The T4/T3 quotient as a risk factor for differentiated thyroid cancer: A case control study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The incidence of thyroid nodules is increasing among patients in North America. Few of these nodules harbour malignancy, thus further research is required to identify predictive markers of malignant thyroid disease. This study set out to understand the relationship between the levels of fT4 and fT3 and differentiated thyroid cancer. METHODS: A case-control study was conducted with 142 cases and 86 controls from the McGill University Teaching Hospitals. All patients underwent thyroid surgery. Cases were defined as patients with malignant nodules confirmed on final pathology and controls were defined as patients with benign nodules. The serological levels of TSH, fT4 and fT3 were measured preoperatively. Odds ratios were determined for each parameter and logistic regressions were calculated between markers and probability of malignancy. Additionally, fT4 values were divided by fT3 values (fT4/fT3 quotient) for each patient and an odds ratio was calculated. RESULTS: Amongst cases, the mean TSH was 2.25 ± 0.360U/mL, fT4 was 14.8 ± 0.689pmol/L, and fT3 was 4.65 ± 0.463pmol/L. Amongst controls, the mean TSH was 2.36 ± 1.68U/mL, fT4 was 14.3 ± 1.71pmol/L, and fT3 was 5.27 ± 0.957pmol/L. Patients in the control group were more likely to have low TSH, while patients in the case group would have high fT4 and patients in the control group were more likely to have a low fT4. The OR for patients with TSH >4.4U/mL was 2.13 (0.97, 4.65), and for patients with TSH <0.4U/mL was 0.46 (0.22, 0.95). The OR for patients with fT4 > 16pmol/L was 2.10 (1.09, 4.06), and for patients with fT4 < 10pmol/L was 0.45 (0.20, 0.98). The OR for patients with fT3 > 5.5pmol/L was 0.39 (0.14, 1.28). The OR for patients with fT3 < 3pmol/L was 1.83 (0.25, 13.69). The average fT4/fT3 was 3.39 ± 0.206 for cases and 2.93 ± 0.467 for controls. The fT4/fT3 quotient was considered high if it was >3.3 (OR =6.00 (2.94, 12.25)). CONCLUSION: In this study, a direct relationship between high levels of fT4 and malignancy was uncovered. Furthermore, low levels of TSH and fT4 increased the likelihood that a nodule was benign. In this study a fT4/fT3 ratio >3.3 increased the risk of malignancy by 3.6 times (p-value =0.0013).
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".