SynthesisEndocrinology, diabetes & metabolism2026
Reassessing Radioactive Iodine Use After Thyroidectomy in Low-Risk Differentiated Thyroid Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Synthesis in Endocrinology, diabetes & metabolism, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRadioactive iodine (RAI) therapy is often administered post-total thyroidectomy in patients with low-risk differentiated thyroid carcinoma, despite guidelines advising against its routine application. Evidence regarding the efficacy of RAI in reducing recurrence and improving survival in low-risk differentiated thyroid cancer (DTC) remains inconsistent.
methodsWe conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies and randomized clinical trials that compare RAI versus no RAI in low-risk DTC patients. Databases such as MEDLINE, Scopus, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar were searched through December 2025. Outcomes included recurrence, recurrence-free survival, treatment response, biochemical markers, and side effects. We performed statistical analysis using Review Manager (RevMan) 5.4 with a random-effects model, reporting odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals, and significance set at p < 0.05. Heterogeneity was assessed using I
resultsTen studies (n = 5260) were included in the analysis. No statistically significant difference was observed between the two groups for recurrence (OR 0.66, 95% CI: 0.41-1.08; p = 0.10), 5-year recurrence-free survival (OR 2.47, 95% CI: 0.63-9.62; p = 0.19), or treatment response (excellent response: OR 1.00, 95% CI: 0.52-1.92; p = 1.00). Secondary outcomes, including serum thyroglobulin > 1 ng/mL (OR 1.20, 95% CI: 0.00-342.55; p = 0.95), elevated thyroglobulin antibodies (OR 0.91, 95% CI: 0.38-2.16; p = 0.83), xerostomia (OR 5.63, 95% CI: 0.05-667.24; p = 0.48), and dysphonia (OR 0.96, 95% CI: 0.53-1.72; p = 0.88), were also not significantly different between groups, although estimates were not precise.
conclusionThe available randomized and observational evidence does not demonstrate a clear, clinically meaningful benefit of routine RAI ablation in patients classified as low-risk DTC. These findings should be interpreted with caution due to heterogeneity across studies, variability in outcome definitions, and the predominance of observational data.
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.