| Literature DB >> 29760433 |
Chun-Jie Hou1,2, Ran Wei3, Jing-Lan Tang4,5, Qiao-Hong Hu1,2, Hong-Feng He1,2, Xiao-Ming Fan1,2.
Abstract
Little work has been done on the prediction of papillary thyroid microcarcinoma in female patients who have given birth to children, which may be different from other people. We performed a retrospective review of female patients who underwent thyroidectomy, aiming at identifying special predictors of papillary thyroid microcarcinoma in female patients who have given birth to children. Univariate analysis was used to identify potential covariates for the prediction of papillary thyroid microcarcinoma. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to identify independent predictors and construct a regression model based on a training cohort (246 patients) and then the regression model was validated using an independent cohort (80 patients). We found that having not more than one boy, taller-than-wide shape, poorly defined margin, marked hypoechogenicity, and microcalcification were independent risk factors for the papillary thyroid microcarcinoma in multivariate analyses. The combined predictive formula had a high predictive effect for papillary thyroid microcarcinoma (AUC = 0.938 for training cohort and 0.929 for validation cohort, respectively). The combined predictive formula has clinical value in the prognosis of papillary thyroid microcarcinoma and it may be simple and effective to ask fertility condition of patients to increase the US diagnosis accuracy of papillary thyroid microcarcinoma.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29760433 PMCID: PMC5951819 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-018-26003-5
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Baseline patient characteristics.
| Variablesa | All patients N = 246 | Benign | PTMC | P value |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age(≥45) | 183(74.39%) | 103(83.74%) | 80(65.04%) | 0.001 |
| Body mass index(kg/m2) | 24.73 ± 14.33 | 23.82 ± 3.30 | 25.63 ± 19.99 | 0.323 |
| Hypertension | 58(23.58%) | 36(29.27%) | 22(17.89%) | 0.050 |
| Diabetes mellitus | 28(11.38%) | 21(17.07%) | 7(5.69%) | 0.008 |
| Time between diagnosis and surgery (months) | 20.39 ± 44.68 | 26.67 ± 57.74 | 14.10 ± 24.41 | 0.028 |
| Length of stay (days) | 7.80 ± 2.05 | 7.30 ± 1.69 | 8.31 ± 2.24 | <0.001 |
| TSH | 1.80 ± 1.25 | 1.64 ± 1.10 | 1.96 ± 1.37 | 0.045 |
| Glucose | 5.38 ± 1.08 | 5.48 ± 1.08 | 5.28 ± 1.08 | 0.146 |
| TC | 5.03 ± 0.94 | 5.04 ± 0.94 | 5.02 ± 0.95 | 0.832 |
| TG | 1.53 ± 1.24 | 1.64 ± 1.46 | 1.43 ± 0.98 | 0.198 |
| HDL | 1.35 ± 0.31 | 1.35 ± 0.29 | 1.35 ± 0.33 | 0.807 |
| LDL | 2.95 ± 0.73 | 2.95 ± 0.71 | 2.96 ± 0.76 | 0.915 |
| LDH | 174.49 ± 33.79 | 175.53 ± 35.99 | 173.45 ± 31.53 | 0.634 |
aContinuous data are shown as meanstandard deviation; categoric data as number (%). Data were missing for some patients TC = total cholesterol; TG = triglyceride; HDL = high density lipoprotein; LDL = low density lipoprotein; LDH = lactate dehydrogenase.
Fertility of condition of patients with benign and PTMC.
| Variablesa | All patients | Benign | PTMC | P value |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Have only boy(s) | 105(42.68%) | 56(45.53%) | 49(39.84%) | 0.439 |
| Have only girl(s) | 73(29.67%) | 35(28.46%) | 38(30.89%) | 0.780 |
| Have at least one boy | 173(70.33%) | 88(71.54%) | 85(69.11%) | 0.780 |
| Have at least one girl | 141(57.32%) | 67(54.47%) | 74(60.16%) | 0.439 |
| Have more than one baby | 113(45.93%) | 59(47.97%) | 54(43.90%) | 0.609 |
| Have not more than one boy | 29(11.79%) | 99(80.49%) | 122 (99.19%) | <0.001 |
| Have at least two girls | 40(16.26%) | 5(16.26%) | 24(16.26%) | <0.001 |
| Number of babies (1:2:3:4) | 132:82:31:1 | 63:38:21:1 | 69:44:10:0 | 0.103 |
aCategoric data as number (%).
