Background: The Afirma Gene Expression Classifier (GEC) has been used to further characterize cytologically indeterminate (cyto-I) thyroid nodules into either benign or suspicious categories. However, its relatively low positive predictive value (PPV) limited its use as a classifier for patients with suspicious results. The Afirma Gene Sequencing Classifier (GSC) was developed to improve PPV while maintaining a high negative predictive value (NPV), yet real-world assessment of its performance is lacking. Methods: We analyzed all patients who had cyto-I nodules and molecular testing with either GEC or GSC between 2011 and 2018 at a single academic medical center. Clinical information was obtained for 343 GEC-tested nodules and 164 GSC-tested nodules. Results: The GSC had a statistically significant higher benign call rate (76.2% vs. 48.1%, p < 0.001), PPV (60.0% vs. 33.3%, p = 0.01), and specificity (94.3% vs. 61.4%, p < 0.001) than the GEC. Improvement was statistically significant in both Bethesda III and Bethesda IV nodules. In particular, the benign call rate of GSC was significantly higher in nodules with Hürthle cell changes (88.8% vs. 25.7%, p < 0.01). The rate of surgical intervention in the indeterminate nodule cohort has decreased by 66.4% since switching to the GSC; 52.5% of indeterminate nodules went to surgery while using the GEC compared with 17.6% with the GSC (p < 0.001). This reduction was statistically significant in nodules with Bethesda III diagnoses, demonstrating a 70.9% decrease (GEC 51.3% vs. GSC 14.9%, p < 0.001), and in nodules with Bethesda IV cytology, a 39.2% decrease was noted (GEC 54.8% vs. GSC 33.3%, p = 0.003). Conclusions: Data from a single academic tertiary center show an improved specificity and PPV while maintaining high sensitivity and NPV for GSC compared with GEC. A statistically significant increase in benign call rates was observed in GSC compared with GEC, likely indicating fewer false positive results. After implementation of GSC, surgical interventions have been reduced by 68%.
Background: The Afirma Gene Expression Classifier (GEC) has been used to further characterize cytologically indeterminate (cyto-I) thyroid nodules into either benign or suspicious categories. However, its relatively low positive predictive value (PPV) limited its use as a classifier for patients with suspicious results. The Afirma Gene Sequencing Classifier (GSC) was developed to improve PPV while maintaining a high negative predictive value (NPV), yet real-world assessment of its performance is lacking. Methods: We analyzed all patients who had cyto-I nodules and molecular testing with either GEC or GSC between 2011 and 2018 at a single academic medical center. Clinical information was obtained for 343 GEC-tested nodules and 164 GSC-tested nodules. Results: The GSC had a statistically significant higher benign call rate (76.2% vs. 48.1%, p < 0.001), PPV (60.0% vs. 33.3%, p = 0.01), and specificity (94.3% vs. 61.4%, p < 0.001) than the GEC. Improvement was statistically significant in both Bethesda III and Bethesda IV nodules. In particular, the benign call rate of GSC was significantly higher in nodules with Hürthle cell changes (88.8% vs. 25.7%, p < 0.01). The rate of surgical intervention in the indeterminate nodule cohort has decreased by 66.4% since switching to the GSC; 52.5% of indeterminate nodules went to surgery while using the GEC compared with 17.6% with the GSC (p < 0.001). This reduction was statistically significant in nodules with Bethesda III diagnoses, demonstrating a 70.9% decrease (GEC 51.3% vs. GSC 14.9%, p < 0.001), and in nodules with Bethesda IV cytology, a 39.2% decrease was noted (GEC 54.8% vs. GSC 33.3%, p = 0.003). Conclusions: Data from a single academic tertiary center show an improved specificity and PPV while maintaining high sensitivity and NPV for GSC compared with GEC. A statistically significant increase in benign call rates was observed in GSC compared with GEC, likely indicating fewer false positive results. After implementation of GSC, surgical interventions have been reduced by 68%.
