Wu James X, Young Stephanie, Hung Matthew L, Li Ning, Yang Sung Eun, Cheung Dianne S, Yeh Michael W, Livhits Masha J
1 Section of Endocrine Surgery; UCLA David Geffen School of Medicine , Los Angeles, California.
2 Department of Biomathematics; UCLA David Geffen School of Medicine , Los Angeles, California.
Thyroid. 2016 Jul;26(7):916-22. doi: 10.1089/thy.2015.0505. Epub 2016 Jun 9.
Molecular diagnostic testing is increasingly used in the management of indeterminate thyroid nodules. Limited data exist regarding the influence of clinical factors on gene expression classifier (GEC) test performance. This study examined the positive and negative predictive value of GEC as stratified by nodule size.
A prospectively maintained pathology database from a single tertiary referral center was queried from 2012 to 2015 for indeterminate thyroid nodules that underwent GEC testing. Nodule size, patient demographics, Bethesda classification, and Hürthle cell-predominant nodules (HCNs) were evaluated as predictors of GEC performance.
Two hundred and thirty-one patients with 245 indeterminate nodules were examined. Assuming all nodules to be benign unless proven malignant on histopathology, the sensitivity and specificity of GEC testing were 95.2% and 60.1%, respectively. The malignancy rate among resected nodules was 25.3%. The positive predictive value was consistent across nodule sizes: 45.5% for nodules <1 cm, 42.9% for nodules 1-1.9 cm, 36.0% for nodules 2-2.9 cm, 54.2% for nodules 3-3.9 cm, and 50.0% for nodules ≥4 cm. The negative predictive value ranged from 93.3% to 100% and was not affected by nodule size. HCNs had a high rate of GEC suspicious results (77.4% vs. 50.5% for nodules without Hürthle cell predominance, p < 0.01), though this did not correspond to a difference in the rate of malignancy (25.8% vs. 25.3%).
Nodule size did not affect GEC test performance in the present cohort. GEC benign results remain reliable in large nodules. GEC suspicious nodules >3 cm carry a similar risk of malignancy compared to smaller nodules, and do not warrant more aggressive treatment. GEC testing has limited clinical utility for HCNs due to the high rate of false-positive results.
分子诊断检测在甲状腺结节性质不明的管理中应用越来越广泛。关于临床因素对基因表达分类器(GEC)检测性能影响的数据有限。本研究探讨了按结节大小分层的GEC的阳性和阴性预测值。
查询了一个单一三级转诊中心2012年至2015年前瞻性维护的病理数据库,以获取接受GEC检测的甲状腺结节性质不明的病例。评估结节大小、患者人口统计学特征、贝塞斯达分类以及以许特尔细胞为主的结节(HCN)作为GEC性能的预测因素。
对231例患者的245个甲状腺结节性质不明的病例进行了检查。假设所有结节在组织病理学证实为恶性之前均为良性,GEC检测的敏感性和特异性分别为95.2%和60.1%。切除结节中的恶性率为25.3%。不同大小结节的阳性预测值一致:<1 cm的结节为45.5%,1 - 1.9 cm的结节为42.9%,2 - 2.9 cm的结节为36.0%,3 - 3.9 cm的结节为54.2%,≥4 cm的结节为50.0%。阴性预测值在93.3%至100%之间,不受结节大小影响。HCN的GEC可疑结果发生率较高(77.4%,而无许特尔细胞为主的结节为50.5%,p < 0.01),尽管这与恶性率差异无关(25.8%对25.3%)。
在本队列中,结节大小不影响GEC检测性能。GEC良性结果在大结节中仍然可靠。3 cm以上的GEC可疑结节与较小结节相比,恶性风险相似,无需更积极的治疗。由于假阳性结果发生率高,GEC检测对HCN的临床应用有限。