Skip to main content
Top
Published in: European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging 2/2017

01-02-2017 | Short Communication

Acknowledging gray areas: 2015 vs. 2009 American Thyroid Association differentiated thyroid cancer guidelines on ablating putatively low-intermediate-risk patients

Authors: Savvas Frangos, Ioannis P. Iakovou, Robert J. Marlowe, Nicolaos Eftychiou, Loukia Patsali, Anna Vanezi, Androulla Savva, Vassilis Mpalaris, Evanthia I. Giannoula

Published in: European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging | Issue 2/2017

Login to get access

Abstract

Purpose

Typically formulated by investigators from “world centres of excellence,” differentiated thyroid carcinoma (DTC) management guidelines may have more limited applicability in settings of less expert care and fewer resources. Arguably the world’s leading DTC guidelines are those of the American Thyroid Association, revised in 2009 (“ATA 2009”) and 2015 (“ATA 2015”). To further explore the issue of “real-world applicability” of DTC guidelines, we retrospectively compared indications for ablation using ATA 2015 versus ATA 2009 in a two-centre cohort of ablated T1–2, M0 DTC patients (N = 336). Based on TNM status and histology, these patients were low–intermediate risk, but many ultimately had other characteristics suggesting elevated or uncertain risk.

Methods

Working by consensus, two experienced nuclear medicine physicians considered patient and treatment characteristics to classify each case as having “no indication,” a “possible indication,” or a “clear indication” for ablation according to ATA 2009 or ATA 2015. The physicians also identified reasons for classification changes between ATA 2015 versus ATA 2009. Classification was unblinded, but the physicians had cared for only 138/336 patients, and the charts encompassed September 2010–October 2013, several years before the classification was performed.

Results

One hundred of 336 patients (29.8 %) changed classification regarding indication for ablation using ATA 2015 versus ATA 2009. Most reclassified patients (70/100) moved from “no indication” or “clear indication” to “possible indication.” Reflecting this phenomenon, “possible indication” became the largest category according to the ATA 2015 classification (141/336, 42.0 %, versus 96/336, 28.6 %, according to ATA 2009). Many reclassifications were attributable to multiple clinicopathological characteristics, most commonly, stimulated thyroglobulin or anti-thyroglobulin antibody levels, multifocality, bilateral involvement, or capsular/nodal invasion.

Conclusions

Regarding indications for ablation, ATA 2015 appears to better “acknowledge grey areas,” i.e., patients with ambiguous or unavailable data requiring individualised, nuanced decision-making, than does ATA 2009.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Huang TW, Lai JH, Wu MY, Chen SL, Wu CH, Tam KW. Systematic review of clinical practice guidelines in the diagnosis and management of thyroid nodules and cancer. BMC Med. 2013;11:191.CrossRef Huang TW, Lai JH, Wu MY, Chen SL, Wu CH, Tam KW. Systematic review of clinical practice guidelines in the diagnosis and management of thyroid nodules and cancer. BMC Med. 2013;11:191.CrossRef
2.
go back to reference Frangos S, Iakovou IP, Marlowe RJ, Eftychiou N, Patsali L, Vanezi A, et al. Difficulties in deciding whether to ablate patients with putatively “low-intermediate-risk” differentiated thyroid carcinoma: do guidelines mainly apply in the centres that produce them? Results of a retrospective, two-centre quality assurance study. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2015;42:2045–55.CrossRef Frangos S, Iakovou IP, Marlowe RJ, Eftychiou N, Patsali L, Vanezi A, et al. Difficulties in deciding whether to ablate patients with putatively “low-intermediate-risk” differentiated thyroid carcinoma: do guidelines mainly apply in the centres that produce them? Results of a retrospective, two-centre quality assurance study. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2015;42:2045–55.CrossRef
3.
go back to reference Frangos S, Iakovou IP, Marlowe RJ, Eftychiou N, Patsali L, Vanezi A, et al. Erratum to: Difficulties in deciding whether to ablate patients with putatively “low-intermediate-risk” differentiated thyroid carcinoma: do guidelines mainly apply in the centres that produce them? Results of a retrospective, two-centre quality assurance study. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2016;43:206–7.CrossRef Frangos S, Iakovou IP, Marlowe RJ, Eftychiou N, Patsali L, Vanezi A, et al. Erratum to: Difficulties in deciding whether to ablate patients with putatively “low-intermediate-risk” differentiated thyroid carcinoma: do guidelines mainly apply in the centres that produce them? Results of a retrospective, two-centre quality assurance study. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2016;43:206–7.CrossRef
4.
go back to reference Cooper DS, Doherty GM, Haugen BR, Kloos RT, Lee SL, Mandel SJ, et al. Revised American Thyroid Association management guidelines for patients with thyroid nodules and differentiated thyroid cancer. Thyroid. 2009;19:1167–214. Cooper DS, Doherty GM, Haugen BR, Kloos RT, Lee SL, Mandel SJ, et al. Revised American Thyroid Association management guidelines for patients with thyroid nodules and differentiated thyroid cancer. Thyroid. 2009;19:1167–214.
5.
go back to reference Haugen BR, Alexander EK, Bible KC, Doherty GM, Mandel SJ, Nikiforov YE, et al. 2015 American Thyroid Association management guidelines for adult patients with thyroid nodules and differentiated thyroid cancer: the American thyroid association guidelines task force on thyroid nodules and differentiated thyroid cancer. Thyroid. 2016;26:1–133. Haugen BR, Alexander EK, Bible KC, Doherty GM, Mandel SJ, Nikiforov YE, et al. 2015 American Thyroid Association management guidelines for adult patients with thyroid nodules and differentiated thyroid cancer: the American thyroid association guidelines task force on thyroid nodules and differentiated thyroid cancer. Thyroid. 2016;26:1–133.
6.
go back to reference Green F, Page DL, Fleming ID, Fritz AG, Balch CM, Haller DG, et al. AJCC cancer staging manual. 6th ed. Chicago: Springer; 2002.CrossRef Green F, Page DL, Fleming ID, Fritz AG, Balch CM, Haller DG, et al. AJCC cancer staging manual. 6th ed. Chicago: Springer; 2002.CrossRef
7.
go back to reference Verburg FA, Aktolun C, Chiti A, Frangos S, Giovanella L, Hoffmann M, et al. Why the European Association of Nuclear Medicine has declined to endorse the 2015 American Thyroid Association management guidelines for adult patients with thyroid nodules and differentiated thyroid cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2016;43:1001–5. Verburg FA, Aktolun C, Chiti A, Frangos S, Giovanella L, Hoffmann M, et al. Why the European Association of Nuclear Medicine has declined to endorse the 2015 American Thyroid Association management guidelines for adult patients with thyroid nodules and differentiated thyroid cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2016;43:1001–5.
Metadata
Title
Acknowledging gray areas: 2015 vs. 2009 American Thyroid Association differentiated thyroid cancer guidelines on ablating putatively low-intermediate-risk patients
Authors
Savvas Frangos
Ioannis P. Iakovou
Robert J. Marlowe
Nicolaos Eftychiou
Loukia Patsali
Anna Vanezi
Androulla Savva
Vassilis Mpalaris
Evanthia I. Giannoula
Publication date
01-02-2017
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in
European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging / Issue 2/2017
Print ISSN: 1619-7070
Electronic ISSN: 1619-7089
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-016-3495-1

Other articles of this Issue 2/2017

European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging 2/2017 Go to the issue