Seven years of Non-invasive Follicular Thyroid Neoplasm with Papillary-like Nuclear Features (NIFTP): Rate of Acceptance and Variation of Diagnostic Approaches Across Different Continents
Bibliographic record
Abstract
CONTEXT: Noninvasive follicular thyroid neoplasm with papillary-like nuclear features (NIFTP) was introduced as a new entity replacing the diagnosis of noninvasive encapsulated follicular variant of papillary thyroid carcinoma (PTC). Significant variability in the incidence of NIFTP diagnosed in different world regions has been reported. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the rate of adoption of NIFTP, change in practice patterns, and uniformity in applying diagnostic criteria among pathologists practicing in different regions. METHODS: Two surveys distributed to pathologists of the International Endocrine Pathology Discussion Group with multiple-choice questions on NIFTP adoption into pathology practice and whole slide images of 5 tumors to collect information on nuclear score and diagnosis. Forty-eight endocrine pathologists, including 24 from North America, 8 from Europe, and 16 from Asia/Oceania completed the first survey and 38 the second survey. RESULTS: A 94% adoption rate of NIFTP by the pathologists was found. Yet, the frequency of rendering NIFTP diagnosis was significantly higher in North America than in other regions (P = .009). While the highest concordance was found in diagnosing lesions with mildly or well-developed PTC-like nuclei, there was significant variability in nuclear scoring and diagnosing NIFTP for tumors with moderate nuclear changes (nuclear score 2) (case 2, P < .05). Pathologists practicing in North America and Europe showed a tendency for lower thresholds for PTC-like nuclei and NIFTP than those practicing in Asia/Oceania. CONCLUSION: Despite a high adoption rate of NIFTP across geographic regions, NIFTP is diagnosed more often by pathologists in North America. Significant differences remain in diagnosing intermediate PTC-like nuclei and respectively NIFTP, with more conservative nuclear scoring in Asia/Oceania, which may explain the geographic differences in NIFTP incidence.
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 | 0.003 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".