Head and Neck Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York.
JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2020 Sep 1;146(9):845-850. doi: 10.1001/jamaoto.2020.1851.
Advances in genomic technologies have facilitated the development of sophisticated molecular diagnostic tests for thyroid nodules, in the hopes of better risk stratifying nodules with indeterminate cytopathologic diagnosis. It is unclear whether the widespread, or reflexive, use of these tests will improve outcomes for patients with thyroid nodules.
Thyroid nodules are a common and essentially normal finding. Even cytologically indeterminate thyroid nodules have a very low probability (approximately 1%) of representing clinically aggressive cancers and an even lower probability (approximately 0.1%) of representing lethal cancers. Therefore, most indeterminate thyroid nodules are low risk. Even if some will eventually require surgery, many can initially be kept under surveillance rather than requiring immediate surgery. Clinical and radiographic features can be helpful in risk stratifying these nodules. Molecular assays are marketed as tools to improve risk stratification for cytologically indeterminate thyroid nodules. However, the performance of these tests varies markedly across different practice settings, and the predictive value of these tests in real world practice may be lower than the numbers provided on laboratory reports. It is unclear whether these assays improve patient outcomes, such as survival or quality of life, or substantially reduce the number of thyroid surgeries performed.
Because of variable performance, unclear benefit to patients, and questionable cost-effectiveness, clinical practice guidelines in the US and Europe currently do not recommend the universal, reflexive use of molecular assays for cytologically indeterminate thyroid nodules. These tests might offer value when used in selected scenarios, although this is not well understood. Future research should address whether the routine use of these molecular diagnostic tests leads to superior patient survival or quality-of-life outcomes compared with management based on clinical and radiographic criteria.
基因组技术的进步促进了复杂的分子诊断检测在甲状腺结节中的应用,希望能够更好地对具有不确定细胞学诊断的结节进行风险分层。目前尚不清楚这些检测方法的广泛应用或反射性应用是否会改善甲状腺结节患者的预后。
甲状腺结节是一种常见且基本正常的发现。即使细胞学不确定的甲状腺结节,其代表临床上侵袭性癌症的概率也非常低(约 1%),代表致命性癌症的概率甚至更低(约 0.1%)。因此,大多数不确定的甲状腺结节是低风险的。即使其中一些最终需要手术,许多也可以在初始阶段进行监测,而不需要立即手术。临床和影像学特征有助于对这些结节进行风险分层。分子检测被作为改善细胞学不确定的甲状腺结节风险分层的工具进行销售。然而,这些检测在不同的实践环境中的性能差异很大,并且这些检测在实际实践中的预测值可能低于实验室报告中提供的数字。目前尚不清楚这些检测是否可以改善患者的预后,例如生存或生活质量,或者是否可以显著减少甲状腺手术的数量。
由于性能的可变性、对患者益处的不明确以及成本效益的质疑,美国和欧洲的临床实践指南目前不建议对细胞学不确定的甲状腺结节进行普遍的、反射性的分子检测。这些检测在某些情况下可能具有一定价值,尽管目前对此了解甚少。未来的研究应该解决是否常规使用这些分子诊断检测可以改善患者的生存或生活质量结果,与基于临床和影像学标准的管理相比。