ArticleFrontiers in endocrinology2026
Active surveillance of highly suspicious thyroid nodules in the isthmus compared with non-isthmus locations: a multicenter retrospective study.
Article in Frontiers in endocrinology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Objectives: To compare progression outcomes during active surveillance between highly suspicious thyroid nodules located in the isthmus and those in non-isthmic regions, and to explore the feasibility of active surveillance for selected isthmic lesions. Methods: This multicenter retrospective study included 449 solitary thyroid nodules that were re-evaluated by blinded image review and classified as American College of Radiology Thyroid Imaging Reporting and Data System (ACR TI-RADS) category 5. Nodules were anatomically categorized as isthmic (n = 33) or non-isthmic (n = 416). Cytological results were available for 144 of 449 nodules (32.1%). Progression was evaluated according to size-based criteria (≥3 mm increase in maximum diameter, ≥3 mm increase in one, two, or all three orthogonal diameters, and ≥50% increase in volume), the occurrence of new suspicious lesions, lymph node metastasis, and distant metastasis, as well as a composite endpoint encompassing the latter three events. Results: The median follow-up duration was 47 months, with no significant difference between the two groups. Non-isthmic nodules had significantly larger volumes at baseline and at final follow-up, whereas maximum diameter did not differ significantly between groups (P>0.05). A ≥50% increase in volume occurred in 30.30% of the isthmus group and 24.52% of the non-isthmus group (P = 0.53). A composite endpoint occurred in 3.03% of the isthmus group and 4.09% of the non-isthmus group (P = 1.00). Observed differences in progression indicators were not statistically significant (P>0.05). No distant metastases or thyroid cancer-related deaths occurred during follow-up. Conclusion: In this multicenter retrospective cohort, ACR TI-RADS 5 thyroid nodules located in the isthmus were not observed to have higher progression rates than non-isthmic nodules during AS. These findings support the potential feasibility of active surveillance for selected isthmic nodules under careful monitoring. However, the small isthmus sample size and low number of progression events preclude definitive conclusions regarding equivalence between the two groups.
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.