| Literature DB >> 32733666 |
Toshihiko Kasahara1, Akira Miyauchi2, Yasuhiro Ito2, Takumi Kudo1, Hiroo Masuoka2, Takuya Higashiyama2, Mitsuru Ito1, Minoru Kihara2, Akihiro Miya2.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Young patients with papillary thyroid carcinoma (PTC) generally have excellent prognoses despite their often-advanced disease status. The reasons for this excellent prognosis are poorly understood.Entities:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32733666 PMCID: PMC7383345 DOI: 10.1155/2020/4652767
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Thyroid Res
Clinical features of the 20 pediatric or adolescent patients with papillary thyroid carcinoma.
| Clinical and biochemical features | |
|---|---|
| Age (years) | 18 (12–19) |
| Male/female | 3/17 |
| Tumor size (mm) | 16.5 (7–44) |
| cN0 or pN0/pN1a/pN1b (cases) | 7/6/7 |
| MX/M0/M1 (cases) | 1/19/0 |
| Follow-up period before surgery (months) | 4.5 (3–60) |
| Cases underwent surgery | 17 |
| 3 months after diagnosis | 7 |
| 4 months after diagnosis | 3 |
| 5 months after diagnosis | 3 |
| 6 months after diagnosis | 1 |
| 7 months after diagnosis | 1 |
| 19 months after diagnosis | 1 |
| 40 months after diagnosis | 1 |
| Cases followed without surgery | 3 |
| 30 months after diagnosis | 1 |
| 51 months after diagnosis | 1 |
| 60 months after diagnosis | 1 |
| TV-DR (/year) | 0.29 (−1.21–1.89) |
| hTV-DR (/year) | 1.71 (1.48–2.66) |
Values indicate median (ranges) and number of cases. TV-DR: tumor volume-doubling rate; hTV-DR: hypothetical tumor volume-doubling rate before presentation.
Clinical presentation and measurements of 20 cases followed for more than 3 months.
| Case | Sex | Age at diagnosis (years) | Initial measurements of the tumor (mm) | Final measurements of the tumor (mm) | Follow-up period (months) | Number of measurements | TV-DR (/year) | hTV-DR (/year) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |||||||
| 1 | F | 19 | 32 | 25 | 24 | 33 | 22 | 19 | 4 | 2 | −1.21 | 1.71 |
| 2 | M | 19 | 26 | 16 | 16 | 25 | 16 | 13 | 3 | 2 | −1.20 | 1.69 |
| 3 | F | 19 | 9 | 6 | 9 | 8 | 6 | 7 | 7 | 2 | −0.91 | 1.48 |
| 4 | M | 16 | 24 | 20 | 17 | 26 | 17 | 16 | 3 | 2 | −0.80 | 1.99 |
| 5 | F | 19 | 21 | 15 | 13 | 20 | 15 | 9 | 40 | 6 | −0.17 | 1.64 |
| 6 | F | 15 | 16 | 12 | 10 | 15 | 14 | 12 | 6 | 4 | −0.13 | 2.01 |
| 7 | F | 18 | 7 | 6 | 6 | 6 | 6 | 5 | 30 | 6 | −0.08 | 1.53 |
| 8 | F | 18 | 12 | 9 | 8 | 14 | 8 | 8 | 4 | 3 | 0.09 | 1.64 |
| 9 | F | 18 | 10 | 9 | 7 | 12 | 10 | 10 | 51 | 10 | 0.25 | 1.59 |
| 10 | F | 15 | 18 | 17 | 14 | 20 | 18 | 13 | 5 | 2 | 0.28 | 2.07 |
| 11 | F | 18 | 9 | 8 | 6 | 15 | 10 | 8 | 60 | 7 | 0.30 | 1.53 |
| 12 | F | 17 | 27 | 20 | 17 | 29 | 20 | 17 | 3 | 2 | 0.39 | 1.86 |
| 13 | F | 19 | 16 | 10 | 11 | 17 | 10 | 12 | 5 | 2 | 0.50 | 1.61 |
| 14 | F | 15 | 10 | 7 | 6 | 13 | 7 | 6 | 5 | 2 | 0.90 | 1.84 |
| 15 | F | 16 | 7 | 5 | 7 | 7 | 6 | 7 | 3 | 2 | 0.91 | 1.70 |
| 16 | F | 16 | 31 | 17 | 16 | 29 | 19 | 18 | 3 | 2 | 0.92 | 1.94 |
| 17 | M | 19 | 44 | 38 | 28 | 43 | 42 | 34 | 3 | 2 | 1.21 | 1.81 |
| 18 | F | 12 | 29 | 24 | 15 | 35 | 24 | 16 | 3 | 2 | 1.36 | 2.66 |
| 19 | F | 18 | 17 | 12 | 10 | 19 | 14 | 12 | 4 | 2 | 1.73 | 1.70 |
| 20 | F | 13 | 8 | 4 | 4 | 15 | 12 | 7 | 19 | 4 | 1.89 | 1.96 |
D1: maximum tumor diameter, D2: diameter perpendicular to the maximum tumor diameter, and D3: depth (mm). TV-DR: tumor volume-doubling rate; hTV-DR: hypothetical tumor volume-doubling rate before presentation. Cases 7, 9, and 11 were under active surveillance at the end of the study period. Cases 5 and 20 underwent thyroidectomy after 19 and 40 months of follow-up, respectively.
Figure 1Comparison of TV-DRs and hTV-DRs. The difference in TV-DRs was calculated using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test. In the 20 patients, the TV-DRs after diagnosis were smaller than the hTV-DRs, and seven patients had negative values, suggesting slowing or regression of the tumors (p < 0.001). TV-DR: tumor volume-doubling rate after presentation; hTV-DR: hypothetical tumor volume-doubling rate before presentation.
Figure 2Comparison of TV-DRs and hTV-DRs in five patients who refused surgery at diagnosis. Five patients refused surgery at diagnosis; of these, two underwent delayed surgery, and the remaining three were under active surveillance. Although there was no significant difference because of the small number of cases, the hypothetical TV-DRs (median 1.59; range, 1.53–1.96) were larger than the TV-DRs in all cases (ns), indicating faster growth before presentation. One patient underwent surgery 19 months after diagnosis because of tumor growth. Even in this progressive case, hTV-DR (1.96) was larger than TV-DR (1.89) under observation. TV-DR: tumor volume-doubling rate after presentation; hTV-DR: hypothetical tumor volume-doubling rate before presentation.