BACKGROUND: Indeterminate categories of thyroid cytopathology (categories B-III and B-IV of the Bethesda system) are integrated by a heterogeneous spectrum of cytological scenarios that are generally clustered for analysis and management recommendations. It has been suggested that aspirates exhibiting nuclear atypia have a higher risk of malignancy. This study aimed to assess whether cytologically indeterminate thyroid nodules with nuclear atypia have a significantly higher cancer risk than those without nuclear atypia. METHODS: On June 30, 2016, PubMed and EMBASE were searched for articles in English or Spanish using a search strategy developed by an endocrinologist and a librarian. Case reports were excluded, and no date limits were used. The references of all included studies were also screened for relevant missing studies. Studies were included if the prevalences of malignancy of cytologically indeterminate thyroid nodules with histological confirmation with and without nuclear atypia were reported. Studies were excluded if they had: (i) nodules suspicious for malignancy; (ii) nodules with non-indeterminate (B-III or B-IV) cytology on repeated biopsy, if performed; (iii) nodules not consecutively evaluated; or (iv) cohorts overlapping with another larger series. Two investigators independently assessed the eligibility and risk of bias of the studies. PRISMA and MOOSE guidelines were followed. Summary data were extracted from published reports by one investigator and independently reviewed by another. Data were pooled using a random-effects model. Heterogeneity was explored using subgroup analysis and mixed-effect model meta-regression. The odds ratio for malignancy of cytologically indeterminate thyroid nodules with nuclear atypia over cytologically indeterminate thyroid nodules without nuclear atypia was calculated. RESULTS: Of 2571 retrieved studies, 20 were eligible. The meta-analysis was conducted on summary data of 3532 cytologically indeterminate thyroid nodules: 1162 with and 2370 without nuclear atypia. The odds ratio for malignancy in cytologically indeterminate thyroid nodules with nuclear atypia was 3.63 [confidence interval 3.06-4.35]. There was no evidence of publication bias, and heterogeneity was insignificant (I2 < 0.01%, p = 0.40). CONCLUSIONS: Nuclear atypia is a significant indicator of malignancy in cytologically indeterminate thyroid nodules and needs to be standardized and implemented into clinical practice.
BACKGROUND: Indeterminate categories of thyroid cytopathology (categories B-III and B-IV of the Bethesda system) are integrated by a heterogeneous spectrum of cytological scenarios that are generally clustered for analysis and management recommendations. It has been suggested that aspirates exhibiting nuclear atypia have a higher risk of malignancy. This study aimed to assess whether cytologically indeterminate thyroid nodules with nuclear atypia have a significantly higher cancer risk than those without nuclear atypia. METHODS: On June 30, 2016, PubMed and EMBASE were searched for articles in English or Spanish using a search strategy developed by an endocrinologist and a librarian. Case reports were excluded, and no date limits were used. The references of all included studies were also screened for relevant missing studies. Studies were included if the prevalences of malignancy of cytologically indeterminate thyroid nodules with histological confirmation with and without nuclear atypia were reported. Studies were excluded if they had: (i) nodules suspicious for malignancy; (ii) nodules with non-indeterminate (B-III or B-IV) cytology on repeated biopsy, if performed; (iii) nodules not consecutively evaluated; or (iv) cohorts overlapping with another larger series. Two investigators independently assessed the eligibility and risk of bias of the studies. PRISMA and MOOSE guidelines were followed. Summary data were extracted from published reports by one investigator and independently reviewed by another. Data were pooled using a random-effects model. Heterogeneity was explored using subgroup analysis and mixed-effect model meta-regression. The odds ratio for malignancy of cytologically indeterminate thyroid nodules with nuclear atypia over cytologically indeterminate thyroid nodules without nuclear atypia was calculated. RESULTS: Of 2571 retrieved studies, 20 were eligible. The meta-analysis was conducted on summary data of 3532 cytologically indeterminate thyroid nodules: 1162 with and 2370 without nuclear atypia. The odds ratio for malignancy in cytologically indeterminate thyroid nodules with nuclear atypia was 3.63 [confidence interval 3.06-4.35]. There was no evidence of publication bias, and heterogeneity was insignificant (I2 < 0.01%, p = 0.40). CONCLUSIONS: Nuclear atypia is a significant indicator of malignancy in cytologically indeterminate thyroid nodules and needs to be standardized and implemented into clinical practice.
