Jin Hwa Kim1,2, Jung-Soo Pyo3, Won Jin Cho4,5. 1. Department of Endocrinology and Metabolism, Chosun University Hospital, Chosun University School of Medicine, Gwangju, Republic of Korea. 2. Study Group for Meta-analysis, Chosun University Hospital, Chosun University School of Medicine, Gwangju, Republic of Korea. 3. Department of Pathology, Eulji University Hospital, Eulji University College of Medicine, Daejeon, Republic of Korea. 4. Department of Urology, Chosun University Hospital, Chosun University School of Medicine, 365 Pilmundaero, Dong-gu, Gwangju, 501-717, Republic of Korea. uro2097@gmail.com. 5. Study Group for Meta-analysis, Chosun University Hospital, Chosun University School of Medicine, Gwangju, Republic of Korea. uro2097@gmail.com.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The objective of the present meta-analysis was to evaluate the clinicopathological significance and prognosis of micro-MTC compared to macro-MTC. METHODS: Relevant articles were obtained by searching the PubMed and MEDLINE databases. A meta-analysis was performed using 15 eligible studies. In addition, subgroup analysis based on heredity was performed in patients diagnosed with micro-MTC. RESULTS: The rate of extrathyroidal extension of micro-MTC [0.118 (95% CI 0.073-0.185)] was significantly lower than that of macro-MTC [0.303 (95% CI 0.224-0.395)]. Micro-MTC [0.229 (95% CI 0.161-0.314)] had a significantly lower rate of cervical lymph node (LN) metastasis compared to macro-MTC [0.595 (95% CI 0.486-0.694)]. The rate of multifocality was not significantly different between micro-MTC and macro-MTC [0.394 (95% CI 0.244-0.566) vs. 0.320 (95% CI 0.234-0.421), respectively]. The rate of distant metastasis did not differ significantly between micro-MTC [0.082 (95% CI 0.017-0.314)] and macro-MTC [0.068 (95% CI 0.009-0.376)]. Patients with micro-MTC showed significantly higher disease-free survival rates [hazard ratio [HR] 0.406 (95% CI 0.288-0.575), I 2 = 40.563%] compared to patients with macro-MTC. CONCLUSION: Micro-MTC has aggressive features, such as multifocality and distant metastasis, similar to macro-MTC and a non-negligible rate of extrathyroidal extension and cervical LN metastasis. We suggest that treatment of micro-MTC should be approached with a similar focus as that of macro-MTC. Considering that less extrathyroidal extension and cervical LN metastasis occur in patients with micro-MTC compared to macro-MTC, we propose that treatment of micro-MTC, which has a relatively low disease burden status, should be viewed as an opportunity for improving prognosis.
BACKGROUND: The objective of the present meta-analysis was to evaluate the clinicopathological significance and prognosis of micro-MTC compared to macro-MTC. METHODS: Relevant articles were obtained by searching the PubMed and MEDLINE databases. A meta-analysis was performed using 15 eligible studies. In addition, subgroup analysis based on heredity was performed in patients diagnosed with micro-MTC. RESULTS: The rate of extrathyroidal extension of micro-MTC [0.118 (95% CI 0.073-0.185)] was significantly lower than that of macro-MTC [0.303 (95% CI 0.224-0.395)]. Micro-MTC [0.229 (95% CI 0.161-0.314)] had a significantly lower rate of cervical lymph node (LN) metastasis compared to macro-MTC [0.595 (95% CI 0.486-0.694)]. The rate of multifocality was not significantly different between micro-MTC and macro-MTC [0.394 (95% CI 0.244-0.566) vs. 0.320 (95% CI 0.234-0.421), respectively]. The rate of distant metastasis did not differ significantly between micro-MTC [0.082 (95% CI 0.017-0.314)] and macro-MTC [0.068 (95% CI 0.009-0.376)]. Patients with micro-MTC showed significantly higher disease-free survival rates [hazard ratio [HR] 0.406 (95% CI 0.288-0.575), I 2 = 40.563%] compared to patients with macro-MTC. CONCLUSION: Micro-MTC has aggressive features, such as multifocality and distant metastasis, similar to macro-MTC and a non-negligible rate of extrathyroidal extension and cervical LN metastasis. We suggest that treatment of micro-MTC should be approached with a similar focus as that of macro-MTC. Considering that less extrathyroidal extension and cervical LN metastasis occur in patients with micro-MTC compared to macro-MTC, we propose that treatment of micro-MTC, which has a relatively low disease burden status, should be viewed as an opportunity for improving prognosis.
Authors: S Guyétant; F Dupre; J C Bigorgne; B Franc; N Dutrieux-Berger; M Lecomte-Houcke; M Patey; B Caillou; G Viennet; O Guerin; J P Saint-Andre Journal: Hum Pathol Date: 1999-08 Impact factor: 3.466
Authors: Venu G Pillarisetty; Steven C Katz; Ronald A Ghossein; R Michael Tuttle; Ashok R Shaha Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2009-07-01 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: Samuel A Wells; Sylvia L Asa; Henning Dralle; Rossella Elisei; Douglas B Evans; Robert F Gagel; Nancy Lee; Andreas Machens; Jeffrey F Moley; Furio Pacini; Friedhelm Raue; Karin Frank-Raue; Bruce Robinson; M Sara Rosenthal; Massimo Santoro; Martin Schlumberger; Manisha Shah; Steven G Waguespack Journal: Thyroid Date: 2015-06 Impact factor: 6.568
Authors: M F Saad; N G Ordonez; R K Rashid; J J Guido; C S Hill; R C Hickey; N A Samaan Journal: Medicine (Baltimore) Date: 1984-11 Impact factor: 1.889
Authors: Fan Wu; Tianhan Zhou; Kaining Lu; Ting Pan; Yeqin Ni; Lingqian Zhao; Kecheng Jiang; Yu Zhang; Dingcun Luo Journal: Zhejiang Da Xue Xue Bao Yi Xue Ban Date: 2021-12-25