Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30591992›Full record

SynthesisEndocrine pathology2019

Evaluation of 167 Gene Expression Classifier (GEC) and ThyroSeq v2 Diagnostic Accuracy in the Preoperative Assessment of Indeterminate Thyroid Nodules: Bivariate/HROC Meta-analysis.

Martyna Borowczyk, Ewelina Szczepanek-Parulska, Michał Olejarz, Barbara Więckowska, Frederik A Verburg, Szymon Dębicki, Bartłomiej Budny, Małgorzata Janicka-Jedyńska, Katarzyna Ziemnicka, Marek Ruchała

Erratum issuedOpen access · hybridAbstract readMeta-Analysis
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Endocrine pathology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 19 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
2.6field-weighted citation impact, top 9% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

19 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 35 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Martyna BorowczykDepartment of Endocrinology, Metabolism and Internal Medicine, Poznań University of Medical Sciences, 49, Przybyszewskiego Street, 60-355, Poznan, Poland. martyna.borowczyk@gmail.com.
Ewelina Szczepanek-ParulskaDepartment of Endocrinology, Metabolism and Internal Medicine, Poznań University of Medical Sciences, 49, Przybyszewskiego Street, 60-355, Poznan, Poland.
Michał OlejarzDepartment of Endocrinology, Metabolism and Internal Medicine, Poznań University of Medical Sciences, 49, Przybyszewskiego Street, 60-355, Poznan, Poland.
Barbara WięckowskaDepartment of Computer Science and Statistics, Poznań University of Medical Sciences, Poznań, Poland.
Frederik A VerburgDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital Marburg, Marburg, Germany.
Szymon DębickiDepartment of Endocrinology, Metabolism and Internal Medicine, Poznań University of Medical Sciences, 49, Przybyszewskiego Street, 60-355, Poznan, Poland.
Bartłomiej BudnyDepartment of Endocrinology, Metabolism and Internal Medicine, Poznań University of Medical Sciences, 49, Przybyszewskiego Street, 60-355, Poznan, Poland.
Małgorzata Janicka-JedyńskaDepartment of Clinical Pathology, Poznań University of Medical Sciences, Poznań, Poland.
Katarzyna ZiemnickaDepartment of Endocrinology, Metabolism and Internal Medicine, Poznań University of Medical Sciences, 49, Przybyszewskiego Street, 60-355, Poznan, Poland.
Marek RuchałaDepartment of Endocrinology, Metabolism and Internal Medicine, Poznań University of Medical Sciences, 49, Przybyszewskiego Street, 60-355, Poznan, Poland.
Poznan University of Medical Sciences · PLPhilipps University of Marburg · DE

Funding

PRELUDIUM Grant of Polish National Center for Science 2015/19/N/NZ5/02257
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The objective of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the performance of the Gene Expression Classifier (GEC) and ThyroSeq v2 (ThyroSeq) in the preoperative diagnosis of thyroid nodules with indeterminate fine-needle aspiration biopsy results. We searched literature databases from January 2001 to April 2018. The bivariate model analysis was performed to estimate pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio (LR+), negative likelihood ratio (LR-), positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV). Pooled data from 1086 nodules with histopathologic confirmation from 16 GEC studies enabled calculation of diagnostic parameters (95% confidence interval): sensitivity 98% (96-99%), specificity 12% (8-20%), PPV 45% (37-53%), and NPV 91% (85-96%). Pooled data from five ThyroSeq studies assessing 459 nodules showed sensitivity of 84% (74-91%), specificity 78% (50-92%), PPV 58% (31-81%), and NPV 93% (89-97%). When both tools were compared, GEC had a significantly higher sensitivity (p = 0.003), while ThyroSeq had a significantly higher specificity (p < 0.001) and accuracy (p = 0.015). Pooled LR+ was higher for ThyroSeq: 3.79 (1.40-10.27) vs. 1.12 (1.05-1.20). Pooled LR- was higher for GEC, 0.20 (0.10-0.39) vs. 0.13 (0.05-0.31). The bivariate summary estimates of sensitivity and specificity for GEC and ThyroSeq and their pooled accuracy showed a superiority of the ThyroSeq test. The GEC with a high sensitivity and NPV may be helpful in ruling out malignancy in cases of indeterminate thyroid nodule cytology. ThyroSeq has a significantly higher specificity and accuracy with an acceptable sensitivity so that it has the potential for use as an all-round test of malignancy of thyroid nodules.

Indexed as

High-Throughput Nucleotide SequencingMolecular Diagnostic TechniquesBiopsy, Fine-NeedleGene ExpressionHumansSensitivity and SpecificityThyroid NeoplasmsThyroid NoduleFollicular thyroid adenomaFollicular thyroid cancerGeneticsIndeterminate cytologyMolecular diagnosisNext-generation sequencingThyroid nodules

Identifiers

PMID30591992
OpenAlexW2907051822

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.