Molecular Testing and Surgical Outcomes in Bethesda III and IV Thyroid Nodules: A Retrospective Cohort Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Bethesda III and IV thyroid nodules, which fall under the category of indeterminate cytology, pose challenges in clinical decision-making due to their ambiguous risk of malignancy. Molecular testing has been increasingly employed to aid risk stratification and optimize the extent of surgical intervention. Methods: A retrospective review of 410 patients with Bethesda III and IV thyroid nodules who underwent thyroid surgery at McGill University teaching hospitals between January 2016 and April 2022. Patients were grouped based on whether or not they underwent preoperative molecular testing. Data were collected on demographic variables, histopathologic diagnosis, mutation profiles, and surgical outcomes. The primary outcome was to assess for concordance between surgical intervention and final pathology in both groups, with a focus on identifying optimal versus suboptimal management. Optimal management is defined as surgery appropriate to the aggressiveness of disease, meaning a hemi-thyroidectomy for a non-aggressive malignancy, total thyroidectomy for an aggressive malignancy, and no surgery for a benign nodule. Furthermore, suboptimal management includes unnecessary surgery or incorrect surgery for the level of aggressivity of the nodule. Results: Among the 410 patients, 203 underwent molecular testing, while 207 did not. Of those who underwent molecular testing, 117 had Bethesda III nodules and 86 had Bethesda IV nodules. In the non-tested group, 129 and 78 patients had Bethesda III and IV nodules, respectively. Optimal surgical intervention was achieved in 67.5% of patients who underwent molecular testing, compared with 25.1% in those who did not (p < 0.001). Subgroup analysis revealed that 61.5% of Bethesda III nodules with molecular testing received optimal care versus 21.0% of those without testing. In the Bethesda IV cohort, optimal surgery was achieved in 75.6% with testing versus 32.1% without. Among the suboptimally managed patients, 70.1% (155/221) were from the group that did not undergo molecular testing. In addition, molecular testing identified aggressive mutations such as BRAF V600E and TERT promoter mutations more frequently in Bethesda III nodules, while RAS-like mutations, associated with indolent behavior, predominated in Bethesda IV nodules. Conclusions: In this study, molecular testing significantly improved risk stratification and the likelihood of optimal surgical management in patients with Bethesda III and IV thyroid nodules. Incorporating molecular diagnostics into the standard preoperative workflow may enhance patient care, reduce unnecessary surgeries, and optimize the extent of surgery. Future studies should evaluate the cost-effectiveness and broader implementation of molecular testing in diverse healthcare settings.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".