Suppr超能文献

AfiRa 基因组测序分类器与基因表达分类器的性能比较:机构经验。

Performance of the Afirma genomic sequencing classifier versus gene expression classifier: An institutional experience.

机构信息

Department of Pathology, Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.

Section of Endocrinology, Department of Medicine, Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.

出版信息

Cancer Cytopathol. 2019 Nov;127(11):720-724. doi: 10.1002/cncy.22188. Epub 2019 Sep 19.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

The use of fine-needle aspiration (FNA) to triage thyroid nodules has resulted in a significant reduction in thyroid surgery. However, approximately one-third of FNA specimens fall into the "indeterminate" category. The Afirma gene expression classifier (GEC) has been used to identify benign nodules with a high sensitivity and negative predictive value. However, the specificity and positive predictive value of the "suspicious" category are low. The updated Afirma genomic sequencing classifier (GSC) has been reported to demonstrate increased specificity while maintaining a high sensitivity and negative predictive value.

METHODS

The authors retrospectively investigated 272 indeterminate thyroid FNA specimens (Bethesda categories III and IV) from nodules measuring >1 cm using the Afirma GEC or GSC tests (July 2012-January 2019).

RESULTS

Of the 194 nodules tested using the Afirma GEC, a benign result was obtained in 88 cases (45.4%). In comparison, 52 of 78 FNA samples (66.7%) tested using GSC yielded a benign result (P = .002). In the GEC group, there were 31 cases with oncocytic cytology, 5 of which (16.1%) were benign on Afirma and 26 of which (83.9%) were suspicious on Afirma. In contrast, in the GSC group, there were 10 cases with oncocytic cytology, 8 of which (80%) were benign on Afirma and only 2 of which (20%) were found to be suspicious on Afirma (P < .001). The positive predictive value of the GSC group (57.1%) was higher than that of the GEC group (36.7%); however, there was no statistical significance noted (P = .15).

CONCLUSIONS

A larger percentage of indeterminate thyroid FNA specimens were classified as benign using the Afirma GSC compared with the Afirma GEC, especially among samples with oncocytic features. The Afirma GSC appears to have a higher benign call rate compared with the Afirma GEC.

摘要

背景

细针抽吸(FNA)用于甲状腺结节分类,已显著减少甲状腺手术。然而,约三分之一的 FNA 标本属于“不确定”类别。 Afirma 基因表达分类器(GEC)已用于识别具有高灵敏度和阴性预测值的良性结节。然而,“可疑”类别的特异性和阳性预测值较低。据报道,更新的 Afirma 基因组测序分类器(GSC)具有更高的特异性,同时保持高灵敏度和阴性预测值。

方法

作者回顾性调查了 272 例直径>1cm 的甲状腺 FNA 标本(Bethesda 分类 3 类和 4 类),这些标本使用 Afirma GEC 或 GSC 检测(2012 年 7 月至 2019 年 1 月)。

结果

在使用 Afirma GEC 检测的 194 个结节中,良性结果为 88 例(45.4%)。相比之下,使用 GSC 检测的 78 个 FNA 样本中有 52 个(66.7%)结果为良性(P=.002)。在 GEC 组中,有 31 例细胞学呈嗜酸细胞,其中 5 例(16.1%) Afirma 为良性,26 例(83.9%) Afirma 为可疑。相比之下,在 GSC 组中,有 10 例细胞学呈嗜酸细胞,其中 8 例(80%) Afirma 为良性,只有 2 例(20%) Afirma 为可疑(P<.001)。GSC 组的阳性预测值(57.1%)高于 GEC 组(36.7%);然而,差异无统计学意义(P=.15)。

结论

与 Afirma GEC 相比,使用 Afirma GSC 分类的不确定甲状腺 FNA 标本中,良性标本的比例更大,尤其是在具有嗜酸细胞特征的标本中。与 Afirma GEC 相比,Afirma GSC 似乎具有更高的良性检出率。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验