ArticleBMJ oncology2026
Active surveillance for a small low-risk papillary thyroid cancer: a 10-year prospective, observational study in an Italian tertiary care centre.
Article in BMJ oncology, 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To evaluate the long-term safety and feasibility of active surveillance (AS) for Italian patients with low-risk papillary thyroid microcarcinoma (mPTC) and to analyse trends in patient enrolment and factors associated with discontinuation of surveillance. This study represents the first prospective European investigation with long-term follow-up assessing AS for mPTC. Design: Prospective, observational, non-randomised study with a duration of 10 years (2014-2024). Setting: Single tertiary referral centre (University Hospital of Pisa, Italy). Participants: 260 adult patients with a mPTC (≤13 mm) who voluntarily opted for AS instead of immediate surgery. Interventions: AS consisting of periodic clinical evaluation and neck ultrasonography every 6 months for the first 2 years and annually thereafter. Surgery was recommended only in the presence of predefined disease progression or at patient request. Main outcome measures: Rates of disease progression, delayed surgical intervention, oncologic outcomes after surgery and patient discontinuation of AS. Results: A total of 260 patients were enrolled and followed for up to 10 years. Disease progression occurred in approximately 5% of patients. All patients who underwent delayed surgery achieved excellent outcomes, with no evidence of recurrence after a median postoperative follow-up of 43.5 months. No disease-specific deaths occurred during AS or after surgery. Over the study period, patient enrolment progressively increased, reflecting growing acceptance of AS. However, 18.5% of patients discontinued surveillance without evidence of progression, most frequently within the first year. Younger age and cytology suspicious for malignancy were associated with higher dropout rates. Conclusions: This study provides the first long-term prospective evidence that AS is a safe and feasible management strategy for patients with mPTC also in a European country. These findings support AS as a valid first-line approach and reinforce the need for improved patient education to optimise adherence and reduce unnecessary surgery.
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.