SynthesisEuropean thyroid journal2025
Comparing the diagnostic accuracy of Afirma GSC to ThyroSeq V3 in cytologically indeterminate thyroid nodules.
Synthesis in European thyroid journal, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- The role of the WD40-repeat protein family in cancer.Molecular cancer · 2026Review
- The Role of Cytology, Histology and Molecular Pathology in the Diagnostic Process of Thyroid Nodules.Cancers · 2026Review
- A malignancy risk prediction model for Bethesda category III thyroid nodules based on serological indicators, C-TIRADS, and BRAF V600E testing.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2026Article
- Integrating miRNA profiling and machine learning for improved thyroid cancer diagnosis.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- A multicenter, clinically interpretable prediction model for malignancy risk in C-TIRADS 3-4 thyroid nodules.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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To compare the diagnostic test accuracy of Afirma GSC and ThyroSeq v3 in cytologically indeterminate thyroid nodules. Methods: PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Medline, and the Web of Science were searched from the date of inception to May 9, 2025. Two independent reviewers screened articles for eligibility. Studies assessing Afirma gene sequencing classifier (GSC) or ThyroSeq v3 for indeterminate thyroid nodules were included. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis reporting guidelines were followed. Statistical analysis was performed using R. Results: A total of 26 studies met the eligibility criteria. For surgically confirmed Afirma GSC results, the sensitivity, specificity, and negative predictive value (NPV) were 94, 42, and 96%, respectively. For unoperated negative cases, the values were 96, 86, and 99%. For ThyroSeq v3, the sensitivity, specificity, and NPV for surgically confirmed cases were 96, 40, and 93%, respectively, and for unoperated negative cases, they were 97, 83, and 99%. Conclusion: Both molecular tests demonstrate high NPV but low specificity; neither is clearly superior. Future research should prioritise randomised controlled trials, long-term follow-up of unoperated nodules, and direct comparisons of molecular tests.
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.