↓ Skip to main content

Shear wave elastography and Afirma™ gene expression classifier in thyroid nodules with indeterminate cytology: a comparison study

Overview of attention for article published in Endocrine, January 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (53rd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (65th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
25 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
26 Mendeley
Title
Shear wave elastography and Afirma™ gene expression classifier in thyroid nodules with indeterminate cytology: a comparison study
Published in
Endocrine, January 2018
DOI 10.1007/s12020-017-1509-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ghobad Azizi, James M. Keller, Michelle L. Mayo, Kelé Piper, David Puett, Karly M. Earp, Carl D. Malchoff

Abstract

To compare shear wave elastography (SWE) and Afirma™ gene expression classifier (GEC) for diagnosis of malignancy in thyroid nodules (TNs) with Bethesda Classification (BC) III or IV indeterminate cytology. This preliminary single-center prospective study was approved by the Institutional Review Board. We evaluated 151 consented patients with 151 indeterminate TNs (123 BC III, 28 BC IV) on fine-needle aspiration biopsy (FNAB). B-mode ultrasound, vascularity, and SWE were performed prior to FNAB. TN stiffness was measured as shear wave velocity (SWV) in meters per second (m/s). The stiffest area of the TN was selected for SWV measurement. GEC testing was performed with a second FNAB. Surgery was recommended for GEC-suspicious TNs, or GEC-benign TNs with two or more worrisome B-mode US features. Surgical pathology confirmed 31 malignant TNs. Among the GEC-suspicious group, 28 of 59 TNs were malignant. The SWV value of ≥3.59 m/s was the best cut-off for malignancy risk based on the receiver operating curve (ROC). Twenty-six malignant TNs had SWV ≥ 3.59 m/s. The sensitivity and specificity for SWV ≥ 3.59 m/s were 83.9 and 79.2%, respectively. Positive predictive value (PPV) was 51.0% and negative predictive value (NPV) was 95.0%. For the GEC-suspicious group, sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV were 90.3, 74.2, 47.5, and 96.7%, respectively. In multivariate analysis, SWV and GEC-suspicious were significant predictors of malignancy, but B-mode features and vascularity were not. This preliminary study indicates that SWE and GEC are independent predictors of malignancy in TNs with BC III or IV.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 26 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 26 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 19%
Other 2 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 8%
Student > Postgraduate 2 8%
Professor > Associate Professor 2 8%
Other 5 19%
Unknown 8 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 11 42%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 4%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 4%
Social Sciences 1 4%
Other 1 4%
Unknown 9 35%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 05 February 2019.
All research outputs
#12,945,774
of 23,020,670 outputs
Outputs from Endocrine
#716
of 1,702 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#204,324
of 441,342 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Endocrine
#12
of 35 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,020,670 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,702 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 57% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 441,342 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 35 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% of its contemporaries.