Atypia of Undetermined Significance in Thyroid Fine-Needle Aspirations: Follow-Up and Outcome Experience in Newfoundland, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The rates of atypia of undetermined significance (AUS) by fine-needle aspiration (FNA) and malignant outcomes have been estimated at < 7% and 5-15%, respectively. Initial AUS diagnosis is followed up clinically with serial ultrasounds, repeat FNA, molecular testing, or direct surgery. We investigated the incidence, follow-up modalities, and final outcomes of AUS in Newfoundland. METHODS: All cases of AUS diagnosed at the Eastern Health Cytology Laboratory between 1 January 2010 and 31 December 2013 were identified. Electronic medical records were examined for follow-up modalities and final histologic diagnosis. The final outcomes were reported as benign, malignant, or undetermined. RESULTS: Out of 3,285 thyroid FNAs, 181 (5.5%) were AUS. Fifty-seven (31.5%) had repeat FNA diagnosed as benign (38.6%), AUS (29.8%), or suspicious/malignant (8.8%). Eighty-four (46.4%) had surgery after the first AUS diagnosis, 39 (46.4%) of which were malignant. Twenty-four patients (13.3%) were followed up by serial ultrasound only, 2 (1.1%) by molecular testing, and 1 (0.6%) died of unrelated disease. Thirteen (7.2%) had no follow-up record. Our malignancy rate (MR) was 29.8%. CONCLUSION: The MR in our population was higher than the rate proposed by The Bethesda System for Reporting Thyroid Cytopathology. Repeat FNA can reduce the rate of unnecessary surgeries, but practice guidelines should consider individual and institutional circumstances. The ratio MR:ADR (AUS diagnostic rate) may be a better indicator of performance.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".