| Literature DB >> 29212258 |
Anna Yordanova1, Soha Mahjoob1, Philipp Lingohr2, Jörg Kalff2, Andreas Türler3, Holger Palmedo4, Hans-Jürgen Biersack1, Glen Kristiansen5, Jamshid Farahati6, Markus Essler1, Hojjat Ahmadzadehfar1.
Abstract
[99mTc]Tc-Sestamibi (MIBI) is an increasingly used tool for evaluation of thyroid nodules. However, there is a lack of evidence about the accuracy of this method in the European population. The aim of this study was to assess the utility of MIBI for the differentiation of thyroid nodules in a large cohort. 161 patients underwent MIBI, followed by a thyroidectomy. We used a dual phase MIBI protocol. Interpretation of the images included a scoring system from 0 (absent) to 3 (increased); this was to provide a scale for the uptake of the thyroid nodule in comparison to the paranodular tissue. Additionally, we evaluated the tracer uptake trend in late images compared to early images. We used the final histopathology as the reference standard. Scores 0-1 in early images, scores 0-2 in late images, and an absence of increasing uptake in the thyroid nodule in late images, showed the best predictive values to exclude malignancy, respectively (negative predictive value (NPV) 89%). Highest sensitivity (91%) for malignant nodules was evident in early images with a score 1-3. Highest specificity (91%) was obtained when the negative was defined as an absence of uptake-increase, in the late images. This study confirms that the most valuable feature of MIBI is the high NPV. Thus, with the appropriate interpretation method, high sensitivity and specificity, and moderate PPV can be obtained.Entities:
Keywords: MIBI; cold nodule; sestamibi; thyroid cancer; thyroid nodules
Year: 2017 PMID: 29212258 PMCID: PMC5706904 DOI: 10.18632/oncotarget.21866
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Oncotarget ISSN: 1949-2553
Characteristics of the thyroid nodules
| Characteristic | Data (%) |
|---|---|
| Uninodular | 33 (20.5%) |
| Multinodular | 128 (79.5%) |
| Yes | 11 (6.8%) |
| No | 150 (93.2%) |
| Yes | 25 (15.5%) |
| No | 136 (84.5%) |
| Hypofunctional | 145 (90.1%) |
| Indifferent | 16 (9.9%) |
| Benign nodule | 139 (86.3%) |
| Malignant nodule | 22 (13.7%) |
Utility of fine needle aspiration biopsy (FNAB) for the differentiation between benign and malignant thyroid nodules
| Cytology results of the FNAB | Histopathology results Data (%) | Total (%) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Benign | Malignant | ||
| Not done | 45 (32.4%) | 7 (31.8%) | 52 (32.3%) |
| Normal | 48 (34.5%) | 4 (18.2%) | 52 (32.3%) |
| Pathologic | 1 (0.7%) | 2 (9.1%) | 3 (1.9%) |
| Intermediate/suspected | 19 (13.7%) | 4 (18.2%) | 23 (14.3%) |
| Insufficient | 26 (18.7%) | 5 (22.7%) | 31 (19.2%) |
| Total (%) | 139 (100%) | 22 (100%) | 161 (100%) |
Differentiation between benign and malignant tumors was not statistically significant, p = 0.058.
Diagnostic values of fine needle aspiration biopsy (FNAB)
| Patients with thyroid nodules | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Malignant nodules | Benign nodules | |||
| Positive (malignant) | PPV | |||
| 6 (7.7%) | 20 (25.7%) | 23% | ||
| Negative (benign) | NPV | |||
| 4 (5.1%) | 48 (61.5%) | 92% | ||
| SEN | SPE | |||
| 60% | 71% | |||
SEN = sensitivity, SPE = specifity, PPV = positive predictive value, NPV = negative predictive value.
Utility of [99mTc]Tc-Sestamibi (MIBI) for the differentiation between benign and malignant thyroid nodules
| Method | Histopathology results Data (%) | Total (%) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Benign | Malignant | ||
| Score 0 | 13 (9.4%) | 2 (9.1%) | 15 (9.3%) |
| Score 1 | 46 (33.1%) | 5 (22.7%) | 51 (31.7%) |
| Score 2 | 43 (30.9%) | 8 (36.4%) | 51 (31.7%) |
| Score 3 | 37 (26.6%) | 7 (31.8%) | 44 (27.3%) |
| Total (%) | 139 (100%) | 22 (100%) | 161 (100%) |
| Score 0 | 39 (28.1%) | 10 (45.5%) | 49 (30.4%) |
| Score 1 | 41 (29.5%) | 3 (13.6%) | 30 (18.6%) |
| Score 2 | 29 (20.9%) | 1 (4.5%) | 30 (18.6%) |
| Score 3 | 30 (21.6%) | 8 (36.4%) | 38 (23.6%) |
| Total (%) | 139 (100%) | 22 (100%) | 161 (100%) |
| Decrease (washout) | 13 (9.4%) | 6 (27.3%) | 19 (11.8%) |
| Increase (retention) | 78 (56.1%) | 12 (54.5%) | 90 (55.9%) |
| Constant (persistence) | 52 (32.3%) | 4 (18.2%) | 48 (34.5%) |
| Total (%) | 139 (100%) | 22 (100%) | 161 (100.0%) |
The p-value from the early images was not significant, the late images achieved p = 0.044, and the washout/tracer retention method was p = 0.034.
