Is thyroid nodule location associated with malignancy risk?

PURPOSE: Nodules located in the upper pole of the thyroid may carry a greater risk for malignancy than those in the lower pole. We conducted a study to analyze the risk of malignancy of nodules depending on location. METHODS: The records of patients undergoing thyroid-nodule fine-needle aspiration cytology (FNAC) at an academic thyroid cancer unit were prospectively collected. The nodules were considered benign in cases of a benign histology or cytology report, and malignant in cases of malignant histology. Pathological findings were analyzed based on the anatomical location of the nodules, which were also scored according to five ultrasonographic classification systems. RESULTS: Between November 1, 2015 and May 30, 2018, 832 nodules underwent FNAC, of which 557 had a definitive diagnosis. The prevalence of malignancy was not significantly different in the isthmus, right, or left lobe. Among the 227 nodules that had a precise longitudinal location noted (from 219 patients [155 females], aged 56.2±14.0 years), malignancy was more frequent in the middle lobe (13.2%; odds ratio [OR], 9.74; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.95 to 48.59). This figure was confirmed in multivariate analyses that took into account nodule composition and the Thyroid Imaging, Reporting, and Data System (TIRADS) classification. Using the American College of Radiologists TIRADS, the upper pole location also demonstrated a slightly significant association with malignancy (OR, 6.92; 95% CI, 1.02 to 46.90; P=0.047). CONCLUSION: The risk of thyroid malignancy was found to be significantly higher for mid-lobar nodules. This observation was confirmed when suspicious ultrasonographic features were included in a multivariate model, suggesting that the longitudinal location in the lobe may be a risk factor independently of ultrasonographic appearance

Taller-than-wide shape: a new definition improves the specificity of TIRADS systems

Introduction: A taller-than-wide (TTW) shape is a suspicious feature of thyroid nodules commonly defined as an anteroposterior/transverse diameter (AP/T) ratio >1. An intraobserver variability of up to 18% in AP diameter evaluations has been described, which may lead to overreporting of this feature. To potentially improve the reliability of the TTW definition, we propose an arbitrary ratio of ≥1.2. Objective: The aim of this study was to estimate the impact of this definition on diagnostic performance. Methods: We prospectively analyzed 553 thyroid nodules referred for cytology evaluation at an academic center. Before fine-needle aspiration, two examiners jointly defined all sonographic features considered in risk stratification systems developed by the American Thyroid Association (ATA), the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists (AACE), the American College of Radiology (ACR TIRADS), the European Thyroid Association (EU-TIRADS), and the Korean Society of Thyroid Radiology (K-TIRADS). TTW was defined according to the current definition (AP/T diameter ratio >1) and an arbitrary alternative definition (AP/T ratio >1.2). Results: The alternative definition classified fewer nodules as TTW (28, 5.1% vs. 94, 17%). The current and proposed definitions have a sensitivity of 26.2 and 11.9% (p = 0.03) and a specificity of 83.8 and 95.5% (p < 0.001). Thus, as a single feature, the arbitrary definition has a lower sensitivity and a higher specificity. When applied to sonographic risk stratification systems, however, the proposed definition would increase the number of avoided biopsies (up to 58.2% for ACR TIRADS) and the specificity of all systems, without negative impact on sensitivity or diagnostic odds ratio. Conclusions: Re-defining TTW nodules as those with an AP/T ratio ≥1.2 improves this marker's specificity for malignancy. Using this definition in risk stratification systems will increase their specificity, reducing the number of suggested biopsies without significantly diminishing their overall diagnostic performance

Contribution of Genome-Wide Association Studies to Scientific Research: A Pragmatic Approach to Evaluate Their Impact

The factual value of genome-wide association studies (GWAS) for the understanding of multifactorial diseases is a matter of intense debate. Practical consequences for the development of more effective therapies do not seem to be around the corner. Here we propose a pragmatic and objective evaluation of how much new biology is arising from these studies, with particular attention to the information that can help prioritize therapeutic targets. We chose multiple sclerosis (MS) as a paradigm disease and assumed that, in pre-GWAS candidate-gene studies, the knowledge behind the choice of each gene reflected the understanding of the disease prior to the advent of GWAS. Importantly, this knowledge was based mainly on non-genetic, phenotypic grounds. We performed single-gene and pathway-oriented comparisons of old and new knowledge in MS by confronting an unbiased list of candidate genes in pre-GWAS association studies with those genes exceeding the genome-wide significance threshold in GWAS published from 2007 on. At the single gene level, the majority (94 out of 125) of GWAS-discovered variants had never been contemplated as plausible candidates in pre-GWAS association studies. The 31 genes that were present in both pre- and post-GWAS lists may be of particular interest in that they represent disease-associated variants whose pathogenetic relevance is supported at the phenotypic level (i.e. the phenotypic information that steered their selection as candidate genes in pre-GWAS association studies). As such they represent attractive therapeutic targets. Interestingly, our analysis shows that some of these variants are targets of pharmacologically active compounds, including drugs that are already registered for human use. Compared with the above single-gene analysis, at the pathway level GWAS results appear more coherent with previous knowledge, reinforcing some of the current views on MS pathogenesis and related therapeutic research. This study presents a pragmatic approach that helps interpret and exploit GWAS knowledge

Comparison of GENOTATOR and GWAS gene lists.

<p>(<b>A</b>) results at the single-gene level; (<b>B</b>) results in terms of biological function derived from IPA analysis. Boxes describe specific biological functions; (<b>C</b>) signaling pathway comparison, resulting from IPA analysis; (<b>D</b>) comparison performed in terms of metabolic pathways, derived from IPA analysis. Box indicates “GENOTATOR-only” signaling pathways.</p

Study flow diagram.

<p>It summarizes of the methodology we designed and followed to compare the pre- and post-GWAS understanding of the disease by means of single gene analyses, pathway comparisons, and drug target evaluations.</p

Results from the analysis of all the molecules directly or indirectly linked to GENOTATOR/GWAS lists of genes.

<p>Histogram chart (<b>center</b>) shows the absolute number of molecules contemporarily targeted by registered drugs or pharmacologically active compounds and also part of complex molecular networks involving GENOTATOR-only, GWAS-only, or common genes; (<b>left</b> and <b>right</b>): most significant molecular networks and related drugs.</p