ArticleClinical nuclear medicine2018
To Use or Not to Use 131I in Thyroid Cancer.
Article in Clinical nuclear medicine, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
- Comment on
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe purpose of the following commentary is to discuss recent controversies in the use of radioactive iodine for differentiated thyroid cancer (DTC).
methodsR. M. Tuttle (Thyroid 2010; 20:257-263), at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, has enumerated the well-accepted goals of radioactive iodine therapy (RAIT) in DTC: (1) ablate residual thyroid to facilitate future surveillance, (2) "adjuvant therapy" for residual radioactive iodine-avid disease, and (3) a post-RAIT scan may reveal unknown local and/or distant metastases. Using these goals as a guide, the authors have critically reviewed a recent movement to decrease the use of RAIT in DTC that is being advocated by some investigators.
resultsAs a result, a recent article has highlighted this new treatment philosophy. A 2017 publication in the Journal of Clinical Oncology (Molenaar et al, 2017 0:JCO.2017.75.0232) recommends that RAIT not be used in low- or intermediate-risk DTC. In this article, the authors claim that the RAIT risks in DTC, particularly leukemia, outweigh its potential benefits. This change, if adopted, in our opinion will have profound deleterious consequences on patient outcomes. We also have identified a major problem with the article of Molenaar et al. The authors use the American Thyroid Association's criteria for staging thyroid cancer. In our opinion, this method of staging is severely flawed. We also quantitatively compare the article's alleged risk of RAIT-induced leukemia with the benefits of RAIT for DTC.
conclusionsIn summary, this matter must be debated before eliminating RAIT in low- or intermediate-risk DTC. If RAIT is eliminated for these patients, many such patients will no longer benefit from the RAIT goals listed by R. M. Tuttle, including the critical advantage of potentially improved overall and event-free survival.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.