Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38968008›Full record

ArticleEuropean thyroid journal2024

Incidentally vs non-incidentally diagnosed papillary thyroid carcinoma: are there differences?

Inês Cosme, Ana Figueiredo, Sara Pinheiro, Valeriano Leite

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European thyroid journal, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Inês CosmeI Cosme, Endocrinology, Unidade Local de Saúde Santa Maria, Lisbon, Portugal.
Ana FigueiredoA Figueiredo, Endocrinology, Instituto Português de Oncologia de Lisboa, Lisboa, Portugal.
Sara PinheiroS Pinheiro, Endocrinology, Instituto Português de Oncologia de Lisboa, Lisboa, Portugal.
Valeriano LeiteV Leite, Endocrinology, Instituto Português de Oncologia de Lisboa, Lisboa, Portugal.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Thyroid carcinoma (TC) incidence increased over the past 50 years. The explanation for this is not consensual. Objective: Compare incidental vs. non-incidental TC (ITC vs. NITC) regarding demographic, clinical, histological data and 5-year clinical outcomes. Design: Retrospective analysis of 225 papillary TC (PTC) cases that completed a 5-year follow-up. Methods: Created 2 groups: ITC (including the incidentalomas) and NITC (cases of palpable or visible nodules or with thyroid compressive complaints). Results: Included 225 PTC (122 were ITC). There were 95 women in ITC and 78 in NITC. ITC patients were significantly older (53.3±14.8 vs 47.2±17.7, p=0.006). Groups had no differences in family history of TC. ITC mean tumour size was smaller (19.1±9.2 vs 28.6±16.2, p<0.01). Tumours >20mm comprised 36.1% of ITC and 58.2% of NITC. We found no differences in tumour multifocality, histological thyroiditis, aggressive PTC subtypes, capsule or lymph-vascular invasion and gross extrathyroidal extension. There were no differences regarding the number of patients submitted to RAI or in RAI activity. pTMN staging showed higher prevalence of T3a and T4 cases (p<0.01), and M1 status (p=0.025) in NITC. There were no differences in the rates of persistence of disease. Logistic regression showed that the diagnostic modality had no impact on the 5-year clinical outcome. Conclusion: ITC patients were older and had smaller tumours. NITC showed no worst histological features or 5-year clinical outcome. Approximately, one third of ITC had diameters >20mm. As even large tumours can be ITC, overdiagnosis can be the most likely cause for the TC increasing incidence.

Identifiers

PMID38968008
PMCPMC11301558

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.