin based on liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry].Se pu = Chinese journal of chromatography · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDistinguishing arginine vasopressin (AVP) deficiency (central diabetes insipidus) from primary polydipsia is challenging. While hypertonic saline-stimulated copeptin testing provides the highest diagnostic accuracy, it is often restricted to specialised centres, requiring close monitoring and potentially causing patient discomfort. Initially, arginine-stimulated copeptin was proposed as a simpler alternative, but a head-to-head comparison study found it less precise than hypertonic saline stimulation. However, the same study identified two new high sensitivity and specificity cut-offs for arginine-stimulated copeptin, though these cut-offs have yet to be validated.
methodsThis is a secondary post-hoc analysis of the initial prospective multicentre study, including adult patients with confirmed AVP deficiency or primary polydipsia. Participants underwent the arginine stimulation test, with plasma copeptin measured at baseline and 60- and 90 min after arginine infusion. The primary objective was to revisit the original study to internally validate the proposed arginine-stimulated copeptin cut-offs of > 5.2pmol/L (high specificity cut-off with > 90% specificity for primary polydipsia) and ≤ 3.0 pmol/L (high specificity cut-off with > 90% specificity for AVP deficiency).
findingsIn total, 96 patients were included between May 2013 and June 2018: n = 38 [40%] with AVP deficiency and n = 58 [60%] with primary polydipsia. At 60 min after arginine infusion, a copeptin level ≤ 3.0 pmol/L showed a specificity of 95% (95% CI: 0.88-1.00) for AVP deficiency, while a copeptin level > 5.2 pmol/L demonstrated a specificity of 97% (95% CI: 0.92-1.00) for primary polydipsia. The ≤ 3.0 pmol/L cut-off accurately identified 71% (n = 27/38) of patients with AVP deficiency, and the > 5.2 pmol/L cut-off correctly identified 69% (n = 40/58) of patients with primary polydipsia.
interpretationThis analysis validates two new copeptin cut-offs of the arginine stimulation test to distinguish AVP deficiency from primary polydipsia: >5.2 pmol/L for high specificity in diagnosing primary polydipsia and ≤ 3.0 pmol/L for high specificity in diagnosing AVP deficiency. These thresholds might offer a practical initial alternative to hypertonic saline testing. REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov (NCT00757276).
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.