ArticleScientific reports2025
Prognosis of invasive encapsulated follicular variant and classical papillary thyroid carcinoma: a propensity score-matched study using the SEER database.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Case report: A case of adolescent invasive encapsulated follicular variant of papillary thyroid carcinoma with literature review.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The latest World Health Organization Classification of Tumors, Fifth Edition, recognizes the invasive encapsulated follicular variant of papillary thyroid carcinoma (IEFVPTC) as a distinct malignant entity rather than a subtype of papillary thyroid carcinoma (PTC). This reclassification highlights the need to explore potential prognostic differences between IEFVPTC and classic PTC. This study utilized the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database to compare prognoses of patients diagnosed with IEFVPTC and classic PTC between 2004 and 2019. Propensity score matching (PSM) was employed to adjust for confounding variables and reduce selection bias. Kaplan-Meier survival curves and Cox regression models were used to evaluate overall survival (OS) between the two groups. A total of 1,530 IEFVPTC and 81,508 classic PTC patients were analyzed. Before PSM, significant differences were noted in race, T-stage, N-stage, M-stage, laterality, radiotherapy, surgical modality, tumor size, and income. Post-PSM, these differences were not statistically significant (p > 0.05). Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox regression models showed no significant differences in OS between IEFVPTC and classic PTC both before and after PSM. This PSM analysis revealed no significant differences in overall survival between patients with IEFVPTC and classic PTC, suggesting that the reclassification of IEFVPTC does not translate into distinct prognostic outcomes.
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.