Personalized Selection Criteria for Radioiodine Administration in Low- and Intermediate-Risk Papillary Thyroid Carcinoma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Our center has developed a personalized strategy based on objective selection criteria for radioactive iodine (RAI) administration after a total thyroidectomy in ≥1 cm low- and intermediate-risk papillary thyroid carcinoma (PTC) patients. These recommendations have been derived from a prospective long-term protocol followed for >8 years on such PTC patients not receiving routine RAI using postsurgical pathology analysis findings in combination with serial stimulated serum thyroglobulin and neck ultrasonography measurements. Our observations have indicated that the vast majority of such PTC patients (116 of 129 = 90%) could safely avoid RAI therapy and that previous evidenced-based clinical risk factors considered as indications for RAI did not correlate with our proposed individualized RAI selection protocol criteria. The routine application of this RAI selection strategy also greatly reduced patient anxiety/inconvenience, potential radiation side effects, and healthcare costs. Paul G. Walfish has received consulting fees from Sanofi Genzyme Canada and is a shareholder in Proteocyte Diagnostics Incorporated. Runtime of video: 15 mins 27 secs This lecture was presented at the 86th Annual Meeting of the American Thyroid Association, Denver, Colorado, September 24, 2016.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".