Department of Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism, University of Massachusetts Medical School, Baystate Health, Springfield, Massachusetts, USA.
Thyroid. 2021 Sep;31(9):1376-1382. doi: 10.1089/thy.2020.0801. Epub 2021 Apr 29.
Thyroid nodules are a very common often incidental finding on physical examination or imaging. Of those who undergo fine needle aspiration, cytology is indeterminate in up to 15%. Molecular testing is increasingly being used to help identify which nodules may be high risk for malignancy and guide management with regard to clinical follow-up or surgical intervention. Recently there has been an increase in publication of independent studies assessing the performance of these molecular tests and comparing "real-world" data with the validation studies. This retrospective study identified all thyroid nodules at our institution that had Afirma gene expression classifier (GEC), genomic sequencing classifier (GSC), or Thyroseq v3 molecular testing from January 2014 to January 2020 and compared measurements of test performance between them at our institution, and then with the original validation studies and other published institutional data. Overall, the benign call rate was highest in the Afirma GSC group (78%) compared with the GEC group (60%) and Thyroseq group (66%). Surgical histopathology revealed malignancy in 6 of 31of biopsied nodules in the GEC group, 8 of 13 in the GSC group, and 3 of 16 in the Thyroseq v3 group. Based on our data, the GSC specificity (73.7%) and positive predictive value (PPV) (61.5%) were higher than the GEC specificity (60.4%) and PPV (22.2%) as well as Thyroseq v3 specificity (55.2%) and PPV (18.8%). From our short-term institutional experience, we found that the GSC classified more cytologically indeterminate nodules as benign compared with the Afirma GEC, and had improved specificity and PPV, which is similar to the validation study and other institutions' reported experiences. We also found that the Thyroseq v3 was similar to the Afirma GEC in terms of specificity and PPV, both of which are much lower than the validation studies.
甲状腺结节在体格检查或影像学检查中是一种非常常见的偶然发现。在接受细针抽吸活检的患者中,细胞学检查结果不确定的比例高达 15%。分子检测越来越多地被用于帮助确定哪些结节可能具有恶性风险,并指导临床随访或手术干预的管理。最近,越来越多的独立研究评估了这些分子检测的性能,并比较了“真实世界”数据与验证研究。这项回顾性研究确定了我们机构在 2014 年 1 月至 2020 年 1 月期间所有接受 Afirma 基因表达分类器(GEC)、基因组测序分类器(GSC)或 Thyroseq v3 分子检测的甲状腺结节,并比较了我们机构之间的检测性能测量值,然后与原始验证研究和其他已发表的机构数据进行了比较。总的来说,Afirma GSC 组的良性诊断率最高(78%),其次是 GEC 组(60%)和 Thyroseq 组(66%)。在 GEC 组中,31 个活检结节中有 6 个手术病理显示恶性,GSC 组中有 8 个,Thyroseq v3 组中有 3 个。根据我们的数据,GSC 的特异性(73.7%)和阳性预测值(PPV)(61.5%)高于 GEC 的特异性(60.4%)和 PPV(22.2%)以及 Thyroseq v3 的特异性(55.2%)和 PPV(18.8%)。根据我们的短期机构经验,我们发现 GSC 将更多细胞学不确定的结节分类为良性,与 Afirma GEC 相比,特异性和 PPV 更高,这与验证研究和其他机构的报告经验相似。我们还发现,Thyroseq v3 在特异性和 PPV 方面与 Afirma GEC 相似,而这两者都远低于验证研究。