Thyroid calcification and its association with thyroid carcinoma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: Calcification within the thyroid gland may occur in both benign and malignant thyroid disease, and its detection on ultrasonography is frequently dismissed by many clinicians as an incidental finding of little significance. As a tertiary referral center, most of our thyroid patients will have had thyroid ultrasonography before being referred to us, and in our experience, the incidence of malignancy in a thyroid nodule containing calcification seems to be higher than that in the average thyroid nodule. To assess this risk, we conducted this retrospective review. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Our analysis included 462 consecutive patients who underwent thyroid surgery at our institution between 1995 and 1999. We reviewed all the patients' charts for data regarding clinical findings, preoperative diagnostic investigations, and histopathologic diagnosis. Of the 462 patients, 361 (78.1%) had thyroid ultrasonography before surgery, and 49 (13.6%) of these ultrasounds showed intrathyroidal calcification. RESULTS: Of the 49 patients whose ultrasounds showed intrathyroidal calcification, 29 (59.2%) were found on histopathologic examination to have thyroid carcinoma. Twelve of the remaining 20 patients had multinodular goiters. Of the 29 patients with malignancy, seven (24.1%) had preoperative fine-needle aspirates that were reported as benign. After excluding patients who were initially seen with multinodular disease, in the subset of 37 patients who presented with a solitary thyroid lesion with calcification, 28 (75.7%) were found to have carcinoma. CONCLUSIONS: When calcification is noted within a solitary thyroid nodule, the risk of malignancy is very high. Surgery should be recommended regardless of the result of fine-needle aspiration cytologic findings.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".