Conventional US features of benign nodules and PTMC. aCategoric data as number (%).
| Variablesa | All nodules n = 310 | Benign n = 165 | PTMC N = 145 | P value |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| <0.001 | |||
| Wider-than-tall | 166(53.55%) | 139(84.24%) | 27(18.62%) | |
| Taller-than-wide | 144(46.45%) | 26(15.76%) | 118(81.38) | |
|
| <0.001 | |||
| Well-defined | 171(55.16%) | 139(84.24%) | 32(22.07%) | |
| Poorly-defined | 139(44.84%) | 26(15.76) | 113(77.93) | |
|
| <0.001 | |||
| None | 5(1.61%) | 5(3.03%) | 0(0.00%) | |
| Marked-hypoecogenicity | 80(25.81%) | 8(4.85%) | 72(49.65%) | |
| hypoecogenicity | 199(64.19%) | 127(76.97%) | 72(49.65%) | |
| Iso-ecogenicity or hyperecogenicity | 26(8.39%) | 25(15.15%) | 1(0.70%) | |
|
| <0.001 | |||
| No calcification | 252(81.29%) | 158(95.76%) | 94(64.83%) | |
| Microcalcification | 58(18.71%) | 7(4.24%) | 51(35.17%) | |
|
| <0.001 | |||
| Cystic or mixed | 129(41.61%) | 99(60.00%) | 30 (20.69%) | |
| solid | 181(58.39%) | 66(40.00%) | 115(79.31%) | |
Multivariate binary logistic regression analysis in the prediction of PTMC.
| Risk Factors | β | OR (95%CI) | P value |
|---|---|---|---|
| Have not more than one boy | −3.087 | 0.046(0.005–0.432) | 0.007 |
| Taller-than-wide | −2.441 | 0.087(0.032–0.235) | <0.001 |
| Poorly defined margin | −1.194 | 0.303(0.116–0.788) | 0.014 |
| Marked hypoechogenicity | −3.137 | 0.043(0.015–0.130) | <0.001 |
| Microcalcification | −1.988 | 0.137(0.045–0.420) | 0.007 |
| Solid | 0.648 | ||
| Age(≥45) | 0.060 | ||
| Diabetes mellitus | 0.169 | ||
| Hypertension | 0.071 | ||
| TSH | 0.840 | ||
| Have at least two girls | — | 0.063 |
CI = confidence interval; TSH = thyroid stimulating hormone.
Figure 1Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis for PTMC. Area under the curve (AUC) estimation for the combined predictive formula in female patients who have given birth to children in training and validation cohorts.
Diagnostic performance of conventional US and fertility condition.
| Features | Sensitivity | Specificity | PPV | NPV | Accuracy(%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||||
| Taller-than-wide | 81.38(73.88–87.17) | 84.24(77.58–89.27) | 81.94 | 83.73 | 82.90 |
| Poorly-defined margins | 77.93(70.14–84.21) | 84.24(77.58–89.27) | 81.29 | 81.29 | 81.29 |
| Marked-hypoecogenicity | 49.66(41.30–58.03) | 95.15(90.34–97.73) | 41.62 | 68.26 | 73.87 |
| Microcalcification | 35.17(27.56–43.59) | 95.76(91.11–98.13) | 87.93 | 62.70 | 67.42 |
| Solid | 79.31(71.63–85.40) | 60.00(52.07–67.45) | 63.54 | 76.74 | 69.03 |
| Combined US predictive formula | 77.71(70.24–83.79) | 84.97(78.09–90.04) | 84.14 | 78.79 | 81.29 |
|
| |||||
| Have not more than one boys | 97.93(93.60–99.46) | 21.21(15.40–28.40) | 55.21 | 92.11 | 57.10 |
| Have at least two girls | 16.55(11.09–23.83) | 96.97(92.70–98.88) | 82.76 | 56.94 | 59.35 |
|
| 94.48(89.06–97.41) | 84.24(77.58–89.27) | 84.04 | 94.56 | 89.03 |
PPV = positive predictive value; NPV, = negative predictive value.