Authors: Edmund S Cibas; Zubair W Baloch; Giovanni Fellegara; Virginia A LiVolsi; Stephen S Raab; Juan Rosai; James Diggans; Lyssa Friedman; Giulia C Kennedy; Richard T Kloos; Richard B Lanman; Susan J Mandel; Nicole Sindy; David L Steward; Martha A Zeiger; Bryan R Haugen; Erik K Alexander Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2013-09-03 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: R Mack Harrell; Stephanie A Eyerly-Webb; Allan C Golding; Courtney M Edwards; David N Bimston Journal: Endocr Pract Date: 2018-11-01 Impact factor: 3.443
Authors: Jennifer A Sipos; Thomas C Blevins; Heidi Chamberlain Shea; Daniel S Duick; Shamsher K Lakhian; Brian E Michael; Michael J Thomas; Julie Ann Sosa Journal: Endocr Pract Date: 2016-01-20 Impact factor: 3.443
Authors: Trevor E Angell; Mary C Frates; Marco Medici; Xiaoyun Liu; Norra Kwong; Edmund S Cibas; Matthew I Kim; Ellen Marqusee Journal: J Clin Endocrinol Metab Date: 2015-09-09 Impact factor: 5.958
Authors: Salem I Noureldine; Alireza Najafian; Patricia Aragon Han; Matthew T Olson; Dane J Genther; Eric B Schneider; Jason D Prescott; Nishant Agrawal; Aarti Mathur; Martha A Zeiger; Ralph P Tufano Journal: JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg Date: 2016-07-01 Impact factor: 6.223
Authors: Yangyang Hao; Quan-Yang Duh; Richard T Kloos; Joshua Babiarz; R Mack Harrell; S Thomas Traweek; Su Yeon Kim; Grazyna Fedorowicz; P Sean Walsh; Peter M Sadow; Jing Huang; Giulia C Kennedy Journal: BMC Syst Biol Date: 2019-04-05
Authors: Sandya Liyanarachchi; Julius Gudmundsson; Egil Ferkingstad; Huiling He; Jon G Jonasson; Vinicius Tragante; Folkert W Asselbergs; Li Xu; Lambertus A Kiemeney; Romana T Netea-Maier; Jose I Mayordomo; Theo S Plantinga; Hannes Hjartarson; Jon Hrafnkelsson; Erich M Sturgis; Pamela Brock; Fadi Nabhan; Gudmar Thorleifsson; Matthew D Ringel; Kari Stefansson; Albert de la Chapelle Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2020-03-04 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Esther Diana Rossi; Pietro Locantore; Carmine Bruno; Marco Dell'Aquila; Pietro Tralongo; Mariangela Curatolo; Luca Revelli; Marco Raffaelli; Luigi Maria Larocca; Liron Pantanowitz; Alfredo Pontecorvi Journal: Front Endocrinol (Lausanne) Date: 2022-05-12 Impact factor: 6.055
Authors: Mayumi Endo; Kyle Porter; Clarine Long; Irina Azaryan; John E Phay; Matthew D Ringel; Jennifer A Sipos; Fadi Nabhan Journal: J Clin Endocrinol Metab Date: 2020-11-01 Impact factor: 5.958
Authors: Trevor E Angell; Lori J Wirth; Maria E Cabanillas; Maisie L Shindo; Edmund S Cibas; Joshua E Babiarz; Yangyang Hao; Su Yeon Kim; P Sean Walsh; Jing Huang; Richard T Kloos; Giulia C Kennedy; Steven G Waguespack Journal: Front Endocrinol (Lausanne) Date: 2019-09-11 Impact factor: 5.555
Authors: Jeffrey F Krane; Edmund S Cibas; Mayumi Endo; Ellen Marqusee; Mimi I Hu; Christian E Nasr; Steven G Waguespack; Lori J Wirth; Richard T Kloos Journal: Cancer Cytopathol Date: 2020-06-16 Impact factor: 5.284