Prognostic value of postsurgical stimulated thyroglobulin levels after initial radioactive iodine therapy in well‐differentiated thyroid carcinoma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In well-differentiated thyroid carcinoma, predictors of future positivity of stimulated thyroglobulin (>2 microg/L) after initial radioactive iodine treatment are not known. METHODS: In a retrospective study, we used logistic regression analysis to determine whether postoperative stimulated thyroglobulin measurements and pathologic stage independently predict future stimulated thyroglobulin positivity. RESULTS: We followed 141 patients with well-differentiated thyroid carcinoma for a median of 35 months; follow-up stimulated thyroglobulin measurements were positive in 20.6% (29/141). The natural logarithm of the postsurgical stimulated thyrogolobulin was independently associated with a positive stimulated thyroglobulin at long-term follow-up (odds ratio [OR], 4.44; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.33-8.45; p < .001); there was a trend for a positive association of TNM stage with positive follow-up stimulated thyroglobulin (p = .054). Lymph node positivity predicted a positive stimulated thyroglobulin in papillary cancer. CONCLUSIONS: Stimulated thyroglobulin measurements prior to initial radioactive iodine treatment independently predict future stimulated thyroglobulin positivity in well-differentiated thyroid carcinoma.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".