Literature DB >> 30591992

Evaluation of 167 Gene Expression Classifier (GEC) and ThyroSeq v2 Diagnostic Accuracy in the Preoperative Assessment of Indeterminate Thyroid Nodules: Bivariate/HROC Meta-analysis.

Martyna Borowczyk1, Ewelina Szczepanek-Parulska2, Michał Olejarz2, Barbara Więckowska3, Frederik A Verburg4, Szymon Dębicki2, Bartłomiej Budny2, Małgorzata Janicka-Jedyńska5, Katarzyna Ziemnicka2, Marek Ruchała2.   

Abstract

The objective of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the performance of the Gene Expression Classifier (GEC) and ThyroSeq v2 (ThyroSeq) in the preoperative diagnosis of thyroid nodules with indeterminate fine-needle aspiration biopsy results. We searched literature databases from January 2001 to April 2018. The bivariate model analysis was performed to estimate pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio (LR+), negative likelihood ratio (LR-), positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV). Pooled data from 1086 nodules with histopathologic confirmation from 16 GEC studies enabled calculation of diagnostic parameters (95% confidence interval): sensitivity 98% (96-99%), specificity 12% (8-20%), PPV 45% (37-53%), and NPV 91% (85-96%). Pooled data from five ThyroSeq studies assessing 459 nodules showed sensitivity of 84% (74-91%), specificity 78% (50-92%), PPV 58% (31-81%), and NPV 93% (89-97%). When both tools were compared, GEC had a significantly higher sensitivity (p = 0.003), while ThyroSeq had a significantly higher specificity (p < 0.001) and accuracy (p = 0.015). Pooled LR+ was higher for ThyroSeq: 3.79 (1.40-10.27) vs. 1.12 (1.05-1.20). Pooled LR- was higher for GEC, 0.20 (0.10-0.39) vs. 0.13 (0.05-0.31). The bivariate summary estimates of sensitivity and specificity for GEC and ThyroSeq and their pooled accuracy showed a superiority of the ThyroSeq test. The GEC with a high sensitivity and NPV may be helpful in ruling out malignancy in cases of indeterminate thyroid nodule cytology. ThyroSeq has a significantly higher specificity and accuracy with an acceptable sensitivity so that it has the potential for use as an all-round test of malignancy of thyroid nodules.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Follicular thyroid adenoma; Follicular thyroid cancer; Genetics; Indeterminate cytology; Molecular diagnosis; Next-generation sequencing; Thyroid nodules

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 30591992     DOI: 10.1007/s12022-018-9560-5

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Endocr Pathol        ISSN: 1046-3976            Impact factor:   3.943


  5 in total

1.  Molecular Testing for Thyroid Nodules of Indeterminate Cytology: A Health Technology Assessment.

Authors: 
Journal:  Ont Health Technol Assess Ser       Date:  2022-04-01

2.  Editorial on the Special Issue "Novel Methods of Diagnostics of Thyroid and Parathyroid Lesions".

Authors:  Ewelina Szczepanek-Parulska; Marek Ruchala
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2022-02-11       Impact factor: 4.241

3.  Thyroseq v3, Afirma GSC, and microRNA Panels Versus Previous Molecular Tests in the Preoperative Diagnosis of Indeterminate Thyroid Nodules: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Cristina Alina Silaghi; Vera Lozovanu; Carmen Emanuela Georgescu; Raluca Diana Georgescu; Sergiu Susman; Bogdana Adriana Năsui; Anca Dobrean; Horatiu Silaghi
Journal:  Front Endocrinol (Lausanne)       Date:  2021-05-13       Impact factor: 5.555

4.  Malignancy rates for Bethesda III and IV thyroid nodules: a retrospective study of the correlation between fine-needle aspiration cytology and histopathology.

Authors:  Busra Yaprak Bayrak; Ahmet Tugrul Eruyar
Journal:  BMC Endocr Disord       Date:  2020-04-15       Impact factor: 2.763

5.  Utility of a multigene testing for preoperative evaluation of indeterminate thyroid nodules: A prospective blinded single center study in China.

Authors:  Yuntao Song; Guohui Xu; Tonghui Ma; Yanli Zhu; Hao Yu; Wenbin Yu; Wei Wei; Tianxiao Wang; Bin Zhang
Journal:  Cancer Med       Date:  2020-09-25       Impact factor: 4.452

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.