Entities:
Keywords:
atypia of undetermined significance or follicular lesion of undetermined significance; follicular neoplasm or Hürthle cell neoplasm; noninvasive follicular thyroid neoplasm with papillary-like nuclear features (NIFTP); thyroid carcinoma; thyroid cytology
Authors: T Rago; G Di Coscio; F Basolo; M Scutari; R Elisei; P Berti; P Miccoli; R Romani; P Faviana; A Pinchera; P Vitti Journal: Clin Endocrinol (Oxf) Date: 2007-01 Impact factor: 3.478
Authors: David S Cooper; Gerard M Doherty; Bryan R Haugen; Bryan R Hauger; Richard T Kloos; Stephanie L Lee; Susan J Mandel; Ernest L Mazzaferri; Bryan McIver; Furio Pacini; Martin Schlumberger; Steven I Sherman; David L Steward; R Michael Tuttle Journal: Thyroid Date: 2009-11 Impact factor: 6.568
Authors: Pablo Valderrabano; Marino E Leon; Barbara A Centeno; Kristen J Otto; Laila Khazai; Judith C McCaffrey; Jeffery S Russell; Bryan McIver Journal: Eur J Endocrinol Date: 2016-02-22 Impact factor: 6.664
Authors: Jonathan Somma; Nicolas F Schlecht; Daniel Fink; Samer N Khader; Richard V Smith; Antonio Cajigas Journal: Acta Cytol Date: 2010 Mar-Apr Impact factor: 2.319
Authors: Chung-Che Charles Wang; Lyssa Friedman; Giulia C Kennedy; Hui Wang; Electron Kebebew; David L Steward; Martha A Zeiger; William H Westra; Yongchun Wang; Elham Khanafshar; Giovanni Fellegara; Juan Rosai; Virginia Livolsi; Richard B Lanman Journal: Thyroid Date: 2010-12-29 Impact factor: 6.568
Authors: D F Stroup; J A Berlin; S C Morton; I Olkin; G D Williamson; D Rennie; D Moher; B J Becker; T A Sipe; S B Thacker Journal: JAMA Date: 2000-04-19 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Connie G Chiu; Reina Yao; Simon K Chan; Scott S Strugnell; Samuel Bugis; Robert Irvine; Donald Anderson; Blair Walker; Steven J Jones; Sam M Wiseman Journal: Can J Surg Date: 2012-06 Impact factor: 2.089
Authors: David A Kleiman; Matthew J Sporn; Toni Beninato; Michael J Crowley; Anvy Nguyen; Alessia Uccelli; Theresa Scognamiglio; Rasa Zarnegar; Thomas J Fahey Journal: Cancer Date: 2012-12-21 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Stefano Gay; Simone Schiaffino; Graziana Santamorena; Barbara Massa; Gianluca Ansaldo; Giovanni Turtulici; Massimo Giusti; Thyroid Team At The Policlinico San Martino Genoa Journal: Med Sci Monit Date: 2018-09-08
Authors: Krzysztof Kaliszewski; Dorota Diakowska; Marta Rzeszutko; Beata Wojtczak; Jerzy Rudnicki Journal: Cancer Manag Res Date: 2021-04-08 Impact factor: 3.989
Authors: Vincent Larouche; Marc Philippe Pusztaszeri; Sabin Filimon; Richard Payne; Michael Hier; Michael Tamilia Journal: J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg Date: 2020-01-02
Authors: Caroline Y Hayashi; Danilo T A Jaune; Cristiano C Oliveira; Bárbara P Coelho; Hélio A Miot; Mariângela E A Marques; José Vicente Tagliarini; Emanuel C Castilho; Carlos S P Soares; Flávia R K Oliveira; Paula Soares; Gláucia M F S Mazeto Journal: Endocr Connect Date: 2021-06-29 Impact factor: 3.335
Authors: Ilaria Celletti; Daniele Fresilli; Corrado De Vito; Marco Bononi; Sara Cardaccio; Alessia Cozzolino; Cosimo Durante; Giorgio Grani; Gianmarco Grimaldi; Andrea M Isidori; Carlo Catalano; Vito Cantisani Journal: Radiol Med Date: 2021-06-15 Impact factor: 3.469