MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411994433 · doi:10.1080/14737140.2025.2529285

Differentiated thyroid cancer and positron emission computed tomography: when, how and why?

2025· review· en· W4411994433 on OpenAlexaff
Andrés Coca‐Pelaz, Juan P. Rodrigo, Mark Zafereo, Iain J. Nixon, Orlando Guntinas‐Lichius, Gregory W. Randolph, Francisco Civantos, Pia Pace‐Asciak, Mark Anthony Jara, Russ Kuker, Alfio Ferlito

Bibliographic record

VenueExpert Review of Anticancer Therapy · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicThyroid Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePositron emission tomographyThyroid cancerPositron Emission Tomography-Computed TomographyComputed tomographyCancerNuclear medicineMedical physicsRadiologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography (FDG PET/CT) has become an indispensable tool in oncology, offering both metabolic and anatomical insights into tumor behavior. Most differentiated thyroid carcinomas (DTC) are indolent and therefore FDG PET/CT is not routinely incorporated into management. However, in biologically aggressive DTCs, FDG PET/CT plays a crucial role in detecting recurrence and metastases. AREAS COVERED: This narrative review with articles from the last 25 years from PubMed database, explores the evolving role of FDG PET/CT, focusing on its utility in recurrence detection, staging, and follow-up of radioactive iodine (RAI)-refractory cases. Current guidelines recommend FDG PET/CT primarily for high-risk patients with elevated thyroglobulin levels and negative RAI scans (TENIS syndrome). We also examine advancements in PET imaging, novel radiotracers and theragnostic approaches that enhance diagnostic accuracy and treatment monitoring. EXPERT OPINION: While FDG PET/CT has proven valuable in biologically aggressive DTC, its routine use remains limited by cost, accessibility, and concerns regarding radiation exposure in younger patients requiring repeated imaging studies. Future developments in molecular imaging, including novel tracers and artificial intelligence-driven analysis, are expected to refine its role, leading to more personalized and effective management, though economic and reimbursement challenges remain important considerations for broader adoption.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.362
Teacher spread0.334 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueExpert Review of Anticancer TherapySame topicThyroid Cancer Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207