Primary versus Tertiary Care Follow-Up of Low-Risk Differentiated Thyroid Cancer: Real-World Comparison of Outcomes and Costs for Patients and Health Care Systems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background: An unprecedented rise in the prevalence of low-risk well-differentiated thyroid cancer (TC) has been reported in several countries, which is partly due to an increased utility of sensitive imaging techniques. The outcome of these cancers has generally remained excellent and the overall 5-year survival is almost 100%. However, the extended follow-up strategy for these patients remains unclear and while the initial management is done in specialist centres some experts opt to follow them on a long-term basis while others discharge them to primary care after the initial management. The effectiveness of one strategy versus the other has not been studied. Methods: We conducted a real-world comparison to assess the outcome of low-risk TC (AJCC stage I) with undetectable thyroglobulin (TG) 2 years after radioiodine (I-131) therapy. The outcome from Halifax (NS, Canada) and London (ON, Canada), where all TC patients are routinely followed by the tertiary care team, was compared with that from Edmonton (AB, Canada), where patients are routinely discharged to primary care. Results: All patients were diagnosed between January 1, 2006, and December 31, 2011. The mean follow-up in primary care after discharge was 62.2 months and in tertiary care it was 64.6 months (p = 0.43). Rates of recurrence were similar in both groups, i.e., 1.1% in primary care and 1.3% in tertiary care (p = 0.69). Ultrasound surveillance was conducted in 56.5% of the patients in primary care and 52.6% of the tertiary care group (p = 0.26). The rate of annual unstimulated TG testing per patient was 0.58 (range 0–14) in primary care and 0.96 (range 0–6) in tertiary care (p = 0.06). More patients in primary care (86%) than in tertiary care (29.9%) consistently had thyroid-stimulating hormone levels within the target range (p < 0.001). The mean healthcare cost, based on a single follow-up visit with a blood test and ultrasound in the primary care group was CAD 118.01 and in the tertiary care group it was CAD 164.12. Conclusion: Our study shows that extended follow-up of low-risk TC patients is perfectly feasible in primary care and provides significant economic benefit for the healthcare system.
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) | 0.001 | 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".