Question

Difficulty: MediumInterpreting Laboratory Results

During a routine employment health screening, a 3434-year-old female healthcare worker is found to have an incidental laboratory abnormality. She reports feeling completely well and denies a history of nephrolithiasis, bone pain, abdominal discomfort, or changes in mood. She takes no prescription or over-the-counter medications. Her family history is notable for a father who was told he had "mildly high calcium" but never required medical or surgical intervention.

Vital signs are within normal limits. Physical examination is unremarkable.

Initial and follow-up laboratory testing reveal the following:

Laboratory TestResultReference Range
Serum calcium11.111.1 mg/dL8.4−10.28.4-10.2 mg/dL
Serum albumin4.04.0 g/dL3.5−5.03.5-5.0 g/dL
Serum phosphorus2.32.3 mg/dL2.5−4.52.5-4.5 mg/dL
Intact PTH6262 pg/mL10−6510-65 pg/mL
25-hydroxyvitamin D3535 ng/mL20−5020-50 ng/mL
Serum creatinine0.80.8 mg/dL0.6−1.10.6-1.1 mg/dL
24-hour urine calcium4545 mg/24 hr100−300100-300 mg/24 hr
24-hour urine creatinine10001000 mg/24 hr800−1800800-1800 mg/24 hr

Based on the provided laboratory results, which of the following is the most likely diagnosis?

  1. Familial hypocalciuric hypercalcemiaAnswer
  2. B
    Primary hyperparathyroidism
  3. C
    Surreptitious thiazide diuretic use
  4. D
    Humoral hypercalcemia of malignancy
  5. E
    Granulomatous disease

Answer

Familial hypocalciuric hypercalcemia
The correct diagnosis is familial hypocalciuric hypercalcemia (FHH). The interpretation of this laboratory panel begins with confirming hypercalcemia (11.111.1 mg/dL) alongside an intact PTH level (6262 pg/mL) that is inappropriately normal (unsuppressed). In a normal physiologic state, hypercalcemia should profoundly suppress parathyroid hormone secretion. An unsuppressed PTH narrows the differential to PTH-dependent causes, primarily primary hyperparathyroidism and FHH. The critical differentiating test is the 24-hour urine calcium. In primary hyperparathyroidism, the kidneys are structurally normal and will attempt to excrete the excessive filtered calcium load, resulting in normal or elevated 24-hour urine calcium (>200> 200 mg/day). In contrast, FHH is caused by an inactivating mutation in the calcium-sensing receptor (CaSR) in both the parathyroid glands and the renal tubules. The renal mutation leads to increased tubular calcium reabsorption, resulting in significant hypocalciuria (<100< 100 mg/day). The patient's asymptomatic status and family history of benign hypercalcemia further secure this diagnosis.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Analyze the serum calcium and intact PTH levels together.
The patient has mild hypercalcemia (11.111.1 mg/dL) with an intact PTH of 6262 pg/mL (upper half of normal).
Determining whether hypercalcemia is PTH-dependent or PTH-independent is the crucial first step in the diagnostic algorithm. An unsuppressed PTH in the face of hypercalcemia indicates a PTH-dependent process.
2
Evaluate the 24-hour urine calcium output to differentiate between the causes of PTH-dependent hypercalcemia.
The 24-hour urine calcium is extremely low at 4545 mg/24 hr (normal is 100−300100-300 mg/24 hr).
Primary hyperparathyroidism and familial hypocalciuric hypercalcemia (FHH) both present with elevated calcium and unsuppressed PTH. Urine calcium excretion is required to distinguish the two.
3
Synthesize the laboratory data with the clinical history to establish the final diagnosis.
The combination of PTH-dependent hypercalcemia, profound hypocalciuria, asymptomatic presentation, and a family history of benign hypercalcemia confirms the diagnosis of FHH.
FHH is caused by an inactivating mutation in the calcium-sensing receptor (CaSR) in the parathyroid glands and kidneys, requiring higher calcium levels to suppress PTH and leading to maximal renal calcium reabsorption.

Key Concept

The hallmark laboratory pattern of familial hypocalciuric hypercalcemia (FHH) is mild hypercalcemia, inappropriately normal or slightly elevated PTH, and a very low 24-hour urine calcium level.
Rate this question