MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4244527181 · doi:10.14740/jem735

Diagnostic Performance of ACR-TIRADS in Differentiating Benign From Malignant Thyroid Nodules in Patients Undergoing Fine-Needle Aspiration Biopsy: Comparative Study Based on Five International Guidelines for Management of Thyroid Nodules

2021· article· en· W4244527181 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Pranav Sharma, Kareem Elfatairy, Darshan Gandhi, Harpreet Sawhney, Mohammed Osman, Puneet Kochar, Steven M. Cohen

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Endocrinology and Metabolism · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicThyroid Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineThyroid nodulesBiopsyNodule (geology)ThyroidFine-needle aspirationRadiologyEchogenicityRetrospective cohort studyReceiver operating characteristicThyroid cancerPathologyUltrasoundInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: The purpose of this study was to retrospectively analyze the diagnostic performance of different international guidelines to detect benign from malignant nodules using fine-needle aspiration biopsy as a reference test. Methods: This study is a multi-institution, IRB-approved, retrospective study conducted from 2016 to 2020 that evaluated 200 consecutive biopsied thyroid nodules. The nodules were reclassified according to American College of Radiology Thyroid Imaging and Reporting Data System (ACR-TIRADS), Kwak-TIRADS (K-TIRADS), Korean Society of Thyroid Radiology (KSThR), European Thyroid Imaging and Reporting Data System (EU-TIRADS), and American Thyroid Association (ATA) guidelines. A Chi-squared test and receiver operating curve (ROC) with 95% confidence intervals and P-value < 0.05 were performed to calculate sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), false negative and unnecessary biopsy rate. The unnecessary biopsy rate was defined as the percentage of benign nodules among total biopsy-required nodules. Results: A total of 200 patients were included in this study. Patients aged from 23 to 74 years including 36 males and 164 females. The female/male ratio was 4.5:1. Female predominance was seen among most of the age groups. The cohort showed 26 (13%) malignant nodules and 174 (87%) benign nodules. A solid component was observed in the majority of malignant nodules (61.6%, P = 0.0376) and mixed component was observed in the majority of benign nodules (51.7%, P = 0.0376). There was no statistically significant difference in differentiating benign from malignant nodule with the echogenicity or orientation of the nodule. The statistically significant features of a benign nodule were spongiform appearance, no echogenic foci or comet tail and absence of peripheral halo (P < 0.03). The statistically significant features of a malignant nodule were a solid, peripheral halo, peripheral or punctate echogenic foci, microcalcification, and macrocalcification (P < 0.001). The ACR-TIRADS showed the highest specificity (40.23% (95% confidence interval (CI) 32 - 47)), PPV (18.75 (95% CI 0.12 - 0.26)), NPV (97.22 (95% CI 0.90 - 0.99)) and area under the curve (AUC) (0.6627 (95% CI 0.59 - 0.72)). This was closely followed by ATA which demonstrated the PPV of 17.39 (95% CI 0.11 - 0.24), NPV of 96.77 (95% CI 0.89 - 0.99) and AUC of 0.6340 (95% CI 0.57 - 0.69). The K-TIRADS has the highest sensitivity (96.15% (95% CI 80 - 99)). Lowest unnecessary biopsy rates were found with ACR-TIRADS (104 (52%) (P = 0.0013)) and KSThR guidelines (114 (57%) (P = 0.0059)) and highest with K-TIRADS (160 (80%) (P = 0.4482)). Conclusion: We found that diagnostic performance of ACR and ATA guidelines is higher and is a practical method for assessing thyroid nodules in routine practice. Both these guidelines can avoid unnecessary biopsies in a significant proportion of benign thyroid lesions. ACR-TIRADS is also very specific in identifying malignant lesions. The increased sensitivity of K-TIRADS is likely due to their lower size threshold. J Endocrinol Metab. 2021;11(3-4):69-75 doi: https://doi.org/10.14740/jem735

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.520

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.041
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.279 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Endocrinology and MetabolismSame topicThyroid Cancer Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207