Figure 1Examples of the scoring system of [99mTc]Tc-Sestamibi (MIBI)- images
The accumulation of the tracer in the thyroid nodule was classified as absent (score 0), low (score 1), isointense (score 2), or increased (score 3).
Figure 3The different methods for the interpretation of tracer uptake trend of [99mTc]Tc-Sestamibi (MIBI) scintigraphy in late images, compared to early images
Method U1: negative = decreased uptake, positive = increased or constant uptake. Method U2: negative = decreased or constant uptake, positive = increased uptake.
Diagnostic values of the early [99mTc]Tc-Sestamibi (MIBI) imaging
| Early images | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Variables | TP | TN | FP | FN | TOT | SEN | SPE | PPV | NPV | ACC |
| Imaging Interpretation | (%) | (%) | (%) | (%) | (%) | |||||
| 20 | 12 | 126 | 2 | 161 | 0.09 | 0.14 | 0.87 | 0.20 | ||
| (12.4) | (8.1) | (78.3) | (1.2) | (100) | ||||||
| 15 | 59 | 80 | 7 | 161 | 0.68 | 0.42 | 0.46 | |||
| (9.3) | (36.6) | (49.7) | (4.3) | (100) | ||||||
| 7 | 102 | 37 | 15 | 161 | 0.32 | 0.87 | ||||
| (4.3) | (63.4) | (23) | (9.3) | (100) | ||||||
Method E1: negative = score 0, positive = score 1-3.
Method E2: negative = score 0-1, positive = score 2-3.
Method E3: negative = score 0-2, positive = score 3.
TP = true positive, TN = true negative, FP = false positive, FN = false negative, TOT = total of valid cases, SEN = sensitivity, SPE = specificity, PPV = positive predictive value, NPV = negative predictive value, ACC = accuracy.
Bold values highlight the most important results.
Diagnostic values of the interpretation of the tracer uptake trend in late images from [99mTc]Tc-Sestamibi (MIBI) scintigraphy
| Tracer uptake trend | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Variables | TP | TN | FP | FN | TOT | SEN | SPE | PPV | NPV | ACC |
| Imaging Interpretation | (%) | (%) | (%) | (%) | (%) | |||||
| 10 | 78 | 61 | 12 | 161 | 0.56 | 0.14 | 0.87 | 0.55 | ||
| (6.2) | (48.4) | (37.9) | (7.5) | (100) | ||||||
| 6 | 126 | 13 | 16 | 161 | 0.27 | |||||
| (3.7) | (78.3) | (8.1) | (9.9) | (100) | ||||||
Method U1: negative = decreased uptake, positive = increased or constant uptake.
Method U2: negative = decreased or constant uptake, positive = increased uptake.
TP = true positive, TN = true negative, FP = false positive, FN = false negative, TOT = total of valid cases, SEN = sensitivity, SPE = specificity, PPV = positive predictive value, NPV = negative predictive value, ACC = accuracy.
Bold values highlight the most important results.
Figure 4Positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) of different [99mTc]Tc-Sestamibi (MIBI) imaging interpretation methods
Early Images: Method E1: negative = score 0, positive = score 1-3. Method E2: negative = score 0-1, positive = score 2-3. Method E3: negative = score 0-2, positive = score 3. Late Images: Method L1: negative = score 0, positive = score 1-3. Method L2: negative = score 0-1, positive = score 2-3. Method L3: negative = score 0-2, positive = score 3. Interpretation of the tracer uptake trend in late images: Method U1: negative = decreased uptake, positive = increased or constant uptake. Method U2: negative = decreased or constant uptake, positive = increased uptake.
Diagnostic values of the late imaging interpretation of [99mTc]Tc-Sestamibi (MIBI) scintigraphy
| Late images | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Variables | TP | TN | FP | FN | TOT | SEN | SPE | PPV | NPV | ACC |
| (%) | (%) | (%) | (%) | (%) | ||||||
| 12 | 40 | 99 | 10 | 161 | 0.29 | 0.11 | 0.80 | 0.32 | ||
| (7.5) | (24.8) | (61.5) | (6.2) | (100) | ||||||
| 9 | 80 | 59 | 13 | 161 | 0.41 | 0.58 | 0.13 | 0.86 | 0.55 | |
| (5.6) | (49.7) | (36.6) | (8.1) | (100) | ||||||
| 8 | 109 | 30 | 14 | 161 | 0.36 | |||||
| (5.6) | (49.7) | (36.6) | (8.1) | (100) | ||||||
Method L1: negative = score 0, positive = score 1-3.
Method L2: negative = score 0-1, positive = score 2-3.
Method L3: negative = score 0-2, positive = score 3.
TP = true positive, TN = true negative, FP = false positive, FN = false negative, TOT = total of valid cases, SEN = sensitivity, SPE = specificity, PPV = positive predictive value, NPV = negative predictive value, ACC = accuracy.
Bold values highlight the most important results.