Association Between Serum Thyrotropin and Cancer Recurrence in Differentiated Thyroid Cancer: A Population-Based Retrospective Cohort Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Levothyroxine to suppress thyrotropin (TSH) to <0.5 mIU/L following thyroidectomy in differentiated thyroid cancer (DTC) may reduce recurrence in higher-risk DTC. However, there is limited evidence to support guideline recommendations to maintain TSH in the low-normal range of 0.5–2 mIU/L to reduce recurrence in patients with lower risk DTC. The primary objective was to assess the association between exposure to high normal serum TSH (2–4 mIU/L) as compared with low normal TSH (0.5–2 mIU/L) target ranges and cancer recurrence in patients with DTC after thyroidectomy. Methods: This population-based retrospective cohort study used linked, administrative health care databases from Ontario, Canada, to follow patients with DTC post-thyroidectomy from 2007 to 2018. The exposure was time updated, serum TSH, treated as a cumulative and instantaneous exposure. Multivariable cause-specific proportional hazard regression analyses were performed to determine time to DTC recurrence from index date, defined as a composite of repeat neck surgery, radioactive iodine (RAI) treatment, and/or DTC-specific death. Results were also stratified by initial treatment as a marker of baseline recurrence risk in a sensitivity analysis. Results: This cohort of 26,336 individuals (78% female) with DTC and a median age of 50 years were followed for a median of 5.9 (interquartile range 3.6–8.6) years; 40.9% were initially treated with a hemi-thyroidectomy only and 38.2% received a total thyroidectomy and RAI. Compared with exposure to TSH 0.5 to ≤2 mIU/L, DTC recurrence rate was similar for each additional 3 months of exposure to TSH >2 to ≤4 mIU/L (adjusted cause specific [cs] hazard ratio [HR] 0.99 [confidence interval or CI 0.97–1.02]) but was significantly increased with each additional 3 months of exposure to TSH >4 mIU/L (adjusted csHR 1.07 [CI 1.04–1.09]). Results were similar across baseline treatment groups. Conclusion: There was no difference in clinically significant recurrence in those with low-risk DTC maintained with a TSH of 0.5–2 mIU/L compared with 2–4 mIU/L. Guidelines should consider liberalizing target TSH level post thyroidectomy in low-risk cohorts. These results cannot be applied to patients with high-risk DTC.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".